THE OXFORD AND CAMBRIDGE MATCH.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume I, Issue 90, 24 September 1873, Page 3

THE OXFORD AND CAMBRIDGE MATCH.

[From the Saturday Review of the 28th June.] At one time the University match hade fair to end as it did three years ago, when a victory that seemed already won was wrested from Oxford in the very last moment in a scene of excitement which will never be forgotten by those who witnessed it. Three men had to go in to get two runs; and Mr. Cobden sent them back with three successive balls. This year three men were left to go in to get one run ; and, curiously enough, Mr. Butler, as in 1870, was the first of the three. There the parallel ends ; for this year, instead of falling to the first ball, Mr. Butler hit it and won the match. A second termination to the University match, such as happened in 1870, would have been infinitely more wonderful than a double dead heat in racing ; yet the supporters of Oxford must have felt their hearts in their mouths last Tuesday, when Mr. Butler went in to make the winning run. Apart from this remarkable coincidence the match was distinguished this year by its surprises and by its constant contradiction of preconceived ideas and established precedents. First of all, public form was utterly upset; for, according to public form, Oxford, which has won every match of importance this season, ought to have found an easy victim in Cambridge, which has not been successful once. We are not great believers, for our own part, in public form at cricket. The chances of racing are often talked about; but racing, as compared with cricket, is a downright certainty. There are so many contingencies by which an innings may be brought to a premature end, or prolonged almost indefinitely, and by which a bowler may get rid of his opponents with ease or be baulked of his prey, that they defy calculation. Yet, year after year we find good judges attempting to make exact calculations of the chances of the respective sides, and grumbling and complaining in no measured terms if they are not duly fulfilled. If there is one truth more than another which long observation must have impressed on the minds of old cricketers, it is, we should have thought, that which is expressed in the maxim—never lay odds on a cricketmatch. Yet in the face of many warnings, partly from enthusiasm, partly from an involuntary adherence to the bugbear of public form, men continue to lay odds, and suffer accordingly. It is hardly credible that as much as five to two and three to one was laid on Oxford before the match commenced last Monday, solely because, as we have said, Oxford had got so far through the season without a defeat, and her two fast bowlers —there is no human being less to be depended on than a fast amateur bowler — had scattered the wickets of the Marylebone Eleven, Mr. Yardley’s among them, only a week ago. And, said the layers of odds, if Mr. Yardley could not play the Oxford bowling, most certainly the Cambridge Eleven will not be able to play it; and so they took heart, and laid yet a point more. As we are already digressing, we may go on to make a remark or two on the general question of betting. We are sorry to say that there appears to be a very large and increasing amount of betting on the University match ; in fact, as much money changes hands over it as over the boat-race. It is a great pity that it should be so, but there is no getting rid of the unpleasant fact. Men will back their opinions with their money; and when there is a certainty of a fair contest, of the absence of all those disgraceful intrigues and chicaneries without which, it appears, modern racing could not exist, there is, of course, an additional inducement to speculate. To return, however, to the point from which we have wandered. Public form was altogether upset by the issue of the University match; and this was one of its many surprises. Oxford, to go back no further than the matches played on

metropolitan grounds, had beaten not only the Marylebone Club, assisted by its professional bowlers, but also the county of Middlesex; and Middlesex brooks few superiors. Cambridge, on the other hand, had been well beaten by the Marylebone Club, and had also suffered defeat at the hands of the comparatively weak county of Surrey. Nor could there be two opinions about the Cambridge bowling. It was essentially weak. On the contrary, the Oxford bowling was effective ; it had proved itself to be so ; and one of the two fast bowlers had in 1871 accomplished the feat of taking every Cambridge wicket at Lord’s. What had been would be again; and therefore, even admitting that Cambridge had some good batting, there could be no doubt about the result; on the contrary, the result hung on the balance up to the last, and the verdict, as finally announced on the telegraph board, was so doubtful that many of the prominent supporters of Oxford must have lost their appetites for dinner, while many of the hangers-on —tidewaiters on fortune —threaded their way (to use the correct expression) through the crowd, and were seen of men and takers of odds no more. Then, as to the contradiction of established precedents at this match. Experience has shown that one fast bowler, on one side or another, nearly always comes off. Last year Mr. Powys for Cambridge, the year before Mr. Butler for Oxford, in former years Mr. Fellowes, Mr. Teape, and others whose name is legion, have borne the brunt of the battle, and have confirmed the theory that Lord’s is essentially a bowler’s ground, and still more essentially a fast bowler’s, if he has a little luck on his side. This year the two fast bowlers of Oxford, Mr. Butler and Mr. Boyle, did but little good, and never established a panic for a moment, while Mr. Sims, the Cambridge fast bowler, was absolutely useless. Mr. Jeffery, a slow bowler, or thrower, or whatever critics may please to designate him, got rid of the powerful Oxford Eleven in their first innings ; and Mr. Ridley and Mr. Maude disposed of Cambridge in their second innings. Then again, the fielding is always considered one of the great points ot the University match. Men are just at their best for fielding then. To the quickness and agility acquired at school is added the strength obtained in increasing years; and, with very few exceptions, an amateur’s fielding wanes year by year after he leaves college till it becomes so ineffective as to neutralize that batting power which deserts a cricketer last of all. This week the fielding shown by the two Elevens would have been more suited to a Lords and Commons match —and wonderfully stiff in the back our hereditary and elected legislators are. Let us hope that their principles are equally rigid. There was an absence of that lissomness, that f»ower of sudden dash and quick recovery, or which we are so in the habit of looking from young men of twenty to twentytwo years of age. The return of the ball also, and the throwing generally, were unprecise add irregular. There was a strange want of life and spirit about the fielding, which was, for the most part, dull and heavy. It was essentially, from beginning to end, a batting contest, a struggle of power, patience, and perseverance, between two Elevens of batsmen. And, as such, it was deserving of high commendation, as well as remarkable as a novelty in University matches. There was no very brilliant or very difficult bowling on either side, and no very dashing fielding; there was of course a certain number of straight balls, requiring to be met with a straight bat; and the question was, on which side would there be shown the greatest amount of steady resistance. In effect, there was very little to choose between the two sides; for each had. excellent batting, and with one or two exceptions the best men on each side fully sustained their reputations. The Cambridge captain had bad luck; but, to counterbalance that, Mr. Wallrotb, one of the most dangerous men on the other side, was not allowed yg fortune any opportunity of distinbuishing himself. If the palm of merit is to be bestowed, it must be awarded to Ottaway, whose unrivalled steadiness would have been sufficient to break the hearts of any bowlers. As a captain also it must be said that he shone conspicuously, the management of Cambrige Eleven being in many respects very faulty. In fact, the last chance of Cambridge was wantonly thrown away’ on Tuesday by no long stop being put- to Mr. Jeffery’s bowling.