Britannia Cricket Club Vs Wollongong Cricket Club
2-Innings Match Played At Johnson's Meadow, 03-Feb-1864,
Inter-Club
Match Drawn
| Round |
1 |
| Toss won by |
Britannia Cricket Club |
| Home Side |
Britannia Cricket Club |
| Comment |
Match was abandoned when Wollongong umpire called A. Gordon for throwing on
first ball of his second over. Both teams refused to re-commence, and Wollongong
team left. |
Wollongong Cricket Club 1st Innings 5/1 Abandoned (Overs
2)
| Batsman |
Fieldsman |
Bowler |
Runs |
| C Morris |
c J Howard |
b Alexander Gordon |
0 |
| J Kelly |
not out |
|
2 |
| James Lahiff |
not out |
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
| extras |
|
(b1 lb0 w0 nb0) |
1 |
| TOTAL |
|
1 wickets for |
5 |
| Bowler |
O |
M |
R |
W |
| Alexander Gordon |
1 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
| Frank Fredericks |
1 |
0 |
4 |
0 |
Compiled by Bill Peters for the Kiama Cricket Club. Not to be
used without permission. Last updated 01-Apr-2016. Send comments to
Bill Peters about this
web page.
Reports
This match has been described in the written history of the Club, Slashing Through the Cordon - Chapter 10: Jerks, Umpires and Media Games. It can be accessed by clicking here
Our readers are aware that a cricket match was to have come off on Wednesday last between the Wollongong and Kiama Clubs. Accordingly, a little before midday the teams respectively representing those clubs met in a paddock forming part of the estate known as Johnson’s meadows, at a distance (across the enclosure) of about half a mile from Mr Beatson’s Hotel. The Kiama men, having won the toss sent their opponents to the wickets, and then, having occupied the field and given three preliminary cheers, the game commenced with an over from Gordon off which one bye was scored, while one of the Wollongong players, Morris, was extinguished for 0, being caught by J. Howard at point. F. Fredericks then tried his round arm bowling, and in this over four notches were scored. Kelly and Lahiff being at the wickets. On Gordon’s resuming the bowling, his delivery was objected to on the pretence that it was a jerk. This caused a dispute which, we are sorry to say, abruptly terminated the match. We have no intention to repeat the hard words which, on such an occasion, each side is apt, more or less, to apply to the others, but as we are sincerely desirous of seeing the noble game of cricket encouraged and cultivated, we would suggest that it may be worthwhile for each side to consider how far they might have been wrong. Our friend Gordon was, no doubt, a little too fast in throwing down the ball, and declaring he would bowl no more, as soon as the Wollongong umpire had mentioned his reason for declaring a “no ball”. We believe, however, not only that the decision was utterly erroneous, but that the umpire was a person in whom, whatever his mates might think of him, they could not reasonably expect their opponents to have any condolence. We regret too that when an attempt was subsequently made by Mr. John Black on behalf of the Kiama man to rearrange the matter and proceed with the game, his advances were met by the Captain of the Wollongong team in a spirit quite inappropriate with the idea of a friendly contest. The moral of the matter, in as far as cricketing is concerned, that any club had better renounce all attempts to play a match against another, if they cannot provide captains and umpires who are not only adequately acquainted with the practice of cricket, but possess sufficient judgement and temper to perceive when it is worthwhile to interrupt a game and ruin the chance of exciting unfriendly feelings for the sake of enforcing some technical point in rules which every club or every chance meeting is at liberty to observe or to disregard as it pleases. It is unfortunate that when a popular recreation has become the subject of a code of regulations conventionally acknowledged, people soon begin to regard it in much the same light as those transactions which are under the control of positive statute law. In such affairs as horseracing where large sums are frequently at stake this may be all very well; but we are very much afraid that cricket can receive no benefit from over-legislation; and a paltry dispute about a style of bowling which does not affect the essential character of the game, seems a very inadequate reason for marring a day’s friendly sport. We hope both the parties concerned will take counsel, and that we may yet see the match played out this season. We believe that, on the whole, both sides rein capital for the contest, and that there would have been an excellent match, notwithstanding the inadequate and desultory practice of the Kiama men.
A scratch match which was got up by the Kiama team and their friends after the departure of their opponents from the ground, exhibited some good practice and showed that excellent material exist in the district. We hope that, whether the match with Wollongong be played out or not, means may be found to get up a match with one of the Sydney clubs before the end of the season.
We have to contradict the assertion of a contemporary that the decision as to Gordon’s bowling was admitted to be correct; and that the ball which was to be the prize of the winner, was delivered up to the Illawarra club. The ball was not delivered up to the Wollongong men, nor did their opponents acknowledge the justice of the decision, or the competency of the person who gave it.
Kiama Independent and Shoalhaven Advertiser. Tuesday 9 February, 1864.
TO THE EDITOR OF THE KIAMA INDEPENDENT
SIR – Perhaps you will allow me space in your journal to make a few remarks in answer to your report of the match commenced between the Illawarra and Britannia Cricket Clubs on the 2nd instant.
I, in common with every member of our club, deeply regret that a dispute should have arisen through taking notice of the technical point of cricket; but still we would (after looking calmly into the matter) act in precisely the same manner as we did on the day referred to. When we commence a game we endeavour to adhere strictly to all the rules, notwithstanding the consequences such a proceeding may be likely to entail.
You remark in your elaborate report of the match referred to, that Gordon’s bowling was objected to on the pretence that it was a “jerk”, thereby inferring that such was not the case. Now, how could your reporter tell whether the bowling was fair or otherwise? No person but the umpire stationed at the bowler’s end can tell with any degree of accuracy whether a “no ball” has been delivered, and consequently your insinuation had batter have been left alone.
Your statement that Mr. Gordon waited until he understood what he was “no-balled” for before he expressed his intention of bowling no more is also untrue. Mr. Brettell had no sooner called “no ball” than Mr. Gordon, in language not the most refined, said he would not deliver another ball; he evidently knew where his fault lay, and was fully expecting it to be discovered. Mr. Gordon, you say, was a little hasty – nothing more, of course! A man possessing such an angelic temper as the individual referred to, could not depart altogether from the path of rectitude! He merely expressed himself in the choicest phraseology of Billingsgate, which is termed being a little hasty.
With reference now to your liberal criticism on our umpire, Mr. Brettell. You state that we could not reasonably expect our opponents to have any confidence in him. Why, may I ask are we to entertain the same opinions of Mr. Brettell as the Kiama team? They cannot be in a position to judge of his fitness for the office of umpire. Mr. Brettell may have been a very indifferent cricketer when in Kiama several years ago, but is that any reason why he should not improve? If Mr. Brettell was disliked as an individual by the majority of the Kiama team, was it our duty to secure a man who could make it his boast that he was the personal friend of the Kiama team collectively and individually? I should say not. We chose Mr. Brettell because we considered him fit for the office, and we have had no cause to alter our opinion of him; therefore it is perfectly immaterial to us what our opponents thought of him. Again, our umpire’s decision is said by you to be erroneous; no mention is made of the party who officiated for Kiama as umpire – his decision was too just to be for a single moment doubted; he spoke when everyone acquainted with the rudiments of cricket was aware that he had no right to, and consequently one of our men had to retire, unfairly given out by a man to whom the theory of cricket was a sealed book.
Reference is further made to an attempt which was made to arrange the affair, and thus continue the game. Mr. Black, the deputy from the Britannia Club, told our captain that it was the wish of the Kiama captain to continue the game if possible. Mr. Brown replied that he did not wish to be insulted again, as we considered we had all been grossly insulted by their team leaving the field, which in all probability would have been the case had the match gone on and Gordon bowled. The reply was construed by Mr. Black (who must have a remarkably thin skin) into a personal affront, and thus the negotiation was put a stop to.
Allusion is also made to our captain and umpire as not possessing tempers to suit their opponents. I would advise you to look at home before you criticise us. The captain of the Kiama team is, of course, the paragon of perfection, so far as temper is concerned; the spectators of the match can vouch for that, and they assert that Mr. Gordon is not fit, even for the ranks in the regiment of cricketers.
I will now advert briefly to the concluding paragraph of your report, having reference to the ball which we played for and won. You assert that we did not acknowledge the justice of the decision referred to; allow me to inform you that we all agreed that the decision was a fair one. You are also aware, perhaps, that when our opponents left the field, the game was forfeited and the victory remained with us; if you are doubtful on this point, I shall be most happy to forward Lillywhite’s Guide for your enlightenment. If the Kiama captain so far forgets himself, as to refuse to give up the ball, which we claimed on the day of the match, he is at perfect liberty to keep it, in addition to our opinion of him as a cricketer. The game, of course, we claim in spite of what Mr. Gordon says to the contrary, although we should prefer winning it in the usual manner.
I may here state that I have laid the whole matter truthfully before the Secretary of the Albert Club of Sydney. In his reply, which I have before me, he states that after consulting practical cricketers in Sydney, he is of opinion that the course we pursued was the only one left for us to follow, and that we were right in that course.
Apologising for troubling you with a matter involving such points of controversy, and trusting that we will again have the pleasure of meeting our Kiama friends to contest for victory in the noble game,
I am yours,
JOHN OSBOURNE, Hon. Sec. Illawarra C. Club. Wollongong, Feb 13.
[We do not think the tone of the above letter very well calculated to forward the writer’s professed desire to “meet our Kiama friends again to contest for victory in the noble game”. We do not think it worth while to waste space in re-asserting the truth of the facts as narrated by us; and the Kiama umpire and others so courteously mentioned by him can, if they please, when they see Mr. Osborne's letter in print, vindicate their character and competency, and say whether our statement about Mr. Gordon and his bowling, and the appeal is or is not “untrue”, as Mr. Osbourne politely asserts. We can inform Mr. Osbourne that the use of the word pretence does by no means necessarily imply an accusation of falsehood, but is pretty nearly equivalent to the word “plea”. Mr Osbourne, however, seems in other respects to misunderstand either our words or our meaning; and we cannot now take time to set him right. We are much obliged to our correspondent for his offer to forward a copy of Lillywhite’s Guide for our enlightenment. We will not give him that trouble, as we can always when requisite consult that work without his assistance – ED.IND]
Kiama Independent and Shoalhaven Advertiser. Tuesday 23 February, 1864.
SIR,--On looking your issue of last week, I was surprised to find a long and inaccurate notice of our proceedings in the late match between the Illawarra Club and ours, by Mr. Osborne, the Secretary of the Illawarra Cricket Club. I really think Mr. Osborne is not accustomed to see his literary productions in print, or he would not trouble you with such an impertinent letter as the one referred to. Mr. Osborne, with the rest of the Wollongong players, say they regret that any dispute should have arisen. What hypocrisy! I do not believe it ; my opinion, and the opinion of all there that day is, that the Wollongong players only wanted a point to take hold of, in order to gain the match, in words. They know that it the game had been played out fairly, they would have been beaten. On the other hand, if they were sure of winning, why did they not waive those insignificant points. No, not they! they were afraid - as every disinterested person on the ground that day could tell you. Mr. Osborne gives you a flattering account of Mr. Brettell's cricketing capabilities for the post of umpire, but he omits to say anything of his qualifications as a gentleman. Our umpire, Mr. R. Miller, does not escape the criticism of your correspondent either; leaving Mr. Miller's cricketing knowledge aside, we can rely on his decision being given in an honourable manner. I do not know whether they can say the same of Mr. Brettell or not. About the ball, which Mr. Osborne says they are entitled to (I do not say won) allow me to tell him that when they earn it, we shall be most happy to give it, but not till then. Mr. Osborne says he hopes to have the pleasure of meeting us again:- well, if they come to Kiama, and he brings Lillywhite's Guide in his hand we have no objection to play them.
I am, Sir, yours, &c.,
JOHN KING,
Hon Sec
Britannia C. Club
Kiama, Feb. 27, 1864
Kiama Independent and Shoalhaven Advertiser. Tuesday 1 March, 1864.
TO THE EDITOR OF THE KIAMA INDEPENDENT
SIR, - I take the liberty, with your permission, of answering so much of Mr.John Osborne's communication in your last issue, as refers to my own conduct in the cricket match. Mr. Osborne writes in the fashion of a man who likes to see his productions in print, and I am afraid mistakes his own sallies of impertinence and flippancy for wit. He shows this plainly enough, I think, in his remarks on your assertion that I was a little too fast (which I freely admit), and he winds up by saying, with the positiveness of one who heard it, that I employed " the choicest phraseology of Billingsgate." The allusion to Billingsgate, though I never saw that celebrated fish market, I quite understand; and I say; as Mr. Osborne says of another part of your report, that his assertion is utterly untrue. I may ask him, too, in his own words, "how he could know this?"
Mr. Osborne has, no doubt, heard something about glass houses and throwing stones. Does he remember the conduct of his captain last year, and the truculent disposition he exhibited towards some of the spectators on the racecourse at Wollongong when they cheered us, on the occasion, of our having won the match we then played against the I.C.C?
Some of the Wollongong team had been endeavouring before the match commenced on Wednesday 2nd February, to induce me to accompany their men to Sydney, in order to play on their side in the expected match with one of the Sydney clubs. Mr. Osborne and his friends seem to have found out in great haste that I was "not fit even for the ranks" in cricket. It is well known Sir, that i have been in the habit of playing in matches during the last 14 or 15 years - not only in the district but also occasionally among the Sydney clubs. I do not pretend to possess the patience of Job; and any candid person will not be surprised that i should have felt annoyed at being "no-balled" by a mere boy, who not only can have no great knowledge of the game, but was unfavourably known in Kiama in other and more important respects. Master Brettell may have improved in his knowledge of the game during the time he has lived in Wollongong; but it is doubtful if his character for integrity, or his manners, are mended.
From the style of Mr Osborne's letter we may guess how scrupulous he was in laying the matter truthfully before the Secretary of the Albert Club. He had better confine himself to the task of persuading his own club of this; we, if necessary, can consult the oracles for ourselves.
I am, Sir, your obedient servant,
ALEXANDER GORDON.
Kiama Independent and Shoalhaven Advertiser. Tuesday 1 March, 1864.
TO THE EDITOR OF THE KIAMA INDEPENDENT
SIR, - In your issue of the 23rd inst, is a letter from the hon. secretary of the I.C.C., in reply to your report of a match commenced between the Illawarra and Britannia Clubs, on the 2nd inst., which charges me, as umpire for the Britannia team, with having given one of their men out unfairly; and insinuates that I was incompetent. As to the insinuation, i shall treat it with the contempt it deserves. With regard to the charge of unfairness, I will lay before you as briefly as possible a plain statement of the game, so far as it had proceeded, in which I think I shall be able to show that the charge of unfairness on my part is utterly false and unfounded.
The game commenced by Lahiff and Morris going to the wickets, Gordon bowling; Brettell, the Wollongong umpire, at the bowlers end. Upon delivery of the third or fourth ball, Morris played to it; it shot off his leg onto his bat. The pint (Howard) stepped forward and caught it. Howard appealed to me, and on the impulse of the moment I said "out", although aware directly I had said the word, it was not my place to have spoken. Morris immediately left the ground. When he had proceeded several paces, Brettell called him back. Gordon then asked Brettell why Morris was not out. Brettell said he (Morris) played the ball off his leg. Gordon called out to Morris - "Morris, how did you play that ball?" Morris replied "Off my leg onto my bat". Brettell then said it was a bump-ball. After some little dispute about the matter, Morris went out - not, as it is plain to be seen, on my decision, but on their own umpire's, and of course, the proper one at the time.
The game then went on, Kelly taking the place vacated by Morris. Gordon finished his over, and an over was bowled from the other end, in which four runs were made. In the next over by Gordon, when the third or fourth ball was delivered, the Wollongong umpire called out "No ball". The ball passed the long stop. One of the men at the wickets said "Let us run, we'll make two". They ran, and it was when the ball was back in the bowler's hands that Gordon asked Brettell what he was "no balled" for. It was then, and not before, that Gordon threw down the ball, and said he would play no more, and challenged them to put him to any test as to his having jerked the ball
After more disputing, the Kiama team left the ground. A number of the Wollongong players then came on the ground and began to play themselves. I then left, and shortly after met Mr Black, who asked me to go with him and try to arrange for the match to go on. I advised him to get some other person to go, and suggested that it would be best to appoint fresh umpires. he came back soon. I asked him if he had succeeded. He said "No; I have been grossed insulted, and it is no use; they will not try to arrange".
Such is the plain truth; and I will now leave the matter with your cricketing readers to say who was most to blame in bringing the match to such an unsatisfactory termination.
As to the charge that Mr Gordon "used language not the most refined" I can only say that I did not hear him make use of any expressions that he need be ashamed of. But as Mr Gordon is able to defend himself from that as well as other charges that are made against him, I leave it for himself to answer.
Apologising for trespassing on your space,
I am, your truly,
ROBERT MILLER JUN.,
Umpire Britannia Cricket Club
Gerringong, Feb 23rd, 1864
Kiama Independent and Shoalhaven Advertiser. Tuesday 1 March, 1864.
TO CORRESPONDENTS
We have received a note signed Henry C. Brettell, and referring to the correspondence on the subject of the late cricket match, which appeared in our last. We must decline publishing the same for the reason that, as the writer himself says, he "makes no statement", and his epistle consists merely of some attempts at sarcasm - very harmless, but not in the best taste. If H. C. B. is very desirous of seeing his letter in print, he may probably get it published in one of the Wollongong journals, which together have four times our space to fill.
Kiama Independent and Shoalhaven Advertiser. Tuesday 8 March, 1864.
TO THE EDITOR OF THE KIAMA INDEPENDENT
Sir,-:In your issue of the 23rd instant, I perceive an elaborate letter from the Secretary of the Illawarra Cricket Club, to which, with your permission I would offer a few words of reply as a spectator.
Your correspondent evidently is very anxious to vindicate the character of his club; but the means whereby, he endeavours to attain this object, appears to me a very unjustifiable one, namely, by the mean subterfuge of abusing a gentleman who has, for his fairness and gentlemanly conduct, both on the cricket field and in his social position,. justly merited the highest confidence of his fellow cricketers, and the esteem of all who have the pleasure of his acquaintance. But your correspondent says in the letter referred to, that Mr. Gordon only expressed himself in the choicest phraseology of Billingsgate, thereby implying that Mr. Gordon made use of ungentlemanly language; but I would advise your correspondent to confine himself in future to facts, and not make insinuations which are patent to everyone who knows Mr. Gordon as perfectly untrue.
Now, Mr. Editor, it appears to me, from the whole tenor of Mr. Osborne's letter that he is thoroughly convinced of the inefficiency of the gentleman (?) who acted as umpire for the Illawarra team; and endeavoured, by heaping opprobrium on the captain and umpire of the Kiama team, to make it appear that Mr. Brettell was not in fault. However, as a spectator, I must beg most respectfully to differ from him in this opinion. It was evident to me that Mr. Brettell was determined to give his own side every possible preference; but whether this was merely from his own inclination, or being only a tool in the hands of the players, and consequently entirely guided by their suggestions, I will not take upon me to say - this is best known to himself.
But it was abundantly evident to the spectators; by Mr. Brettell's attempt to favour the player who first lost his wicket, by saying the ball bounded off his leg, and then when the player admitted it was off his bat, the umpire, to justify his first error (if it was one) said it bounded off the ground.
Moreover, it appears singular that if Mr. Gordon's bowling is a jerk, as decided by Mr. Brettell, that it was never discovered before; for to my knowledge Mr. Gordon has been bowling in matches for many years both in this and the neighbouring districts, and against some of the best players; but it would appear his bowling was never objected to before, and I suppose it was only discovered on that occasion by Mr. Brettell's superior knowledge of cricket and remarkable perspicuity.
To conclude, Mr. Editor, I agree with you that it is a pity such disputes should take place between cricket clubs when they meet to have a friendly game. The players are not the only persons disappointed, for I feel convinced that the spectators are equally disappointed. And then, such disputes tend to bring the game into disrepute and prevents the public from taking the interest in the matches they otherwise would, as well as prevents them from supporting the clubs as they undoubtedly would if such disputes were not so frequent.
Hoping the matter of dispute may be amicably settled, and that we may have the pleasure of witnessing the match played out his season,
I remain, yours most respectfully,
A. SPECTATOR.
Feb. 26, 1864.
Kiama Independent and Shoalhaven Advertiser. Tuesday 8 March, 1864.
