29 May 2007 10:17:07
Captain Henry Holden

When the 1882 Australian visitors went in for lunch at Trent Bridge,
during their tour fixture against Notts, it was soon discovered that
no lunch had been provided. It was, of course, the long-established
convention for the hosts to look after the amateur "gentlemen"
cricketers in respect of catering, while the paid professionals were
expected to join the line of spectators over at the public refreshment
tents. The Australians, however (although all of them were making
money out of the venture), did not regard themselves as amateurs - and
neither did the majority of the country in which they were travelling.
They were, therefore, less than impressed at what they regarded as a
pointed statement by the local authorities.

The Notts secretary, Captain Henry Holden (prevalently known as
"Hellfire Jack"), was the man in command of the luncheon arrangements,
and his defence, quite simply, was that he "forgot". That, of course,
hardly satisfied the Australians, whose manager, Charlie Beal, backed
up by big George Bonnor and several others, engaged him in an irate
quarrel about tour conditions. When pressed again about matter of the
missing lunch, Holden made the contemptuous rejoinder that
professionals found their own.

Holden then proceeded to lay into Billy Murdoch, the Australian
captain, telling him that, as the secretary of Nottinghamshire County
Cricket Club, it was he, not the umpires or the team captains, who was
responsible for deciding upon the duration for which the wicket would
be rolled between innings. Bonnor, meanwhile, had grown so livid that
he had to be held back, and Holden announced that he had had quite
enough of this. Taking out a cigar, the secretary asked, pointedly,
and with emphasis, "Will some Englishman give me a light?"

Bonnor shot back in an instant: "I can tell you, sir. I am as much an
Englishman as you or any gentlemen present. I can trace my family back
for six generations, and perhaps you cannot do more."

That evening, a hanger-on to the Australian team chalked onto its
hotel door some nasty comments about the nasty man who had caused all
the trouble that day. The remarks were discovered the following
morning, and Holden openly accused Beal of having made them. This was
disproven, however, when it was discovered that it had actually been
the work of the aforementioned sycophant.

Rodney Ulyate
The cricket blog to which I grudgingly contribute: http://crickex.blogspot.com/
My Wikipedia talk page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Robertson-Glasgow



29 May 2007 11:39:41
Offramp
Re: Captain Henry Holden

On May 29, 6:17 pm, rodney.uly...@gmail.com wrote:

That is brilliant stuff. It is a great story which I've never heard
before.




29 May 2007 11:49:26
Re: Captain Henry Holden

On May 29, 8:39 pm, Offramp <alaneobr...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On May 29, 6:17 pm, rodney.uly...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> That is brilliant stuff. It is a great story which I've never heard
> before.

Thank you. Holden seems to have been a very controversial character. I
shall post more on him shortly.

Rodney Ulyate
The cricket blog to which I grudgingly contribute: http://crickex.blogspot.com/
My Wikipedia talk page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Robertson-Glasgow



29 May 2007 19:47:09
John Hall
Re: Captain Henry Holden

In article <1180463981.754598.174960@q66g2000hsg.googlegroups.com >,
Offramp <alaneobrien@gmail.com > writes:
>On May 29, 6:17 pm, rodney.uly...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>That is brilliant stuff. It is a great story which I've never heard
>before.
>
>
Echoed.

If the Notts secretary felt like that, one wonders why Australia were
invited to play. Perhaps the county's committee went over his head.
--
John Hall

"I am not young enough to know everything."
Oscar Wilde (1854-1900)


29 May 2007 11:54:58
Re: Captain Henry Holden

On May 29, 8:47 pm, John Hall <nospam_no...@jhall.co.uk > wrote:
> In article <1180463981.754598.174...@q66g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>, Offramp <alaneobr...@gmail.com> writes:
> >On May 29, 6:17 pm, rodney.uly...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >That is brilliant stuff. It is a great story which I've never heard
> >before.
>
> Echoed.
>
> If the Notts secretary felt like that, one wonders why Australia were
> invited to play. Perhaps the county's committee went over his head.

Holden was a law unto himself, often superseding or acting in spite of
the committee.

Rodney Ulyate
The cricket blog to which I grudgingly contribute: http://crickex.blogspot.com/
My Wikipedia talk page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Robertson-Glasgow



29 May 2007 20:46:56
Spaceman Spiff
Re: Captain Henry Holden

rodney.ulyate@gmail.com wrote:
> [snip] The Australians, however (although all of them were making
> money out of the venture), did not regard themselves as amateurs - and
> neither did the majority of the country in which they were travelling.
> [snip]

hmm?? this does not follow.
either they did not regard themselves as amateurs although they were not
making money, or, they did not regard themselves as professionals although
they were making money.
from the rest of the article, i presume it was the latter.

--
stay cool,
Spaceman Spiff

get your own damn grateful dead lyrics.
http://arts.ucsc.edu/gdead/agdl/




30 May 2007 13:45:39
Robert Henderson
Re: Captain Henry Holden

In message <1180459027.263094.267920@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com >,
rodney.ulyate@gmail.com writes
>
>Holden then proceeded to lay into Billy Murdoch, the Australian
>captain, telling him that, as the secretary of Nottinghamshire County
>Cricket Club, it was he, not the umpires or the team captains, who was
>responsible for deciding upon the duration for which the wicket would
>be rolled between innings. Bonnor, meanwhile, had grown so livid that
>he had to be held back, and Holden announced that he had had quite
>enough of this. Taking out a cigar, the secretary asked, pointedly, and
>with emphasis, "Will some Englishman give me a light?"
>
>Bonnor shot back in an instant: "I can tell you, sir. I am as much an
>Englishman as you or any gentlemen present. I can trace my family back
>for six generations, and perhaps you cannot do more."

Shades of the rebellious American colonials insisting they were all good
Englishmen. RH
--
Robert Henderson
Blair Scandal website: http://www.geocities.com/blairscandal/
Personal website: http://www.anywhere.demon.co.uk


30 May 2007 13:47:30
Robert Henderson
Re: Captain Henry Holden

In message <4j07i.1119$WZ6.828@trnddc03 >, Spaceman Spiff
<spaceman_spiff@nospammail.com > writes
>rodney.ulyate@gmail.com wrote:
>> [snip] The Australians, however (although all of them were making
>> money out of the venture), did not regard themselves as amateurs - and
>> neither did the majority of the country in which they were travelling.
>> [snip]
>
>hmm?? this does not follow.
>either they did not regard themselves as amateurs although they were not
>making money, or, they did not regard themselves as professionals although
>they were making money.
>from the rest of the article, i presume it was the latter.
>

Correct. The farce of treating them as amateurs lasted until 1962. rH
--
Robert Henderson
Blair Scandal website: http://www.geocities.com/blairscandal/
Personal website: http://www.anywhere.demon.co.uk


30 May 2007 07:08:53
eusebius
Re: Captain Henry Holden

On May 30, 3:17 am, rodney.uly...@gmail.com wrote:
snip

Good post, Ralph




30 May 2007 09:44:48
Re: Captain Henry Holden

On May 29, 10:46 pm, "Spaceman Spiff" <spaceman_sp...@nospammail.com >
wrote:
> rodney.uly...@gmail.com wrote:
> > [snip] The Australians, however (although all of them were making
> > money out of the venture), did not regard themselves as amateurs - and
> > neither did the majority of the country in which they were travelling.
> > [snip]
>
> hmm?? this does not follow.
> either they did not regard themselves as amateurs although they were not
> making money, or, they did not regard themselves as professionals although
> they were making money.
> from the rest of the article, i presume it was the latter.

Oh dear. That was very slipshod of me. Please eject the "not" from
"The Australians ... did not regard themselves as amateurs", and
you'll see what I meant to say. Sorry 'bout that!

Rodney Ulyate
The cricket blog to which I grudgingly contribute: http://crickex.blogspot.com/
My Wikipedia talk page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Robertson-Glasgow



30 May 2007 09:48:30
Re: Captain Henry Holden

On May 30, 2:45 pm, Robert Henderson <phi...@anywhere.demon.co.uk >
wrote:
> In message <1180459027.263094.267...@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
> rodney.uly...@gmail.com writes
>
>
>
> >Holden then proceeded to lay into Billy Murdoch, the Australian
> >captain, telling him that, as the secretary of Nottinghamshire County
> >Cricket Club, it was he, not the umpires or the team captains, who was
> >responsible for deciding upon the duration for which the wicket would
> >be rolled between innings. Bonnor, meanwhile, had grown so livid that
> >he had to be held back, and Holden announced that he had had quite
> >enough of this. Taking out a cigar, the secretary asked, pointedly, and
> >with emphasis, "Will some Englishman give me a light?"
>
> >Bonnor shot back in an instant: "I can tell you, sir. I am as much an
> >Englishman as you or any gentlemen present. I can trace my family back
> >for six generations, and perhaps you cannot do more."
>
> Shades of the rebellious American colonials insisting they were all good
> Englishmen. RH

Indeed. Spofforth was nailed for making that assertion during a
farewell dinner in his honour, saying that he would be quite happy to
play for England against Australia should that opportunity arise.

Rodney Ulyate
The cricket blog to which I grudgingly contribute: http://crickex.blogspot.com/
My Wikipedia talk page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Robertson-Glasgow



30 May 2007 09:50:13
Re: Captain Henry Holden

On May 30, 4:08 pm, eusebius <eusebiu...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On May 30, 3:17 am, rodney.uly...@gmail.com wrote:
> snip
>
> Good post, Ralph

Why, thank you - but why "Ralph"? Are you referring to John's recent
mistaking of my work for Barker's?

Rodney Ulyate
The cricket blog to which I grudgingly contribute: http://crickex.blogspot.com/
My Wikipedia talk page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Robertson-Glasgow



30 May 2007 17:20:29
Dr A. N. Walker
Re: Captain Henry Holden

In article <1180464898.857698.208640@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com >,
<rodney.ulyate@gmail.com > wrote:
>On May 29, 8:47 pm, John Hall <nospam_no...@jhall.co.uk> wrote:
>> If the Notts secretary felt like that, one wonders why Australia were
>> invited to play. Perhaps the county's committee went over his head.

Matches vs Oz were very lucrative [which is why they came
so often in those years]. In 1878, 8000 spectators watched the
first day when Notts played the opening match of the first real
Oz tour [apart from the aborigines of 1868], won by an innings
[thanks to Shaw and Morley bowling unchanged, Shaw 94.3-65-55-11,
Morley 93-56-72-9 -- gripping stuff! -- and, just to please RH, an
innings of 66 from Selby], and were praised for their hospitality
by Gregory, the Oz captain. Murdoch's 1882 side were luckier in
their cricket [a win and the better side of a draw], but not so
fortunate with their food ....

>Holden was a law unto himself, often superseding or acting in spite of
>the committee.

There is no doubt that Capt. Holden, Chief Constable, JP,
autocrat, was a pain in the nether regions; the Oz "problem" was
one of the last straws, and he was "invited" to resign before the
start of the 1883 season. It wasn't just Oz -- he had the same
problem with Hornby, the Lancs captain. The previous year, 1881,
his attitudes had precipitated a strike by the Notts professionals,
who refused to talk to Holden -- indeed, refused to talk to the
Notts Cttee with Holden present.

To be fair to Holden, he was technically correct on both
the "lunch" and the "roller" issues. Amateurs were not provided
with lunch [and many of them would have been appalled if they had
been expected to accept a "free" lunch rather than bring their own
hampers]; and, as the ground staff were employees of the club,
Holden had a perfect right to be on the ground and to instruct
them. Murdoch [and Hornby] should not have tried to turf Holden
off the field, nor to give orders to his staff. But it all seems
rather petty from a modern perspective ....

Note that under the Laws of the time, there was no "rolling,
watering, covering, mowing, or beating" unless *both* sides agreed.
[From the 1884 code, the ground was to be swept and rolled between
innings unless the "in-side" objected, which is not too different
from the present rules.] So Murdoch had no right to have the pitch
rolled unless Oscroft [the Notts captain] or Holden [as, um, the
most autocratic person present and Oscroft's employer] agreed.

--
Andy Walker, School of MathSci., Univ. of Nott'm, UK.
anw@maths.nott.ac.uk


30 May 2007 11:01:40
Re: Captain Henry Holden

On May 30, 7:20 pm, a...@maths.nott.ac.uk (Dr A. N. Walker) wrote:
> In article <1180464898.857698.208...@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
>
> <rodney.uly...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On May 29, 8:47 pm, John Hall <nospam_no...@jhall.co.uk> wrote:
> >> If the Notts secretary felt like that, one wonders why Australia were
> >> invited to play. Perhaps the county's committee went over his head.
>
> Matches vs Oz were very lucrative [which is why they came
> so often in those years]. In 1878, 8000 spectators watched the
> first day when Notts played the opening match of the first real
> Oz tour [apart from the aborigines of 1868], won by an innings
> [thanks to Shaw and Morley bowling unchanged, Shaw 94.3-65-55-11,
> Morley 93-56-72-9 -- gripping stuff! -- and, just to please RH, an
> innings of 66 from Selby], and were praised for their hospitality
> by Gregory, the Oz captain. Murdoch's 1882 side were luckier in
> their cricket [a win and the better side of a draw], but not so
> fortunate with their food ....

How so?

> >Holden was a law unto himself, often superseding or acting in spite of
> >the committee.
>
> There is no doubt that Capt. Holden, Chief Constable, JP,
> autocrat, was a pain in the nether regions; the Oz "problem" was
> one of the last straws, and he was "invited" to resign before the
> start of the 1883 season. It wasn't just Oz -- he had the same
> problem with Hornby, the Lancs captain. The previous year, 1881,
> his attitudes had precipitated a strike by the Notts professionals,
> who refused to talk to Holden -- indeed, refused to talk to the
> Notts Cttee with Holden present.

I also seem to recall him suspending Shrewsbury for a time.

> To be fair to Holden, he was technically correct on both
> the "lunch" and the "roller" issues. Amateurs were not provided
> with lunch

The Notts amateurs apparently were.

> [and many of them would have been appalled if they had
> been expected to accept a "free" lunch rather than bring their own
> hampers]; and, as the ground staff were employees of the club,
> Holden had a perfect right to be on the ground and to instruct
> them. Murdoch [and Hornby] should not have tried to turf Holden
> off the field, nor to give orders to his staff. But it all seems
> rather petty from a modern perspective ....

Murdoch tried to turf him off the field?

> Note that under the Laws of the time, there was no "rolling,
> watering, covering, mowing, or beating" unless *both* sides agreed.
> [From the 1884 code, the ground was to be swept and rolled between
> innings unless the "in-side" objected, which is not too different
> from the present rules.] So Murdoch had no right to have the pitch
> rolled unless Oscroft [the Notts captain] or Holden [as, um, the
> most autocratic person present and Oscroft's employer] agreed.

Thanks, Andy. A very interesting post, that.

Rodney Ulyate
The cricket blog to which I grudgingly contribute: http://crickex.blogspot.com/
My Wikipedia talk page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Robertson-Glasgow



30 May 2007 19:00:16
John Hall
Re: Captain Henry Holden

In article <f3kbot$s8$1@oyez.ccc.nottingham.ac.uk >,
Dr A. N. Walker <anw@maths.nott.ac.uk > writes:
> There is no doubt that Capt. Holden, Chief Constable, JP,
>autocrat, was a pain in the nether regions; the Oz "problem" was
>one of the last straws, and he was "invited" to resign before the
>start of the 1883 season. It wasn't just Oz -- he had the same
>problem with Hornby, the Lancs captain.
<snip >

A run-in between Holden and Hornby would have been well worth seeing, I
imagine.
--
John Hall

"I am not young enough to know everything."
Oscar Wilde (1854-1900)


31 May 2007 05:30:07
Robert Henderson
Re: Captain Henry Holden

In message <1180543710.292783.118530@q69g2000hsb.googlegroups.com >,
rodney.ulyate@gmail.com writes
>On May 30, 2:45 pm, Robert Henderson <phi...@anywhere.demon.co.uk>
>wrote:
>> In message <1180459027.263094.267...@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
>> rodney.uly...@gmail.com writes
>>
>>
>>
>> >Holden then proceeded to lay into Billy Murdoch, the Australian
>> >captain, telling him that, as the secretary of Nottinghamshire County
>> >Cricket Club, it was he, not the umpires or the team captains, who was
>> >responsible for deciding upon the duration for which the wicket would
>> >be rolled between innings. Bonnor, meanwhile, had grown so livid that
>> >he had to be held back, and Holden announced that he had had quite
>> >enough of this. Taking out a cigar, the secretary asked, pointedly, and
>> >with emphasis, "Will some Englishman give me a light?"
>>
>> >Bonnor shot back in an instant: "I can tell you, sir. I am as much an
>> >Englishman as you or any gentlemen present. I can trace my family back
>> >for six generations, and perhaps you cannot do more."
>>
>> Shades of the rebellious American colonials insisting they were all good
>> Englishmen. RH
>
>Indeed. Spofforth was nailed for making that assertion during a
>farewell dinner in his honour, saying that he would be quite happy to
>play for England against Australia should that opportunity arise.
>
>Rodney Ulyate
>The cricket blog to which I grudgingly contribute: http://crickex.blogspot.com/
>My Wikipedia talk page:
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Robertson-Glasgow
>

Spofforth of course settled in England and played a bit for the MCC. RH
--
Robert Henderson
Blair Scandal website: http://www.geocities.com/blairscandal/
Personal website: http://www.anywhere.demon.co.uk


31 May 2007 05:45:05
Robert Henderson
Re: Captain Henry Holden

In message <f3kbot$s8$1@oyez.ccc.nottingham.ac.uk >, Dr A. N. Walker
<anw@maths.nott.ac.uk > writes
> To be fair to Holden, he was technically correct on both
>the "lunch" and the "roller" issues. Amateurs were not provided with
>lunch [and many of them would have been appalled if they had been
>expected to accept a "free" lunch rather than bring their own hampers];
>and, as the ground staff were employees of the club, Holden had a
>perfect right to be on the ground and to instruct them. Murdoch [and
>Hornby] should not have tried to turf Holden off the field, nor to give
>orders to his staff. But it all seems rather petty from a modern
>perspective ....

People were much less circumspect in those days, vide Wisden editor
Preston's description of the England team going into the 1909 Oval Test
without a fast bowler as a decision which "touched the confines of
lunacy".

WG and EM once literally kidnapped Midwinter after he agreed to play
for the Oz tourists rather than Gloucester. RH
--
Robert Henderson
Blair Scandal website: http://www.geocities.com/blairscandal/
Personal website: http://www.anywhere.demon.co.uk


31 May 2007 09:31:20
Cicero
Re: Captain Henry Holden


"Robert Henderson" <philip@anywhere.demon.co.uk > wrote in message
news:qysRIaJP9kXGFw9w@anywhere.demon.co.uk...
> In message <1180543710.292783.118530@q69g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
> rodney.ulyate@gmail.com writes
>>On May 30, 2:45 pm, Robert Henderson <phi...@anywhere.demon.co.uk>
>>wrote:
>>> In message <1180459027.263094.267...@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
>>> rodney.uly...@gmail.com writes
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> >Holden then proceeded to lay into Billy Murdoch, the Australian
>>> >captain, telling him that, as the secretary of Nottinghamshire County
>>> >Cricket Club, it was he, not the umpires or the team captains, who was
>>> >responsible for deciding upon the duration for which the wicket would
>>> >be rolled between innings. Bonnor, meanwhile, had grown so livid that
>>> >he had to be held back, and Holden announced that he had had quite
>>> >enough of this. Taking out a cigar, the secretary asked, pointedly, and
>>> >with emphasis, "Will some Englishman give me a light?"
>>>
>>> >Bonnor shot back in an instant: "I can tell you, sir. I am as much an
>>> >Englishman as you or any gentlemen present. I can trace my family back
>>> >for six generations, and perhaps you cannot do more."
>>>
>>> Shades of the rebellious American colonials insisting they were all good
>>> Englishmen. RH
>>
>>Indeed. Spofforth was nailed for making that assertion during a
>>farewell dinner in his honour, saying that he would be quite happy to
>>play for England against Australia should that opportunity arise.
>>
>>Rodney Ulyate
>>The cricket blog to which I grudgingly contribute:
>>http://crickex.blogspot.com/
>>My Wikipedia talk page:
>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Robertson-Glasgow
>>
>
> Spofforth of course settled in England and played a bit for the MCC. RH


So you stole Spofforth and S. Law? Tried to get Symonds...sad isn't it?




31 May 2007 10:37:24
John Hall
Re: Captain Henry Holden

In article <LS7ZwHMRLlXGFwrr@anywhere.demon.co.uk >,
Robert Henderson <philip@anywhere.demon.co.uk > writes:
>People were much less circumspect in those days, vide Wisden editor
>Preston's description of the England team going into the 1909 Oval
>Test without a fast bowler as a decision which "touched the confines of
>lunacy".

That was Sydney Pardon, not Preston.
>
>WG and EM once literally kidnapped Midwinter after he agreed to play
>for the Oz tourists rather than Gloucester. RH

Though EM was a coroner, and therefore in theory ought to have been
law-abiding, the mental image that I have of him is somewhat akin to
Carver Doone. Compared to him, WG seems almost angelic.
--
John Hall

"I am not young enough to know everything."
Oscar Wilde (1854-1900)


31 May 2007 08:54:50
Re: Captain Henry Holden

On May 30, 8:00 pm, John Hall <nospam_no...@jhall.co.uk > wrote:
> In article <f3kbot$s...@oyez.ccc.nottingham.ac.uk>,
> Dr A. N. Walker <a...@maths.nott.ac.uk> writes:> There is no doubt that Capt. Holden, Chief Constable, JP,
> >autocrat, was a pain in the nether regions; the Oz "problem" was
> >one of the last straws, and he was "invited" to resign before the
> >start of the 1883 season. It wasn't just Oz -- he had the same
> >problem with Hornby, the Lancs captain.
>
> <snip>
>
> A run-in between Holden and Hornby would have been well worth seeing, I
> imagine.

Only recently have I begun to comprehend just how controversial a
figure old Boss/Monkey/Albert Hornby really was. He must surely have
been very physically arresting, for I understand that he was an
absolute monster of a man. Does anyone know anything more about his
less civil or diplomatic moments?

Rodney Ulyate
The cricket blog to which I grudgingly contribute: http://crickex.blogspot.com/
My Wikipedia talk page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Robertson-Glasgow



31 May 2007 08:56:31
Re: Captain Henry Holden

On May 31, 6:30 am, Robert Henderson <phi...@anywhere.demon.co.uk >
wrote:
> In message <1180543710.292783.118...@q69g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
> rodney.uly...@gmail.com writes
>
>
>
> >On May 30, 2:45 pm, Robert Henderson <phi...@anywhere.demon.co.uk>
> >wrote:
> >> In message <1180459027.263094.267...@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
> >> rodney.uly...@gmail.com writes
>
> >> >Holden then proceeded to lay into Billy Murdoch, the Australian
> >> >captain, telling him that, as the secretary of Nottinghamshire County
> >> >Cricket Club, it was he, not the umpires or the team captains, who was
> >> >responsible for deciding upon the duration for which the wicket would
> >> >be rolled between innings. Bonnor, meanwhile, had grown so livid that
> >> >he had to be held back, and Holden announced that he had had quite
> >> >enough of this. Taking out a cigar, the secretary asked, pointedly, and
> >> >with emphasis, "Will some Englishman give me a light?"
>
> >> >Bonnor shot back in an instant: "I can tell you, sir. I am as much an
> >> >Englishman as you or any gentlemen present. I can trace my family back
> >> >for six generations, and perhaps you cannot do more."
>
> >> Shades of the rebellious American colonials insisting they were all good
> >> Englishmen. RH
>
> >Indeed. Spofforth was nailed for making that assertion during a
> >farewell dinner in his honour, saying that he would be quite happy to
> >play for England against Australia should that opportunity arise.
>
> >Rodney Ulyate
> >The cricket blog to which I grudgingly contribute:http://crickex.blogspot.com/
> >My Wikipedia talk page:
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Robertson-Glasgow
>
> Spofforth of course settled in England and played a bit for the MCC.

Yes, the farewell dinner preceded that immigration.

Rodney Ulyate
The cricket blog to which I grudgingly contribute: http://crickex.blogspot.com/
My Wikipedia talk page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Robertson-Glasgow



31 May 2007 08:58:52
Re: Captain Henry Holden

On May 31, 6:45 am, Robert Henderson <phi...@anywhere.demon.co.uk >
wrote:
> In message <f3kbot$s...@oyez.ccc.nottingham.ac.uk>, Dr A. N. Walker
> <a...@maths.nott.ac.uk> writes
>
> > To be fair to Holden, he was technically correct on both
> >the "lunch" and the "roller" issues. Amateurs were not provided with
> >lunch [and many of them would have been appalled if they had been
> >expected to accept a "free" lunch rather than bring their own hampers];
> >and, as the ground staff were employees of the club, Holden had a
> >perfect right to be on the ground and to instruct them. Murdoch [and
> >Hornby] should not have tried to turf Holden off the field, nor to give
> >orders to his staff. But it all seems rather petty from a modern
> >perspective ....
>
> People were much less circumspect in those days, vide Wisden editor
> Preston's description of the England team going into the 1909 Oval Test
> without a fast bowler as a decision which "touched the confines of
> lunacy".

...while Fry and Ranji, for such close friends, weren't at all afraid
to speak their minds publicly about one another's weaker points.

> WG and EM once literally kidnapped Midwinter after he agreed to play
> for the Oz tourists rather than Gloucester. RH

Delightful story, that. I'll try to post something about it at a later
stage.

Rodney Ulyate
The cricket blog to which I grudgingly contribute: http://crickex.blogspot.com/
My Wikipedia talk page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Robertson-Glasgow



31 May 2007 09:03:49
Re: Captain Henry Holden

On May 31, 11:37 am, John Hall <nospam_no...@jhall.co.uk > wrote:
> In article <LS7ZwHMRLlXGF...@anywhere.demon.co.uk>,
> Robert Henderson <phi...@anywhere.demon.co.uk> writes:
> >WG and EM once literally kidnapped Midwinter after he agreed to play
> >for the Oz tourists rather than Gloucester. RH
>
> Though EM was a coroner, and therefore in theory ought to have been
> law-abiding, the mental image that I have of him is somewhat akin to
> Carver Doone. Compared to him, WG seems almost angelic.

Yes, although not much in terms of physical stature, E.M. definitely
made up for it through the quite petrifying nature of his extremely
fierce character. Naturally, with that and the six feet in height that
both W.G. and Arthur Bush adorned, poor old Billy Midwinter didn't
stand much of a chance.

Rodney Ulyate
The cricket blog to which I grudgingly contribute: http://crickex.blogspot.com/
My Wikipedia talk page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Robertson-Glasgow



31 May 2007 17:39:00
John Hall
Re: Captain Henry Holden

In article <1180626890.781890.270140@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com >,
rodney.ulyate@gmail.com writes:
>Only recently have I begun to comprehend just how controversial a
>figure old Boss/Monkey/Albert Hornby really was. He must surely have
>been very physically arresting, for I understand that he was an
>absolute monster of a man.

I thought that he was rather a small man. Hence the "monkey".

> Does anyone know anything more about his
>less civil or diplomatic moments?

I only know what I've read about him in Alan Gibson's "The Cricket
Captains of England", IIRC, he was inclined to be hot-tempered but was
well liked.
--
John Hall

"I am not young enough to know everything."
Oscar Wilde (1854-1900)


31 May 2007 18:23:06
Robert Henderson
Re: Captain Henry Holden

In message <1180626890.781890.270140@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com >,
rodney.ulyate@gmail.com writes
>On May 30, 8:00 pm, John Hall <nospam_no...@jhall.co.uk> wrote:
>> In article <f3kbot$s...@oyez.ccc.nottingham.ac.uk>,
>> Dr A. N. Walker <a...@maths.nott.ac.uk> writes:> There is no
>>doubt that Capt. Holden, Chief Constable, JP,
>> >autocrat, was a pain in the nether regions; the Oz "problem" was
>> >one of the last straws, and he was "invited" to resign before the
>> >start of the 1883 season. It wasn't just Oz -- he had the same
>> >problem with Hornby, the Lancs captain.
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>> A run-in between Holden and Hornby would have been well worth seeing, I
>> imagine.
>
>Only recently have I begun to comprehend just how controversial a
>figure old Boss/Monkey/Albert Hornby really was. He must surely have
>been very physically arresting,

He was very small. RH

> for I understand that he was an
>absolute monster of a man. Does anyone know anything more about his
>less civil or diplomatic moments?
>
>Rodney Ulyate
>The cricket blog to which I grudgingly contribute: http://crickex.blogspot.com/
>My Wikipedia talk page:
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Robertson-Glasgow
>

--
Robert Henderson
Blair Scandal website: http://www.geocities.com/blairscandal/
Personal website: http://www.anywhere.demon.co.uk


31 May 2007 17:25:02
Dr A. N. Walker
Re: Captain Henry Holden

In article <1180548100.282456.167770@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com >,
<rodney.ulyate@gmail.com > wrote:
>> [...] Murdoch's 1882 side were luckier in
>> their cricket [a win and the better side of a draw], but not so
>> fortunate with their food ....
>How so?

The 1878 side were entertained to a banquet at the George
Hotel; the 1882 side didn't even get lunch, and cut their noses
off to spite their faces by also refusing the offer of a dinner
provided by William Wright [not to be confused with either Walter
Wright (no relation) or C. W. Wright (the Test player and William's
son), both playing for Notts in 1882], a wealthy committee member.
However, it didn't stop the Australians coming back for a second
match three months later!

>> To be fair to Holden, he was technically correct on both
>> the "lunch" and the "roller" issues. Amateurs were not provided
>> with lunch
>The Notts amateurs apparently were.

Ah. Watch for weasel words! My expectation would be that
the amateurs would be asked "Have you made arrangements for lunch?",
and depending on the reply, a lad could be sent across to the TBI,
or the amateur's own hamper could be brought in, or the amateur
could say he was dining with so-and-so. For people they knew, the
arrangements could well have amounted to "Your usual, sir?", and/or
the club might have had "standing orders" with the TBI, either on
account with the player or with the club [no-one was going to ask
C. W. Wright for payment -- his family were major benefactors].
The club would have denied that lunch was *provided*.

For visiting amateurs, it's very likely that Holden or one
of the cttee might have invited them to have lunch -- "Allow me to
send a lad over on your behalf, I can recommend the ham salad?".
It's perfectly plausible that Holden *should* have made sure that
the Australians were provided for, and forgot. The mistake was
for them to expect it -- the mistake you would make if you visited
a friend who forgot to ask if you would like a drink, and you then
said "I thought you would offer me a drink".

>Murdoch tried to turf him off the field?

" Murdoch said Holden had no right on the field, but the
" Chief Constable said he could give orders as he liked to
" the groundsmen. " -- Peter Wynne-Thomas's account of the
affair in his "History of Notts CCC".

--
Andy Walker, School of MathSci., Univ. of Nott'm, UK.
anw@maths.nott.ac.uk


31 May 2007 14:15:44
Re: Captain Henry Holden

On May 31, 6:39 pm, John Hall <nospam_no...@jhall.co.uk > wrote:
> In article <1180626890.781890.270...@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com>,
>
> rodney.uly...@gmail.com writes:
> >Only recently have I begun to comprehend just how controversial a
> >figure old Boss/Monkey/Albert Hornby really was. He must surely have
> >been very physically arresting, for I understand that he was an
> >absolute monster of a man.
>
> I thought that he was rather a small man. Hence the "monkey".

You're probably right.

> > Does anyone know anything more about his
> >less civil or diplomatic moments?
>
> I only know what I've read about him in Alan Gibson's "The Cricket
> Captains of England", IIRC, he was inclined to be hot-tempered but was
> well liked.

That is a volume on which I really must get my grubby little paws. If
you don't mind me saying so, it seems to have been a very valuable
resource to you, based on how often I have seen you consult it.

Cheers,
Rodney Ulyate
The cricket blog to which I grudgingly contribute: http://crickex.blogspot.com/
My Wikipedia talk page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Robertson-Glasgow



31 May 2007 14:16:08
Re: Captain Henry Holden

On May 31, 7:23 pm, Robert Henderson <phi...@anywhere.demon.co.uk >
wrote:
> In message <1180626890.781890.270...@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com>,
> rodney.uly...@gmail.com writes
>
>
>
> >On May 30, 8:00 pm, John Hall <nospam_no...@jhall.co.uk> wrote:
> >> In article <f3kbot$s...@oyez.ccc.nottingham.ac.uk>,
> >> Dr A. N. Walker <a...@maths.nott.ac.uk> writes:> There is no
> >>doubt that Capt. Holden, Chief Constable, JP,
> >> >autocrat, was a pain in the nether regions; the Oz "problem" was
> >> >one of the last straws, and he was "invited" to resign before the
> >> >start of the 1883 season. It wasn't just Oz -- he had the same
> >> >problem with Hornby, the Lancs captain.
>
> >> <snip>
>
> >> A run-in between Holden and Hornby would have been well worth seeing, I
> >> imagine.
>
> >Only recently have I begun to comprehend just how controversial a
> >figure old Boss/Monkey/Albert Hornby really was. He must surely have
> >been very physically arresting,
>
> He was very small. RH

I stand corrected.

Rodney Ulyate
The cricket blog to which I grudgingly contribute: http://crickex.blogspot.com/
My Wikipedia talk page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Robertson-Glasgow



31 May 2007 14:22:49
Re: Captain Henry Holden

On May 31, 7:25 pm, a...@maths.nott.ac.uk (Dr A. N. Walker) wrote:
> In article <1180548100.282456.167...@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
>
> <rodney.uly...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> [...] Murdoch's 1882 side were luckier in
> >> their cricket [a win and the better side of a draw], but not so
> >> fortunate with their food ....
> >How so?
>
> The 1878 side were entertained to a banquet at the George
> Hotel; the 1882 side didn't even get lunch, and cut their noses
> off to spite their faces by also refusing the offer of a dinner
> provided by William Wright [not to be confused with either Walter
> Wright (no relation) or C. W. Wright (the Test player and William's
> son), both playing for Notts in 1882], a wealthy committee member.
> However, it didn't stop the Australians coming back for a second
> match three months later!

Very interesting; thank you, Andrew. Where did you find this
information, might I ask? I wouldn't mind perusing it myself.

> >> To be fair to Holden, he was technically correct on both
> >> the "lunch" and the "roller" issues. Amateurs were not provided
> >> with lunch
> >The Notts amateurs apparently were.
>
> Ah. Watch for weasel words!

Nope, just an observation.

> My expectation would be that
> the amateurs would be asked "Have you made arrangements for lunch?",
> and depending on the reply, a lad could be sent across to the TBI,
> or the amateur's own hamper could be brought in, or the amateur
> could say he was dining with so-and-so. For people they knew, the
> arrangements could well have amounted to "Your usual, sir?", and/or
> the club might have had "standing orders" with the TBI, either on
> account with the player or with the club [no-one was going to ask
> C. W. Wright for payment -- his family were major benefactors].
> The club would have denied that lunch was *provided*.
>
> For visiting amateurs, it's very likely that Holden or one
> of the cttee might have invited them to have lunch -- "Allow me to
> send a lad over on your behalf, I can recommend the ham salad?".
> It's perfectly plausible that Holden *should* have made sure that
> the Australians were provided for, and forgot. The mistake was
> for them to expect it -- the mistake you would make if you visited
> a friend who forgot to ask if you would like a drink, and you then
> said "I thought you would offer me a drink".

That made for fascinating reading. You evidently have an intimate
knowledge of the way in which things worked back then.

> >Murdoch tried to turf him off the field?
>
> " Murdoch said Holden had no right on the field, but the
> " Chief Constable said he could give orders as he liked to
> " the groundsmen. " -- Peter Wynne-Thomas's account of the
> affair in his "History of Notts CCC".

Cheers, mate. If it's not too much trouble, would you mind posting a
fuller excerpt of W-T's account?

Rodney Ulyate
The cricket blog to which I grudgingly contribute: http://crickex.blogspot.com/
My Wikipedia talk page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Robertson-Glasgow



31 May 2007 15:08:36
Re: Captain Henry Holden

On May 31, 11:22 pm, rodney.uly...@gmail.com wrote:
> On May 31, 7:25 pm, a...@maths.nott.ac.uk (Dr A. N. Walker) wrote:
>
>
>
> > In article <1180548100.282456.167...@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
>
> > <rodney.uly...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> [...] Murdoch's 1882 side were luckier in
> > >> their cricket [a win and the better side of a draw], but not so
> > >> fortunate with their food ....
> > >How so?
>
> > The 1878 side were entertained to a banquet at the George
> > Hotel; the 1882 side didn't even get lunch, and cut their noses
> > off to spite their faces by also refusing the offer of a dinner
> > provided by William Wright [not to be confused with either Walter
> > Wright (no relation) or C. W. Wright (the Test player and William's
> > son), both playing for Notts in 1882], a wealthy committee member.
> > However, it didn't stop the Australians coming back for a second
> > match three months later!
>
> Very interesting; thank you, Andrew. Where did you find this
> information, might I ask? I wouldn't mind perusing it myself.
>
> > >> To be fair to Holden, he was technically correct on both
> > >> the "lunch" and the "roller" issues. Amateurs were not provided
> > >> with lunch
> > >The Notts amateurs apparently were.
>
> > Ah. Watch for weasel words!
>
> Nope, just an observation.

One which you have now proven to amount to total folly. My apologies.

Rodney Ulyate
The cricket blog to which I grudgingly contribute: http://crickex.blogspot.com/
My Wikipedia talk page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Robertson-Glasgow



01 Jun 2007 00:50:07
Dr A. N. Walker
Re: Captain Henry Holden

In article <1180646569.883659.55510@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com >,
<rodney.ulyate@gmail.com > wrote:
>Very interesting; thank you, Andrew.

I prefer "Andy" ....

> Where did you find this
>information, might I ask? I wouldn't mind perusing it myself.

As narrative history, mostly from Peter Wynne-Thomas's
"official" history of NCCC, previously referenced. Apart from
that, the usual snippets and anecdotes that one picks up over
the years .... [Not least through many happy hours spent in
the TB pavilion (and "museum").]

[...]
>That made for fascinating reading. You evidently have an intimate
>knowledge of the way in which things worked back then.

Not *that* intimate! But when I was being brought up,
somewhat after WW2, there were still plenty of people around
who had themselves been brought up in the late Victorian era,
and who still had the attitudes of that era. Indeed, public
schools and top universities of my time *still* tried to teach
the manners of an earlier period, despite the breakdown of the
"old order" [especially] brought about by the war. Jane Austen
was a little earlier, but you get [IMO] a pretty good idea of
how society worked from her books. [You perhaps do from Dickens
as well, but personally I find Dickens unreadable, a caricature
of life, not a portrait.]

Incidentally, the world of the Georgian/Victorian/Edwardian
gentleman was smaller than you might suppose. Wright's "Directory"
[eg] lists around 100 "notables" for Nottingham in the period --
that's the local aristocracy, landowners, top clergy, "ladies and
gents", and similar [inc a handful of major employers]. Basically,
if you were "anyone" in the city, you would know all of them, and
meet them regularly in the clubs, balls, concerts, etc. If you
were one of the 100, there was no way you could play cricket as
a pro, any more than you could run a pub or sweep the streets;
if you were not wealthy, this could be a problem .... Even in
London, although there would have been many more in total, that
city, then as now, consisted of a collection of "villages", each
with its own society.

>> " Murdoch said Holden had no right on the field, but the
>> " Chief Constable said he could give orders as he liked to
>> " the groundsmen. " -- Peter Wynne-Thomas's account of the
>> affair in his "History of Notts CCC".
>Cheers, mate. If it's not too much trouble, would you mind posting a
>fuller excerpt of W-T's account?

I think everything in it is covered between what I have
already posted and your original account [which went further
than PW-T into the biography of Holden and the Oz reactions].
But if there is anything specific about Notts cricket you'd like
to know, fire away. [I don't pretend to be a Universal Expert!]

Incidentally, there is a Henry Holden who was born in
Derbys in 1823, played for Sussex in 1853, and died in Nott'm
in 1900, but about whom the interweb-thinggy seems to have no
further info. Sounds as though it could be the same bloke?
Right age and location, and associated with cricket.

--
Andy Walker, School of MathSci., Univ. of Nott'm, UK.
anw@maths.nott.ac.uk


31 May 2007 18:43:58
Robert Henderson
Re: Captain Henry Holden

In message <fjh2qLCUdpXGFwqq@jhall.demon.co.uk.invalid >, John Hall
<nospam_nov03@jhall.co.uk > writes
>In article <LS7ZwHMRLlXGFwrr@anywhere.demon.co.uk>,
> Robert Henderson <philip@anywhere.demon.co.uk> writes:
>>People were much less circumspect in those days, vide Wisden editor
>>Preston's description of the England team going into the 1909 Oval
>>Test without a fast bowler as a decision which "touched the confines of
>>lunacy".
>
>That was Sydney Pardon, not Preston.
>>
>>WG and EM once literally kidnapped Midwinter after he agreed to play
>>for the Oz tourists rather than Gloucester. RH
>
>Though EM was a coroner,


I think that was just a nickname given to him as joke after WG qualified
as a doctor: WG saves them, EM puts them underground. RH

> and therefore in theory ought to have been
>law-abiding, the mental image that I have of him is somewhat akin to
>Carver Doone. Compared to him, WG seems almost angelic.

--
Robert Henderson
Blair Scandal website: http://www.geocities.com/blairscandal/
Personal website: http://www.anywhere.demon.co.uk


31 May 2007 18:44:20
Robert Henderson
Re: Captain Henry Holden

In message <TltVrsBkovXGFwrj@jhall.demon.co.uk.invalid >, John Hall
<nospam_nov03@jhall.co.uk > writes
>In article <1180626890.781890.270140@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com>,
> rodney.ulyate@gmail.com writes:
>>Only recently have I begun to comprehend just how controversial a
>>figure old Boss/Monkey/Albert Hornby really was. He must surely have
>>been very physically arresting, for I understand that he was an
>>absolute monster of a man.
>
>I thought that he was rather a small man. Hence the "monkey".

Correct. Around 5'6". RH
>
>> Does anyone know anything more about his
>>less civil or diplomatic moments?
>
>I only know what I've read about him in Alan Gibson's "The Cricket
>Captains of England", IIRC, he was inclined to be hot-tempered but was
>well liked.

--
Robert Henderson
Blair Scandal website: http://www.geocities.com/blairscandal/
Personal website: http://www.anywhere.demon.co.uk


01 Jun 2007 05:23:00
Robert Henderson
Re: Captain Henry Holden

In message <f3nqfv$j8s$1$8302bc10@news.demon.co.uk >, Dr A. N. Walker
<anw@cuboid.demon.co.uk > writes
>In article <1180646569.883659.55510@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com>,
> <rodney.ulyate@gmail.com> wrote:
>>Very interesting; thank you, Andrew.
>
> I prefer "Andy" ....

Unlike Flintoff who thinks it is .......RH
--
Robert Henderson
Blair Scandal website: http://www.geocities.com/blairscandal/
Personal website: http://www.anywhere.demon.co.uk


01 Jun 2007 11:04:34
John Hall
Re: Captain Henry Holden

In article <1180646144.042032.320570@q69g2000hsb.googlegroups.com >,
rodney.ulyate@gmail.com writes:
>On May 31, 6:39 pm, John Hall <nospam_no...@jhall.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> I only know what I've read about him in Alan Gibson's "The Cricket
>> Captains of England", IIRC, he was inclined to be hot-tempered but was
>> well liked.
>
>That is a volume on which I really must get my grubby little paws. If
>you don't mind me saying so, it seems to have been a very valuable
>resource to you, based on how often I have seen you consult it.

It has been. Gibson casts his net wide. The book is really a complete
history of English Test cricket, and also of the prior All-England XI as
well.
--
John Hall

"I am not young enough to know everything."
Oscar Wilde (1854-1900)


01 Jun 2007 11:54:44
Re: Captain Henry Holden

On Jun 1, 2:50 am, a...@cuboid.demon.co.uk (Dr A. N. Walker) wrote:
> In article <1180646569.883659.55...@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com>,
>
> <rodney.uly...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >Very interesting; thank you, Andrew.
>
> I prefer "Andy" ....

Alright, Andrew.

> > Where did you find this
> >information, might I ask? I wouldn't mind perusing it myself.
>
> As narrative history, mostly from Peter Wynne-Thomas's
> "official" history of NCCC, previously referenced. Apart from
> that, the usual snippets and anecdotes that one picks up over
> the years .... [Not least through many happy hours spent in
> the TB pavilion (and "museum").]

Lucky blighter!

> >That made for fascinating reading. You evidently have an intimate
> >knowledge of the way in which things worked back then.
>
> Not *that* intimate! But when I was being brought up,
> somewhat after WW2, there were still plenty of people around
> who had themselves been brought up in the late Victorian era,
> and who still had the attitudes of that era. Indeed, public
> schools and top universities of my time *still* tried to teach
> the manners of an earlier period, despite the breakdown of the
> "old order" [especially] brought about by the war.

Did you ever meet any old Victorian or Edwardian cricketers?

> Jane Austen
> was a little earlier, but you get [IMO] a pretty good idea of
> how society worked from her books. [You perhaps do from Dickens
> as well, but personally I find Dickens unreadable, a caricature
> of life, not a portrait.]

Indeed. The man was verbosity personified at times.

> Incidentally, the world of the Georgian/Victorian/Edwardian
> gentleman was smaller than you might suppose. Wright's "Directory"
> [eg] lists around 100 "notables" for Nottingham in the period --
> that's the local aristocracy, landowners, top clergy, "ladies and
> gents", and similar [inc a handful of major employers]. Basically,
> if you were "anyone" in the city, you would know all of them, and
> meet them regularly in the clubs, balls, concerts, etc. If you
> were one of the 100, there was no way you could play cricket as
> a pro, any more than you could run a pub or sweep the streets;
> if you were not wealthy, this could be a problem .... Even in
> London, although there would have been many more in total, that
> city, then as now, consisted of a collection of "villages", each
> with its own society.

Fascinating as always, Andy. Thank you.

> >> " Murdoch said Holden had no right on the field, but the
> >> " Chief Constable said he could give orders as he liked to
> >> " the groundsmen. " -- Peter Wynne-Thomas's account of the
> >> affair in his "History of Notts CCC".
> >Cheers, mate. If it's not too much trouble, would you mind posting a
> >fuller excerpt of W-T's account?
>
> I think everything in it is covered between what I have
> already posted and your original account [which went further
> than PW-T into the biography of Holden and the Oz reactions].
> But if there is anything specific about Notts cricket you'd like
> to know, fire away. [I don't pretend to be a Universal Expert!]

I would appreciate some information about Nottinghamshire's near-
monopoly over the County Championship during the 1880s, if you don't
mind.

> Incidentally, there is a Henry Holden who was born in
> Derbys in 1823, played for Sussex in 1853, and died in Nott'm
> in 1900, but about whom the interweb-thinggy seems to have no
> further info. Sounds as though it could be the same bloke?
> Right age and location, and associated with cricket.

I can't see why it wouldn't be him.

Rodney Ulyate
The cricket blog to which I grudgingly contribute: http://crickex.blogspot.com/
My Wikipedia talk page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Robertson-Glasgow



01 Jun 2007 11:55:30
Re: Captain Henry Holden

On May 31, 7:44 pm, Robert Henderson <phi...@anywhere.demon.co.uk >
wrote:
> In message <TltVrsBkovXGF...@jhall.demon.co.uk.invalid>, John Hall
> <nospam_no...@jhall.co.uk> writes
>
> >In article <1180626890.781890.270...@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com>,
> > rodney.uly...@gmail.com writes:
> >>Only recently have I begun to comprehend just how controversial a
> >>figure old Boss/Monkey/Albert Hornby really was. He must surely have
> >>been very physically arresting, for I understand that he was an
> >>absolute monster of a man.
>
> >I thought that he was rather a small man. Hence the "monkey".
>
> Correct. Around 5'6". RH

Tiny indeed.

Rodney Ulyate
The cricket blog to which I grudgingly contribute: http://crickex.blogspot.com/
My Wikipedia talk page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Robertson-Glasgow



01 Jun 2007 11:56:35
Re: Captain Henry Holden

On Jun 1, 12:04 pm, John Hall <nospam_no...@jhall.co.uk > wrote:
> In article <1180646144.042032.320...@q69g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
>
> rodney.uly...@gmail.com writes:
> >On May 31, 6:39 pm, John Hall <nospam_no...@jhall.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >> I only know what I've read about him in Alan Gibson's "The Cricket
> >> Captains of England", IIRC, he was inclined to be hot-tempered but was
> >> well liked.
>
> >That is a volume on which I really must get my grubby little paws. If
> >you don't mind me saying so, it seems to have been a very valuable
> >resource to you, based on how often I have seen you consult it.
>
> It has been. Gibson casts his net wide. The book is really a complete
> history of English Test cricket, and also of the prior All-England XI as
> well.

I read the chapter on the All-England XI in Guha's ''Picador Book of
Cricket'' -- quite delightful.

Rodney Ulyate
The cricket blog to which I grudgingly contribute: http://crickex.blogspot.com/
My Wikipedia talk page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Robertson-Glasgow



01 Jun 2007 18:10:40
John Hall
Re: Captain Henry Holden

In article <1180698884.818856.112280@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com >,
rodney.ulyate@gmail.com writes:
>On Jun 1, 2:50 am, a...@cuboid.demon.co.uk (Dr A. N. Walker) wrote:
>
>> Incidentally, there is a Henry Holden who was born in
>> Derbys in 1823, played for Sussex in 1853, and died in Nott'm
>> in 1900, but about whom the interweb-thinggy seems to have no
>> further info. Sounds as though it could be the same bloke?
>> Right age and location, and associated with cricket.
>
>I can't see why it wouldn't be him.

It is. His obituary in the 1901 Wisden reads in full:

"CAPTAIN H. HOLDEN, secretary to the Nottinghamshire County Cricket Club
from 1874 to 1882. Died February 1, 1900, aged 77."

So the date of death precisely coincides with that given by Cricinfo for
Henry Holden. I see that his secretaryship ended in the same year as the
incident with the Australians. Could there have been a connection? Had
he continued, I wonder whether the Australians would have consented to
play a Test in Trent Bridge two years later?
--
John Hall

"I am not young enough to know everything."
Oscar Wilde (1854-1900)


01 Jun 2007 17:58:12
Re: Captain Henry Holden

On Jun 1, 7:10 pm, John Hall <nospam_no...@jhall.co.uk > wrote:
> In article <1180698884.818856.112...@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com>,
>
> rodney.uly...@gmail.com writes:
> >On Jun 1, 2:50 am, a...@cuboid.demon.co.uk (Dr A. N. Walker) wrote:
>
> >> Incidentally, there is a Henry Holden who was born in
> >> Derbys in 1823, played for Sussex in 1853, and died in Nott'm
> >> in 1900, but about whom the interweb-thinggy seems to have no
> >> further info. Sounds as though it could be the same bloke?
> >> Right age and location, and associated with cricket.
>
> >I can't see why it wouldn't be him.
>
> It is. His obituary in the 1901 Wisden reads in full:
>
> "CAPTAIN H. HOLDEN, secretary to the Nottinghamshire County Cricket Club
> from 1874 to 1882. Died February 1, 1900, aged 77."
>
> So the date of death precisely coincides with that given by Cricinfo for
> Henry Holden.

Many thanks.

> I see that his secretaryship ended in the same year as the
> incident with the Australians. Could there have been a connection? Had
> he continued, I wonder whether the Australians would have consented to
> play a Test in Trent Bridge two years later?

That's a very interesting observation, John. Perhaps Andy won't mind
delving deep into Wynne-Thomas's book again for us?

Cheers,
Rodney Ulyate



01 Jun 2007 18:37:47
Dr A. N. Walker
Re: Captain Henry Holden

In article <eP$2BIDQMFYGFww6@jhall.demon.co.uk.invalid >,
John Hall <john_nospam@jhall.co.uk > wrote:
>>> Incidentally, there is a Henry Holden who was born in
>>> Derbys in 1823, played for Sussex in 1853, and died in Nott'm
>>> in 1900, [...]
>>I can't see why it wouldn't be him.
>It is. His obituary in the 1901 Wisden

Aarrgghh! I should have checked, of course.

> reads in full:
>"CAPTAIN H. HOLDEN, secretary to the Nottinghamshire County Cricket Club
>from 1874 to 1882. Died February 1, 1900, aged 77."

Um. So not even the slightest mention that he actually played
county cricket, then? Perhaps they didn't realise, Cricinfo being not
quite so comprehensive then ....

>So the date of death precisely coincides with that given by Cricinfo for
>Henry Holden. I see that his secretaryship ended in the same year as the
>incident with the Australians.

Technically, no; he resigned in January 1883.

> Could there have been a connection? Had
>he continued, I wonder whether the Australians would have consented to
>play a Test in Trent Bridge two years later?

There *was* a connexion; the Notts Cttee were thoroughly fed
up with the autocrat who had upset Australia, Lancashire, and most of
the Notts team. In that sort of job, it's not enough to be *right*
[if he was], you need elements of diplomacy as well. I dare say he was
less than popular as Chief Constable as well.

As for TB in 1884, well ???? There was no Test. There were
two matches Notts vs Oz, and a match North vs Oz, which was virtually
also Notts vs Oz. OK, not quite, Barlow was the "man of the match",
but Flowers and Attewell also did very well. Were you thinking of OT?
I don't think there would have been any serious problem, Oz were happy
enough to play the return at TB later in 1882 while Holden was still in
post. Money speaks louder than rudeness/autocracy.

--
Andy Walker, School of MathSci., Univ. of Nott'm, UK.
anw@maths.nott.ac.uk


01 Jun 2007 20:47:40
John Hall
Re: Captain Henry Holden

In article <f3pp1r$2bb$1@oyez.ccc.nottingham.ac.uk >,
Dr A. N. Walker <anw@maths.nott.ac.uk > writes:
> As for TB in 1884, well ???? There was no Test. There were
>two matches Notts vs Oz, and a match North vs Oz, which was virtually
>also Notts vs Oz. OK, not quite, Barlow was the "man of the match",
>but Flowers and Attewell also did very well. Were you thinking of OT?

Yes, I was. Silly of me. If I had put my brain in gear, I would have
recalled that the first Trent Bridge Test wasn't till 1899.
--
John Hall

"I am not young enough to know everything."
Oscar Wilde (1854-1900)


02 Jun 2007 01:16:47
Dr A. N. Walker
Re: Captain Henry Holden

In article <1180698884.818856.112280@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com >,
<rodney.ulyate@gmail.com > wrote:
>Did you ever meet any old Victorian or Edwardian cricketers?

Not knowingly, though I occasionally had elderly [*very*
elderly, as far as a small boy was concerned] men pointed out to
me -- "That's Mr Rhodes" "Oh. Who's he?". I must have met Dr
George Ogg Gauld, the Notts captain just pre-WW1, for he lived
a few doors away, but he was old and frail, and I didn't find
out that he was a [slightly] famous cricketer until long after
he died. More interesting would have been Tinsley Lindley, who
also lived very close for more than 40 years, but died not long
before I was born. His cricketing career was undistinguished,
but he was a brilliant footballer who still holds the record of
scoring in 7 consecutive internationals for England, prominent
in a number of other sports, and a well-known barrister.

Several more recent county cricketers have also lived
within a few doors, but none of any great fame.

>I would appreciate some information about Nottinghamshire's near-
>monopoly over the County Championship during the 1880s, if you don't
>mind.

Oh. They had by far the best team at the time. I assume
that's not really what you want to know?

Basically, as in all such cases, it was a combination of
luck and circumstance. To some extent, it's always luck when a
small number of top players happen to be in the same place at the
same time. But it's rarely, if ever, *just* luck. In the case
of Notts, the great team of the 1880s grew out of the great teams
of the '60s and '70s, and you can trace the steady putting-together
of the teams of the most successful years. Each individual brick
in the wall is "luck" [eg that Shrewsbury played for Notts rather
than some other county], but the wall isn't there by chance.

The point was that Notts turned professional in a different
way from other counties. Elsewhere, you were either an amateur --
a gentleman whose hobby and passion was cricket -- or you were a
professional, employed by a gentleman to play cricket for his team
[and to win bets]. Unusually, because of the lace industry, many
of the workers in Nottingham were sufficiently self-employed to be
able to take time off to suit themselves, and thus to play/watch
sports. It's not a coincidence that Notts County and Nott'm Forest
were two of the three [with Stoke] oldest Football League clubs.
William Clarke's notion of charging people to watch cricket at TB,
and his founding of the All-England XI soon followed, enabling
an interesting number of local people to become professional
players, esp with the opening up of the country thanks to railways.

Business boomed. ISTR reading that at one time there were
well over 300 Notts professional cricketers playing or coaching in
other counties. Notts players made up a high proportion of the
professionals engaged by MCC. Out of that, naturally, came some
of the best players, Clarke himself, then Parr and Daft. Notts
took teams abroad, and formed the backbone of most of the touring
XIs. There was no direct reason why Notts should have had most
of the best players -- but there were definitely reasons why if
you were one of the most talented players you were more likely to
be spotted and be offered an engagement if you lived near to TB.

That's it, really. Notts were broadly top dogs from 1850
or so up to 1890 or so, from the rise of the touring elevens to
the time when other counties raised their game. It wasn't Notts
all the way, of course; there were plenty of talented players
in the rest of the country, and sometimes counties such as Lancs
had several at the same time and did well. In the end, Notts ran
up against the sheer weight of population in Lancs/Yorks/London.
Once other places got lots of people playing club cricket, they
too could consistently raise good teams.

Is that roughly what you wanted?

--
Andy Walker, School of MathSci., Univ. of Nott'm, UK.
anw@maths.nott.ac.uk


02 Jun 2007 07:22:39
Re: Captain Henry Holden

On Jun 2, 3:16 am, a...@cuboid.demon.co.uk (Dr A. N. Walker) wrote:
> In article <1180698884.818856.112...@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com>,
>
> <rodney.uly...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >Did you ever meet any old Victorian or Edwardian cricketers?
>
> Not knowingly, though I occasionally had elderly [*very*
> elderly, as far as a small boy was concerned] men pointed out to
> me -- "That's Mr Rhodes"

Wow. That right there is absolutely incredible. Fancy crossing
Wilfred's path!

> "Oh. Who's he?". I must have met Dr
> George Ogg Gauld, the Notts captain just pre-WW1, for he lived
> a few doors away, but he was old and frail, and I didn't find
> out that he was a [slightly] famous cricketer until long after
> he died. More interesting would have been Tinsley Lindley, who
> also lived very close for more than 40 years, but died not long
> before I was born. His cricketing career was undistinguished,
> but he was a brilliant footballer who still holds the record of
> scoring in 7 consecutive internationals for England, prominent
> in a number of other sports, and a well-known barrister.
>
> Several more recent county cricketers have also lived
> within a few doors, but none of any great fame.

Still, it must be (and have been) fantastic to be able to mix in such
circles (even subconsciously).

> >I would appreciate some information about Nottinghamshire's near-
> >monopoly over the County Championship during the 1880s, if you don't
> >mind.
>
> Oh. They had by far the best team at the time. I assume
> that's not really what you want to know?

No.

> Basically, as in all such cases, it was a combination of
> luck and circumstance. To some extent, it's always luck when a
> small number of top players happen to be in the same place at the
> same time. But it's rarely, if ever, *just* luck. In the case
> of Notts, the great team of the 1880s grew out of the great teams
> of the '60s and '70s, and you can trace the steady putting-together
> of the teams of the most successful years. Each individual brick
> in the wall is "luck" [eg that Shrewsbury played for Notts rather
> than some other county], but the wall isn't there by chance.
>
> The point was that Notts turned professional in a different
> way from other counties. Elsewhere, you were either an amateur --
> a gentleman whose hobby and passion was cricket -- or you were a
> professional, employed by a gentleman to play cricket for his team
> [and to win bets]. Unusually, because of the lace industry, many
> of the workers in Nottingham were sufficiently self-employed to be
> able to take time off to suit themselves, and thus to play/watch
> sports. It's not a coincidence that Notts County and Nott'm Forest
> were two of the three [with Stoke] oldest Football League clubs.
> William Clarke's notion of charging people to watch cricket at TB,
> and his founding of the All-England XI soon followed, enabling
> an interesting number of local people to become professional
> players, esp with the opening up of the country thanks to railways.
>
> Business boomed. ISTR reading that at one time there were
> well over 300 Notts professional cricketers playing or coaching in
> other counties. Notts players made up a high proportion of the
> professionals engaged by MCC. Out of that, naturally, came some
> of the best players, Clarke himself, then Parr and Daft. Notts
> took teams abroad

Vis-a-vis Shrewsbury and Shaw. Do you know anything more about their
excusions?

> and formed the backbone of most of the touring
> XIs. There was no direct reason why Notts should have had most
> of the best players -- but there were definitely reasons why if
> you were one of the most talented players you were more likely to
> be spotted and be offered an engagement if you lived near to TB.
>
> That's it, really. Notts were broadly top dogs from 1850
> or so up to 1890 or so, from the rise of the touring elevens to
> the time when other counties raised their game. It wasn't Notts
> all the way, of course; there were plenty of talented players
> in the rest of the country, and sometimes counties such as Lancs
> had several at the same time and did well. In the end, Notts ran
> up against the sheer weight of population in Lancs/Yorks/London.
> Once other places got lots of people playing club cricket, they
> too could consistently raise good teams.
>
> Is that roughly what you wanted?

That's it. It made for some quite enthralling reading, as ever, Andy.
You really are a wealth of interpreted knowledge.

Thanks a ton,
Rodeny Ulyate



02 Jun 2007 08:05:11
Cicero
Re: Captain Henry Holden


In the end, Notts ran
> up against the sheer weight of population in Lancs/Yorks/London.
> Once other places got lots of people playing club cricket, they
> too could consistently raise good teams.
>

Great post- thanks. However, I'm not convinced population is a convincing
argument (although I understand that is not your only argument). That would
mean India or Pakistan should be the best teams playing International
cricket- and consistently so.




02 Jun 2007 10:00:13
John Hall
Re: Captain Henry Holden

In article <f3qgdv$b5v$1$8302bc10@news.demon.co.uk >,
Dr A. N. Walker <anw@cuboid.demon.co.uk > writes:
<snip >
> Is that roughly what you wanted?

I can's answer for Rodney, of course, but I found it very interesting.
Would you mind if I made use of some of it for the Wikipedia article on
Notts CCC? I suppose that Peter Wynne-Thomas's book would be the one to
give as a reference.
--
John Hall

"I am not young enough to know everything."
Oscar Wilde (1854-1900)


02 Jun 2007 10:01:26
John Hall
Re: Captain Henry Holden

In article <1180768959.044481.232480@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com >,
rodney.ulyate@gmail.com writes:
>Vis-a-vis Shrewsbury and Shaw. Do you know anything more about their
>excusions?

There's a little, though not much, on Wikipedia.
--
John Hall

"I am not young enough to know everything."
Oscar Wilde (1854-1900)


02 Jun 2007 14:17:28
David North
Re: Captain Henry Holden

"Robert Henderson" <philip@anywhere.demon.co.uk > wrote in message
news:IdGpjUDk85XGFwKo@anywhere.demon.co.uk...
> In message <f3nqfv$j8s$1$8302bc10@news.demon.co.uk>, Dr A. N. Walker
> <anw@cuboid.demon.co.uk> writes
>>In article <1180646569.883659.55510@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com>,
>> <rodney.ulyate@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>Very interesting; thank you, Andrew.
>>
>> I prefer "Andy" ....
>
> Unlike Flintoff who thinks it is .......RH

Whereas, of course, no-one known as Freddie ever has been ...
--
David North
Test Career Ratings: http://www.lanefarm.plus.com




02 Jun 2007 15:06:30
David North
Re: Captain Henry Holden

"Dr A. N. Walker" <anw@maths.nott.ac.uk > wrote in message
news:f3pp1r$2bb$1@oyez.ccc.nottingham.ac.uk...
> In article <eP$2BIDQMFYGFww6@jhall.demon.co.uk.invalid>,
> John Hall <john_nospam@jhall.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> Incidentally, there is a Henry Holden who was born in
>>>> Derbys in 1823, played for Sussex in 1853, and died in Nott'm
>>>> in 1900, [...]
>>>I can't see why it wouldn't be him.
>>It is. His obituary in the 1901 Wisden
>
> Aarrgghh! I should have checked, of course.
>
>> reads in full:
>>"CAPTAIN H. HOLDEN, secretary to the Nottinghamshire County Cricket Club
>>from 1874 to 1882. Died February 1, 1900, aged 77."
>
> Um. So not even the slightest mention that he actually played
> county cricket, then? Perhaps they didn't realise, Cricinfo being not
> quite so comprehensive then ....

He captained Sussex (to victory) on his one FC appearance, which was at TB.
He batted at 11, made a duck in his only innings and didn't bowl, but did
take a catch.

http://www.cricketarchive.co.uk/Archive/Scorecards/0/989.html

If John Wisden had still been around in 1901, the omission might not have
been made. Wisden's 11-67 and 35 in the second innings were key to Sussex's
win.

The Who's Who of Cricketers (2nd edition, 1993), which claims to be "a
complete record of all cricketers who have played first class cricket in the
British Isles", also overlooks Holden.
--
David North
Test Career Ratings: http://www.lanefarm.plus.com




02 Jun 2007 15:01:22
Re: Captain Henry Holden

On Jun 2, 11:01 am, John Hall <nospam_no...@jhall.co.uk > wrote:
> In article <1180768959.044481.232...@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
>
> rodney.uly...@gmail.com writes:
> >Vis-a-vis Shrewsbury and Shaw. Do you know anything more about their
> >excusions?
>
> There's a little, though not much, on Wikipedia.

I'll see about attending to it.



02 Jun 2007 15:02:11
Re: Captain Henry Holden

On Jun 2, 4:06 pm, "David North" <dno...@abbeymanor.fsbusiness.co.uk >
wrote:
> "Dr A. N. Walker" <a...@maths.nott.ac.uk> wrote in messagenews:f3pp1r$2bb$1@oyez.ccc.nottingham.ac.uk...
>
>
>
> > In article <eP$2BIDQMFYGF...@jhall.demon.co.uk.invalid>,
> > John Hall <john_nos...@jhall.co.uk> wrote:
> >>>> Incidentally, there is a Henry Holden who was born in
> >>>> Derbys in 1823, played for Sussex in 1853, and died in Nott'm
> >>>> in 1900, [...]
> >>>I can't see why it wouldn't be him.
> >>It is. His obituary in the 1901 Wisden
>
> > Aarrgghh! I should have checked, of course.
>
> >> reads in full:
> >>"CAPTAIN H. HOLDEN, secretary to the Nottinghamshire County Cricket Club
> >>from 1874 to 1882. Died February 1, 1900, aged 77."
>
> > Um. So not even the slightest mention that he actually played
> > county cricket, then? Perhaps they didn't realise, Cricinfo being not
> > quite so comprehensive then ....
>
> He captained Sussex (to victory) on his one FC appearance, which was at TB.
> He batted at 11, made a duck in his only innings and didn't bowl, but did
> take a catch.
>
> http://www.cricketarchive.co.uk/Archive/Scorecards/0/989.html
>
> If John Wisden had still been around in 1901, the omission might not have
> been made. Wisden's 11-67 and 35 in the second innings were key to Sussex's
> win.
>
> The Who's Who of Cricketers (2nd edition, 1993), which claims to be "a
> complete record of all cricketers who have played first class cricket in the
> British Isles", also overlooks Holden.

That's very surprising. It could never escape the CricketArchive
system, though.

Rodney



02 Jun 2007 05:53:04
Robert Henderson
Re: Captain Henry Holden

In message <f3qgdv$b5v$1$8302bc10@news.demon.co.uk >, Dr A. N. Walker
<anw@cuboid.demon.co.uk > writes
> That's it, really. Notts were broadly top dogs from 1850
>or so up to 1890

Tell that to Surrey, Lancs, Yorks. RH
--
Robert Henderson
Blair Scandal website: http://www.geocities.com/blairscandal/
Personal website: http://www.anywhere.demon.co.uk


03 Jun 2007 10:12:47
John Hall
Re: Captain Henry Holden

In article <2qsWOmGwePYGFwX7@anywhere.demon.co.uk >,
Robert Henderson <philip@anywhere.demon.co.uk > writes:
>In message <f3qgdv$b5v$1$8302bc10@news.demon.co.uk>, Dr A. N. Walker
><anw@cuboid.demon.co.uk> writes
>> That's it, really. Notts were broadly top dogs from 1850
>>or so up to 1890
>
>Tell that to Surrey, Lancs, Yorks. RH

Note the "broadly". They certainly had far more success than any other
county. In outright titles (excluding years when the title was shared),
and going by the list back to 1864 that used to appear in Wisden, up to
and including 1889 Notts had 10 wins, Surrey 3, Lancs 1, Yorks 2, Gloucs
3, Middlesex 1. I think that justifies Andy's assertion.
--
John Hall

"I am not young enough to know everything."
Oscar Wilde (1854-1900)


03 Jun 2007 12:20:38
Dr A. N. Walker
Re: Captain Henry Holden

In article <Xw98i.7696$wH4.4325@news-server.bigpond.net.au >,
Cicero <moofie53@bigpond.net.au > wrote:
> In the end, Notts ran
>> up against the sheer weight of population in Lancs/Yorks/London.
> [...] However, I'm not convinced population is a convincing
>argument (although I understand that is not your only argument). That would
>mean India or Pakistan should be the best teams playing International
>cricket- and consistently so.

Not consistently -- Notts can still win the CC occasionally!
But on a more-or-less level playing field, smaller count[r]ies have
to be lucky [eg accident of birth of one or two star players].

Test cricket is not yet levelled out. There are reasons why
Australia and New Zealand [eg] punch above their weight in a number
of sports, and why India, Pakistan, Indonesia and China punch below.
When the coaching, grounds, career structures, public interest,
national pride, etc., converge, *then* you can expect weight to
match population.

--
Andy Walker, School of MathSci., Univ. of Nott'm, UK.
anw@maths.nott.ac.uk


03 Jun 2007 12:47:15
Dr A. N. Walker
Re: Captain Henry Holden

In article <sJcawoAdGTYGFwXZ@jhall.demon.co.uk.invalid >,
John Hall <john_nospam@jhall.co.uk > wrote:
>I can's answer for Rodney, of course, but I found it very interesting.
>Would you mind if I made use of some of it for the Wikipedia article on
>Notts CCC? I suppose that Peter Wynne-Thomas's book would be the one to
>give as a reference.

I don't mind; but I would have thought it might fall foul
of Wiki notions of verifiable and referenced facts rather than mere
opinions and assertions? PW-T should certainly be a reference, but
he is rather limited on the social aspects -- his book tends to be
rather a catalogue of players joining and leaving, matches won and
lost, and occasional incidents. You [and Rodney!] might find his
biography ["Give me Arthur"] of Shrewsbury and/or the Haynes/Lucas
book ["The Trent Bridge Battery"] on the Gunns more enlightening.

--
Andy Walker, School of MathSci., Univ. of Nott'm, UK.
anw@maths.nott.ac.uk


03 Jun 2007 14:10:17
John Hall
Re: Captain Henry Holden

In article <f3ud8j$5l0$1$8302bc10@news.demon.co.uk >,
Dr A. N. Walker <anw@cuboid.demon.co.uk > writes:
>In article <sJcawoAdGTYGFwXZ@jhall.demon.co.uk.invalid>,
>John Hall <john_nospam@jhall.co.uk> wrote:
>>I can's answer for Rodney, of course, but I found it very interesting.
>>Would you mind if I made use of some of it for the Wikipedia article on
>>Notts CCC? I suppose that Peter Wynne-Thomas's book would be the one to
>>give as a reference.
>
> I don't mind; but I would have thought it might fall foul
>of Wiki notions of verifiable and referenced facts rather than mere
>opinions and assertions? PW-T should certainly be a reference, but
>he is rather limited on the social aspects -- his book tends to be
>rather a catalogue of players joining and leaving, matches won and
>lost, and occasional incidents. You [and Rodney!] might find his
>biography ["Give me Arthur"] of Shrewsbury and/or the Haynes/Lucas
>book ["The Trent Bridge Battery"] on the Gunns more enlightening.
>

Thanks. In view of the difficulties that you've pointed out, it's
possible that lethargy may triumph.
--
John Hall

"I am not young enough to know everything."
Oscar Wilde (1854-1900)


03 Jun 2007 13:35:00
Dr A. N. Walker
Re: Captain Henry Holden

In article <5cdbqbF30lembU1@mid.individual.net >,
David North <dnorth@abbeymanor.fsbusiness.co.uk > wrote:
>>>>> Incidentally, there is a Henry Holden who was born in
>>>>> Derbys in 1823, played for Sussex in 1853, and died in Nott'm
>>>>> in 1900, [...]
[John Hall:]
>>> [...] His obituary in the 1901 Wisden reads in full:
>>>"CAPTAIN H. HOLDEN, secretary to the Nottinghamshire County Cricket Club
>>>from 1874 to 1882. Died February 1, 1900, aged 77."
>He captained Sussex (to victory) on his one FC appearance, which was at TB.
[...]

OK, that leaves open whether he really was a Sussex player
[who happened to play just the once, against his future county], or
whether Sussex arrived a player short, and someone said "Got just
the bloke to make up your numbers ...". Neither is particularly
unlikely.

As he was still referred to as "Captain" in his old age,
this must have been a naval rank rather than army, and there's not
much navy in Notts [not much in Sussex, come to that, but at least
there's seaside!]. I don't suppose it would take long to check
service records and find out. Anyway, if he was stationed or just
living in Sussex, you can imagine them wanting a team to travel
up to Nottingham, and HH saying "Oh, I'll play, I've got family
in Derbyshire, I can kill two birds with one stone." The other
scenario, that Sussex needed a player, and someone knew HH, would
seem more likely -- *except* that HH captained the side. Perhaps
he just was so autocratic that no-one dared to say no?

Anyway, I checked up just a little. The Post Office
Directory for Sussex for 1852 is on-line, and includes several
H. Holdens, but none of them seem to be our man. But if he was
still in the services at that stage, that means little. By 1855,
the PO Directory for Notts lists Capt. Holden as "gentry", and
living in Hoveringham. The next available directory is Wright's
for 1858, and by then he is Chief Constable -- not bad going at
age 35, even if one suspects it was somewhat of an honorary post
and the real work was done by his deputy.

Anyone who is *really* interested and living near Nott'm
could certainly find out much more. Chief Constables are always
in the local papers. There will be ample reports of his life and
times, his family and connexions, and so on. And no doubt of the
incident that sparked this thread. Plus a fuller obituary.

>The Who's Who of Cricketers (2nd edition, 1993), which claims to be "a
>complete record of all cricketers who have played first class cricket in the
>British Isles", also overlooks Holden.

Somewhat worryingly, Peter Wynne-Thomas is one of the
authors of WWoC. Perhaps the complete scorecard of that match
was unknown until after 1993? Might be interesting to know how
many more 19thC f-c cricketers there are now than there were in
1993!

--
Andy Walker, School of MathSci., Univ. of Nott'm, UK.
anw@maths.nott.ac.uk


03 Jun 2007 16:00:43
Don Aitken
Re: Captain Henry Holden

On Sun, 3 Jun 2007 13:35:00 +0000 (UTC), anw@cuboid.demon.co.uk (Dr A.
N. Walker) wrote:

>In article <5cdbqbF30lembU1@mid.individual.net>,
>David North <dnorth@abbeymanor.fsbusiness.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> Incidentally, there is a Henry Holden who was born in
>>>>>> Derbys in 1823, played for Sussex in 1853, and died in Nott'm
>>>>>> in 1900, [...]
>[John Hall:]
>>>> [...] His obituary in the 1901 Wisden reads in full:
>>>>"CAPTAIN H. HOLDEN, secretary to the Nottinghamshire County Cricket Club
>>>>from 1874 to 1882. Died February 1, 1900, aged 77."
>>He captained Sussex (to victory) on his one FC appearance, which was at TB.
>[...]
>
> OK, that leaves open whether he really was a Sussex player
>[who happened to play just the once, against his future county], or
>whether Sussex arrived a player short, and someone said "Got just
>the bloke to make up your numbers ...". Neither is particularly
>unlikely.
>
> As he was still referred to as "Captain" in his old age,
>this must have been a naval rank rather than army, and there's not
>much navy in Notts [not much in Sussex, come to that, but at least
>there's seaside!]. I don't suppose it would take long to check
>service records and find out. Anyway, if he was stationed or just
>living in Sussex, you can imagine them wanting a team to travel
>up to Nottingham, and HH saying "Oh, I'll play, I've got family
>in Derbyshire, I can kill two birds with one stone." The other
>scenario, that Sussex needed a player, and someone knew HH, would
>seem more likely -- *except* that HH captained the side. Perhaps
>he just was so autocratic that no-one dared to say no?
>
> Anyway, I checked up just a little. The Post Office
>Directory for Sussex for 1852 is on-line, and includes several
>H. Holdens, but none of them seem to be our man. But if he was
>still in the services at that stage, that means little. By 1855,
>the PO Directory for Notts lists Capt. Holden as "gentry", and
>living in Hoveringham. The next available directory is Wright's
>for 1858, and by then he is Chief Constable -- not bad going at
>age 35, even if one suspects it was somewhat of an honorary post
>and the real work was done by his deputy.
>
> Anyone who is *really* interested and living near Nott'm
>could certainly find out much more. Chief Constables are always
>in the local papers. There will be ample reports of his life and
>times, his family and connexions, and so on. And no doubt of the
>incident that sparked this thread. Plus a fuller obituary.
>
He was one of the Holdens of Aston-on-Trent, later of Nuttall Temple,
one of the biggest landed families in Notts, which, at that time, is
probably enough to explain how he got to be both Chief Constable and
Secretary of Notts CCC. The genealogy is here -

http://www.stirnet.com/HTML/genie/british/hh4bz/holden02.htm

See also

http://www.nottshistory.org.uk/Jacks1881/nuttalltemple.htm

and

http://longford.nottingham.ac.uk/Dserve/dserve.exe?dsqIni=Dserve.ini&dsqApp=Archive&dsqCmd=show.tcl&dsqDb=Catalog&dsqSearch=(RefNo==Hn)

--
Don Aitken
Mail to the From: address is not read.
To email me, substitute "clara.co.uk" for "freeuk.com"


03 Jun 2007 15:23:03
Dr A. N. Walker
Re: Captain Henry Holden

In article <1180768959.044481.232480@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com >,
<rodney.ulyate@gmail.com > wrote:
>Vis-a-vis Shrewsbury and Shaw. Do you know anything more about their
>excusions?

John has pointed you at Wiki. ISTR there is much more in
"Give me Arthur", Peter Wynne-Thomas's biography of Shrewsbury.
Looking around Abe, I see that PW-T also has a "complete" book
of "tours abroad", which no doubt has much to say about the
S&S trips.

--
Andy Walker, School of MathSci., Univ. of Nott'm, UK.
anw@maths.nott.ac.uk


03 Jun 2007 14:34:10
Re: Captain Henry Holden

On Jun 3, 2:47 pm, a...@cuboid.demon.co.uk (Dr A. N. Walker) wrote:
> In article <sJcawoAdGTYGF...@jhall.demon.co.uk.invalid>,
> John Hall <john_nos...@jhall.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >I can's answer for Rodney, of course, but I found it very interesting.
> >Would you mind if I made use of some of it for the Wikipedia article on
> >Notts CCC? I suppose that Peter Wynne-Thomas's book would be the one to
> >give as a reference.
>
> I don't mind; but I would have thought it might fall foul
> of Wiki notions of verifiable and referenced facts rather than mere
> opinions and assertions? PW-T should certainly be a reference, but
> he is rather limited on the social aspects -- his book tends to be
> rather a catalogue of players joining and leaving, matches won and
> lost, and occasional incidents. You [and Rodney!] might find his
> biography ["Give me Arthur"] of Shrewsbury and/or the Haynes/Lucas
> book ["The Trent Bridge Battery"] on the Gunns more enlightening.

My books-to-buy list is expanding every day, it seems! I certainly
hadn't heard of ''The Trent Bridge Battery'' before.

Cheers,
Rodney Ulyate
My new blog: http://crickets-rich-tapestry.blogspot.com/



03 Jun 2007 14:39:12
Re: Captain Henry Holden

On Jun 3, 3:35 pm, a...@cuboid.demon.co.uk (Dr A. N. Walker) wrote:
> In article <5cdbqbF30lem...@mid.individual.net>,David North <dno...@abbeymanor.fsbusiness.co.uk> wrote:
> >>>>> Incidentally, there is a Henry Holden who was born in
> >>>>> Derbys in 1823, played for Sussex in 1853, and died in Nott'm
> >>>>> in 1900, [...]
> [John Hall:]
> >>> [...] His obituary in the 1901 Wisden reads in full:
> >>>"CAPTAIN H. HOLDEN, secretary to the Nottinghamshire County Cricket Club
> >>>from 1874 to 1882. Died February 1, 1900, aged 77."
> >He captained Sussex (to victory) on his one FC appearance, which was at TB.
>
> [...]
>
> OK, that leaves open whether he really was a Sussex player
> [who happened to play just the once, against his future county], or
> whether Sussex arrived a player short, and someone said "Got just
> the bloke to make up your numbers ...". Neither is particularly
> unlikely.
>
> As he was still referred to as "Captain" in his old age,
> this must have been a naval rank rather than army, and there's not
> much navy in Notts [not much in Sussex, come to that, but at least
> there's seaside!]. I don't suppose it would take long to check
> service records and find out.

I've Googled Holden and found plenty of links, but I'm far too lazy to
take the time to look at them.

> Anyway, if he was stationed or just
> living in Sussex, you can imagine them wanting a team to travel
> up to Nottingham, and HH saying "Oh, I'll play, I've got family
> in Derbyshire, I can kill two birds with one stone." The other
> scenario, that Sussex needed a player, and someone knew HH, would
> seem more likely -- *except* that HH captained the side. Perhaps
> he just was so autocratic that no-one dared to say no?

Based on his reputation, my money's on the latter possibility.

> Anyway, I checked up just a little. The Post Office
> Directory for Sussex for 1852 is on-line, and includes several
> H. Holdens, but none of them seem to be our man. But if he was
> still in the services at that stage, that means little. By 1855,
> the PO Directory for Notts lists Capt. Holden as "gentry", and
> living in Hoveringham. The next available directory is Wright's
> for 1858, and by then he is Chief Constable -- not bad going at
> age 35, even if one suspects it was somewhat of an honorary post
> and the real work was done by his deputy.

I did not realise that P.O. Directory was available online, Andy. What
a resource that must be!

> Anyone who is *really* interested and living near Nott'm
> could certainly find out much more.

I wish...

> Chief Constables are always
> in the local papers. There will be ample reports of his life and
> times, his family and connexions, and so on. And no doubt of the
> incident that sparked this thread. Plus a fuller obituary.
>
> >The Who's Who of Cricketers (2nd edition, 1993), which claims to be "a
> >complete record of all cricketers who have played first class cricket in the
> >British Isles", also overlooks Holden.
>
> Somewhat worryingly, Peter Wynne-Thomas is one of the
> authors of WWoC. Perhaps the complete scorecard of that match
> was unknown until after 1993? Might be interesting to know how
> many more 19thC f-c cricketers there are now than there were in
> 1993!

Indeed.

Cheers,
Rodney Ulyate
My new blog: http://crickets-rich-tapestry.blogspot.com/



03 Jun 2007 14:41:37
Re: Captain Henry Holden

On Jun 3, 5:00 pm, Don Aitken <don-ait...@freeuk.com > wrote:

> He was one of the Holdens of Aston-on-Trent, later of Nuttall Temple,
> one of the biggest landed families in Notts, which, at that time, is
> probably enough to explain how he got to be both Chief Constable and
> Secretary of Notts CCC. The genealogy is here -
>
> http://www.stirnet.com/HTML/genie/british/hh4bz/holden02.htm
>
> See also
>
> http://www.nottshistory.org.uk/Jacks1881/nuttalltemple.htm
>
> and
>
> http://longford.nottingham.ac.uk/Dserve/dserve.exe?dsqIni=Dserve.ini&...)

Thanks for those. I spotted something to do with Aston-on-Trent while
I was Googling, but I didn't bother to click on it.

Cheers,
Rodney Ulyate
My new blog: http://crickets-rich-tapestry.blogspot.com/



03 Jun 2007 14:42:46
Re: Captain Henry Holden

On Jun 3, 5:23 pm, a...@cuboid.demon.co.uk (Dr A. N. Walker) wrote:
> In article <1180768959.044481.232...@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
>
> <rodney.uly...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >Vis-a-vis Shrewsbury and Shaw. Do you know anything more about their
> >excusions?
>
> John has pointed you at Wiki. ISTR there is much more in
> "Give me Arthur", Peter Wynne-Thomas's biography of Shrewsbury.
> Looking around Abe, I see that PW-T also has a "complete" book
> of "tours abroad", which no doubt has much to say about the
> S&S trips.

Yes, I saw that one in a second-hand bookstore recently. It's
definitely worth a buy.

Cheers,
Rodney Ulyate
My new blog: http://crickets-rich-tapestry.blogspot.com/



03 Jun 2007 23:32:40
Dr A. N. Walker
Re: Captain Henry Holden

In article <j0l563hfrc0hqju54chvdmkb1sir45ejf5@4ax.com >,
Don Aitken <don-aitken@freeuk.com > wrote:
>> Anyone who is *really* interested and living near Nott'm
>>could certainly find out much more. [...]
>He was one of the Holdens of Aston-on-Trent, later of Nuttall Temple,

Brilliant! Thanks. I found the Aston/Nuttall/Locko/Hawton
Holdens in the trade directories, but of course they don't do the
genealogy so it wasn't clear whether they were the same family.

>one of the biggest landed families in Notts,

Um .... Tinge of exaggeration? Aston and Locko are in
Derbyshire, and Nuthall [the modern spelling] and Hawton are
rather small villages. Except that Nuthall is *now* a suburb of
Nott'm and has acquired a housing estate or three to replace the
Temple. Doesn't quite compare with the Dukeries ....

> which, at that time, is
>probably enough to explain how he got to be both Chief Constable and
>Secretary of Notts CCC.

The family clearly had influence! Chief Constable I can
understand from this point of view. Running a reasonably new
police force must have had certain similarities with running a
ship. But Secretary of Notts CCC still seems a little strange.
Even in modern times, it was a job that was sometimes dished out
to retired high-ranking officers; but it's only in *very* recent
times that it's had a proper staff. Letters to the Secretary used
to get personal, hand-written replies until the 1980s. I don't
suppose the job was less hands-on a century earlier.

> The genealogy is here -
>http://www.stirnet.com/HTML/genie/british/hh4bz/holden02.htm

Thanks again. One curiosity -- if I read Civa(1)(A)(vii)+
correctly, then Henry's sister Augusta died [as Mrs Vandeleur] two
months before she was born. I assume it's a typo of some sort.

>See also
>http://www.nottshistory.org.uk/Jacks1881/nuttalltemple.htm

Also v interesting. "Demolished in 1929" -- you can't
imagine that being allowed today! Sheer vandalism. It would be
a decent enough tourist attraction, presumably with restored
gardens, tea shoppe, and a DHLawrence Library, or some such.

--
Andy Walker, School of MathSci., Univ. of Nott'm, UK.
anw@maths.nott.ac.uk


03 Jun 2007 18:23:28
Robert Henderson
Re: Captain Henry Holden

In message <lSIo21BPYoYGFwns@jhall.demon.co.uk.invalid >, John Hall
<nospam_nov03@jhall.co.uk > writes
>In article <2qsWOmGwePYGFwX7@anywhere.demon.co.uk>,
> Robert Henderson <philip@anywhere.demon.co.uk> writes:
>>In message <f3qgdv$b5v$1$8302bc10@news.demon.co.uk>, Dr A. N. Walker
>><anw@cuboid.demon.co.uk> writes
>>> That's it, really. Notts were broadly top dogs from 1850
>>>or so up to 1890
>>
>>Tell that to Surrey, Lancs, Yorks. RH
>
>Note the "broadly". They certainly had far more success than any other
>county. In outright titles (excluding years when the title was shared),
>and going by the list back to 1864 that used to appear in Wisden, up to
>and including 1889 Notts had 10 wins, Surrey 3, Lancs 1, Yorks 2, Gloucs
>3, Middlesex 1. I think that justifies Andy's assertion.

The CC title was unofficial until 1890. Many disputes over who was the
rightful champion for this year or that year.

In the period under question Yorks produced Freeman, Emmett, Hill,
Ullyett, Harrison, Peel, Peate, Wainwright, Bates. E Lockwood. Care to
cite the Notts players in the period to match them? RH
--
Robert Henderson
Blair Scandal website: http://www.geocities.com/blairscandal/
Personal website: http://www.anywhere.demon.co.uk


04 Jun 2007 08:57:52
Re: Captain Henry Holden

On Jun 3, 7:23 pm, Robert Henderson <phi...@anywhere.demon.co.uk >
wrote:
> In message <lSIo21BPYoYGF...@jhall.demon.co.uk.invalid>, John Hall
> <nospam_no...@jhall.co.uk> writes
>
> >In article <2qsWOmGwePYGF...@anywhere.demon.co.uk>,
> > Robert Henderson <phi...@anywhere.demon.co.uk> writes:
> >>In message <f3qgdv$b5v$1$8302b...@news.demon.co.uk>, Dr A. N. Walker
> >><a...@cuboid.demon.co.uk> writes
> >>> That's it, really. Notts were broadly top dogs from 1850
> >>>or so up to 1890
>
> >>Tell that to Surrey, Lancs, Yorks. RH
>
> >Note the "broadly". They certainly had far more success than any other
> >county. In outright titles (excluding years when the title was shared),
> >and going by the list back to 1864 that used to appear in Wisden, up to
> >and including 1889 Notts had 10 wins, Surrey 3, Lancs 1, Yorks 2, Gloucs
> >3, Middlesex 1. I think that justifies Andy's assertion.
>
> The CC title was unofficial until 1890. Many disputes over who was the
> rightful champion for this year or that year.

Indeed.

> In the period under question

I assume that you mean 1850 to 1890.

> Yorks produced Freeman, Emmett, Hill,
> Ullyett, Harrison, Peel, Peate, Wainwright, Bates. E Lockwood. Care to
> cite the Notts players in the period to match them? RH

I list my favourites (in alphabetical order, for convenience): Wright
(Walter), Wootton, Walker, Shrewsbury, Shaw (Alfred and Jemmy),
Scotton, Flowers, Daft, Hinkly, Jackson, the Gunns, Brown (Charlie),
Buttress, Bickley and Barnes (Billy).

Cheers,
Rodney Ulyate
My blog: http://crickets-rich-tapestry.blogspot.com/



04 Jun 2007 10:07:58
John Hall
Re: Captain Henry Holden

In article <qIkxG8MQkvYGFwWC@anywhere.demon.co.uk >,
Robert Henderson <philip@anywhere.demon.co.uk > writes:
>In message <lSIo21BPYoYGFwns@jhall.demon.co.uk.invalid>, John Hall
><nospam_nov03@jhall.co.uk> writes
>>In article <2qsWOmGwePYGFwX7@anywhere.demon.co.uk>,
>> Robert Henderson <philip@anywhere.demon.co.uk> writes:
>>>In message <f3qgdv$b5v$1$8302bc10@news.demon.co.uk>, Dr A. N. Walker
>>><anw@cuboid.demon.co.uk> writes
>>>> That's it, really. Notts were broadly top dogs from 1850
>>>>or so up to 1890
>>>
>>>Tell that to Surrey, Lancs, Yorks. RH
>>
>>Note the "broadly". They certainly had far more success than any other
>>county. In outright titles (excluding years when the title was shared),
>>and going by the list back to 1864 that used to appear in Wisden, up to
>>and including 1889 Notts had 10 wins, Surrey 3, Lancs 1, Yorks 2, Gloucs
>>3, Middlesex 1. I think that justifies Andy's assertion.
>
>The CC title was unofficial until 1890. Many disputes over who was the
>rightful champion for this year or that year.
>
>In the period under question Yorks produced Freeman, Emmett, Hill,
>Ullyett, Harrison, Peel, Peate, Wainwright, Bates. E Lockwood. Care to
>cite the Notts players in the period to match them? RH

That's Andy's job. In any case, it's irrelevant. Though the Championship
was unofficial, and there are disputes over a couple of years, a margin
in wins of 10 to Notts and 2 to Yorks leaves little room for argument.
IIRC what I've read, though Yorks always had plenty of talent, until
Lord Hawke came along they were too ill-disciplined to achieve the
success that they should have.
--
John Hall

"I am not young enough to know everything."
Oscar Wilde (1854-1900)


04 Jun 2007 14:49:34
Dr A. N. Walker
Re: Captain Henry Holden

In article <aXw33PCuZ9YGFwRe@jhall.demon.co.uk.invalid >,
John Hall <john_nospam@jhall.co.uk > wrote:
>>In the period under question Yorks produced Freeman, Emmett, Hill,
>>Ullyett, Harrison, Peel, Peate, Wainwright, Bates. E Lockwood. Care to
>>cite the Notts players in the period to match them? RH
>That's Andy's job.

No it isn't. As usual, RH just tosses out lists of names,
with no serious attempt to evaluate them. Obviously, several of
those listed are "big names" of the late 19thC. Anyone who knows
their cricket history could list a dozen similar names from Notts,
or Surrey or Lancs. It's meaningless.

FWIW, Roy Webber, RH's favourite statistician, in his book
on the CC, named the Notts championship-winning side of 1884 as
probably the greatest county side ever. Ten of the regular side
were Test players of the period. From earlier than that, *at least*
fifteen Notts players would have been automatic picks for the Test
side [and were, eg, regular players in Gents vs Players or North
vs South]. I'm sure RH would have no difficulty naming them.

> In any case, it's irrelevant. Though the Championship
>was unofficial, and there are disputes over a couple of years, a margin
>in wins of 10 to Notts and 2 to Yorks leaves little room for argument.

Just so. By 1890, Notts had a clear plus record against every
other county.

--
Andy Walker, School of MathSci., Univ. of Nott'm, UK.
anw@maths.nott.ac.uk


05 Jun 2007 14:08:11
David North
Re: Captain Henry Holden

"Dr A. N. Walker" <anw@cuboid.demon.co.uk > wrote in message
news:f3ug24$7cn$1$8302bc10@news.demon.co.uk...
> In article <5cdbqbF30lembU1@mid.individual.net>,
> David North <dnorth@abbeymanor.fsbusiness.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> Incidentally, there is a Henry Holden who was born in
>>>>>> Derbys in 1823, played for Sussex in 1853, and died in Nott'm
>>>>>> in 1900, [...]
> [John Hall:]
>>>> [...] His obituary in the 1901 Wisden reads in full:
>>>>"CAPTAIN H. HOLDEN, secretary to the Nottinghamshire County Cricket Club
>>>>from 1874 to 1882. Died February 1, 1900, aged 77."
>>He captained Sussex (to victory) on his one FC appearance, which was at
>>TB.
> [...]
>
> OK, that leaves open whether he really was a Sussex player
> [who happened to play just the once, against his future county], or
> whether Sussex arrived a player short, and someone said "Got just
> the bloke to make up your numbers ...". Neither is particularly
> unlikely.
>
> As he was still referred to as "Captain" in his old age,
> this must have been a naval rank rather than army, and there's not
> much navy in Notts [not much in Sussex, come to that, but at least
> there's seaside!]. I don't suppose it would take long to check
> service records and find out. Anyway, if he was stationed or just
> living in Sussex, you can imagine them wanting a team to travel
> up to Nottingham, and HH saying "Oh, I'll play, I've got family
> in Derbyshire, I can kill two birds with one stone." The other
> scenario, that Sussex needed a player, and someone knew HH, would
> seem more likely -- *except* that HH captained the side. Perhaps
> he just was so autocratic that no-one dared to say no?

Actually, it is possible that CricketArchive has incorrectly identified him
as captain. In the other three county matches listed for 1853, only the
Notts captain, William Clarke, has been identified.
--
David North
Test Career Ratings: http://www.lanefarm.plus.com




05 Jun 2007 13:33:35
Re: Captain Henry Holden

On Jun 5, 3:08 pm, "David North" <dno...@abbeymanor.fsbusiness.co.uk >
wrote:
> "Dr A. N. Walker" <a...@cuboid.demon.co.uk> wrote in messagenews:f3ug24$7cn$1$8302bc10@news.demon.co.uk...
>
>
>
> > In article <5cdbqbF30lem...@mid.individual.net>,
> > David North <dno...@abbeymanor.fsbusiness.co.uk> wrote:
> >>>>>> Incidentally, there is a Henry Holden who was born in
> >>>>>> Derbys in 1823, played for Sussex in 1853, and died in Nott'm
> >>>>>> in 1900, [...]
> > [John Hall:]
> >>>> [...] His obituary in the 1901 Wisden reads in full:
> >>>>"CAPTAIN H. HOLDEN, secretary to the Nottinghamshire County Cricket Club
> >>>>from 1874 to 1882. Died February 1, 1900, aged 77."
> >>He captained Sussex (to victory) on his one FC appearance, which was at
> >>TB.
> > [...]
>
> > OK, that leaves open whether he really was a Sussex player
> > [who happened to play just the once, against his future county], or
> > whether Sussex arrived a player short, and someone said "Got just
> > the bloke to make up your numbers ...". Neither is particularly
> > unlikely.
>
> > As he was still referred to as "Captain" in his old age,
> > this must have been a naval rank rather than army, and there's not
> > much navy in Notts [not much in Sussex, come to that, but at least
> > there's seaside!]. I don't suppose it would take long to check
> > service records and find out. Anyway, if he was stationed or just
> > living in Sussex, you can imagine them wanting a team to travel
> > up to Nottingham, and HH saying "Oh, I'll play, I've got family
> > in Derbyshire, I can kill two birds with one stone." The other
> > scenario, that Sussex needed a player, and someone knew HH, would
> > seem more likely -- *except* that HH captained the side. Perhaps
> > he just was so autocratic that no-one dared to say no?
>
> Actually, it is possible that CricketArchive has incorrectly identified him
> as captain. In the other three county matches listed for 1853, only the
> Notts captain, William Clarke, has been identified.

A spanner in the works if there ever was one!

Cheers,
Rodney Ulyate
My blog: http://crickets-rich-tapestry.blogspot.com/



05 Jun 2007 14:45:39
Dr A. N. Walker
Re: Captain Henry Holden

In article <5cl5h3F30irs2U1@mid.individual.net >,
David North <dnorth@abbeymanor.fsbusiness.co.uk > wrote:
>> [...] The other
>> scenario, that Sussex needed a player, and someone knew HH, would
>> seem more likely -- *except* that HH captained the side. Perhaps
>> he just was so autocratic that no-one dared to say no?
>Actually, it is possible that CricketArchive has incorrectly identified him
>as captain. In the other three county matches listed for 1853, only the
>Notts captain, William Clarke, has been identified.

Ah. Of course, HH was "Captain", so perhaps either CA or some
software has interpreted "Captain" as "*", so to speak. Anyway, I can
now cast some further light, which just about resolves all issues.
From the earlier-mentioned "History" of NCCC by Peter Wynne-Thomas,
p35 [but indexed under "Holden" as p39, which is why I didn't spot it
earlier]. Notts had just beaten Surrey, England and Sussex when:

" A week later Sussex came up to Trent Bridge and had their revenge,
" despite lacking one man and co-opting Captain Holden into the side.
" Holden later became the powerful Honorary Secretary of Notts as well
" as Chief Constable. When Edwin Browne (the Notts paid secretary)
" wrote a brief history of the Club in the 1880s, he had a dig at the
" bellicose captain:
" The gallant Captain was I presume not allowed to bowl, or he
" would have given a good account of himself as he was very
" dangerous in those days. However he caught a man out, and
" although he was given out leg-before-wicket before scoring,
" it is generally understood that the decision was a bad one,
" at least so I have heard the worthy Captain assert on several
" occasions. "

So: (a) Holden was drafted in; (b) but did not captain;
(c) was *Hon* Sec [doubtless very influential, but it murkies the
waters about the roller/lunch incidents]; and (d) was known as a
f-c cricketer to PW-T, which makes his omission from WWoC rather
more surprising. As regards (c), it makes HH's role in the "lunch"
incident more one of "host" than of "provider". As a matter of
normal courtesy, someone should have made sure on behalf of NCCC
that arrangements had been made for *amateur* guests, but pros
would simply have followed the prevailing rules. That HH forgot
was unfortunate; that he was then ill-mannered towards Murdoch
suggests that he didn't regard him as a a "gentleman", but rather
as a tradesman who didn't "know his place". Still a "bad show",
and clearly the Notts Cttee disapproved. I assume that Browne's
history was written after 1882, or he would scarcely have dared
to write like that.

FWIW, Sussex did not beat Notts again until 1874, and then
not again until 1894; meanehile, Notts chalked up a remarkable 29
wins conceding draws only in 1883, 1893 and 1894. You would have
expected the weather -- at TB if not at Brighton/Eastbourne -- to
have rescued even the most dreadful side more often than that.
Small wonder that Cardus and others had this image of lazy, hazy
afternoons with Shrewsbury and Gunn putting on stands of 300+.

--
Andy Walker, School of MathSci., Univ. of Nott'm, UK.
anw@maths.nott.ac.uk


05 Jun 2007 16:31:00
Re: Captain Henry Holden

On Jun 5, 4:45 pm, a...@maths.nott.ac.uk (Dr A. N. Walker) wrote:
> In article <5cl5h3F30irs...@mid.individual.net>,
>
> David North <dno...@abbeymanor.fsbusiness.co.uk> wrote:
> >> [...] The other
> >> scenario, that Sussex needed a player, and someone knew HH, would
> >> seem more likely -- *except* that HH captained the side. Perhaps
> >> he just was so autocratic that no-one dared to say no?
> >Actually, it is possible that CricketArchive has incorrectly identified him
> >as captain. In the other three county matches listed for 1853, only the
> >Notts captain, William Clarke, has been identified.
>
> Ah. Of course, HH was "Captain", so perhaps either CA or some
> software has interpreted "Captain" as "*", so to speak.

How we failed to detect that I have no idea.

> Anyway, I can
> now cast some further light, which just about resolves all issues.
> From the earlier-mentioned "History" of NCCC by Peter Wynne-Thomas,
> p35 [but indexed under "Holden" as p39, which is why I didn't spot it
> earlier]. Notts had just beaten Surrey, England and Sussex when:
>
> " A week later Sussex came up to Trent Bridge and had their revenge,
> " despite lacking one man and co-opting Captain Holden into the side.

Ah-ha!

> " Holden later became the powerful Honorary Secretary of Notts as well
> " as Chief Constable. When Edwin Browne (the Notts paid secretary)

Browne was better known for his work as manager of Notts County
Football Club, I believe.

> " wrote a brief history of the Club in the 1880s, he had a dig at the
> " bellicose captain:
> " The gallant Captain was I presume not allowed to bowl, or he
> " would have given a good account of himself as he was very
> " dangerous in those days.

I wonder what that entails.

> " However he caught a man out, and
> " although he was given out leg-before-wicket before scoring,
> " it is generally understood that the decision was a bad one,
> " at least so I have heard the worthy Captain assert on several
> " occasions. "

I saw that last bit coming before I even got to it.

> So: (a) Holden was drafted in; (b) but did not captain;
> (c) was *Hon* Sec

I didn't know that his job-title was a question under deliberation
here; probably I should have paid more attention. In a lot of the
accounts that I have read, though, Holden definitely had that title.

> [doubtless very influential, but it murkies the
> waters about the roller/lunch incidents];

How so? Surely an honorary secretary has the same rights and duties as
a normal one?

> and (d) was known as a
> f-c cricketer to PW-T, which makes his omission from WWoC rather
> more surprising. As regards (c), it makes HH's role in the "lunch"
> incident more one of "host" than of "provider".

I see.

> As a matter of
> normal courtesy, someone should have made sure on behalf of NCCC
> that arrangements had been made for *amateur* guests, but pros
> would simply have followed the prevailing rules. That HH forgot
> was unfortunate; that he was then ill-mannered towards Murdoch
> suggests that he didn't regard him as a a "gentleman", but rather
> as a tradesman who didn't "know his place". Still a "bad show",

Are you quoting a reference there with all of those inverted commas?

Cheers,
Rodney Ulyate
My blog: http://crickets-rich-tapestry.blogspot.com/



05 Jun 2007 18:26:05
Dr A. N. Walker
Re: Captain Henry Holden

In article <1181061060.612854.95470@p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com >,
<rodney.ulyate@gmail.com > wrote:
>> " The gallant Captain was I presume not allowed to bowl, or he
>> " would have given a good account of himself as he was very
>> " dangerous in those days.
>I wonder what that entails.

HH was said to be a fast bowler; beyond that, your guess is
as good as mine, and it could be that Browne was being ironic, &/or
implying back-handedly that the danger would be to the close fielder,
or merely telling it as it was. I suspect that there is not much
evidence that HH was fast -- perhaps even just based on the above.

>> So: (a) Holden was drafted in; (b) but did not captain;
>> (c) was *Hon* Sec
>I didn't know that his job-title was a question under deliberation
>here; probably I should have paid more attention. In a lot of the
>accounts that I have read, though, Holden definitely had that title.

Right, but if there was an "Hon Sec" *and* a real sec [as
opposed to more recently when the "Hon Sec" *was* the real sec],
then it explains why HH could be it. "Hon Sec" today, for a club,
usually implies a degree of experience and authority, but also
means dealing with day-to-day management of the club. It looks
as though HH left that to Browne, but didn't let that stop him
interfering. Which means, for example, that he may have had the
technical right to be on the field dictating arrangements for
rolling, but shouldn't really have been exercising it.

>> [...] That HH forgot
>> was unfortunate; that he was then ill-mannered towards Murdoch
>> suggests that he didn't regard him as a a "gentleman", but rather
>> as a tradesman who didn't "know his place". Still a "bad show",
>Are you quoting a reference there with all of those inverted commas?

No, rather thinking of the words that might have used in
Bromley House [or wherever] when the local gentry were discussing
the incident.

--
Andy Walker, School of MathSci., Univ. of Nott'm, UK.
anw@maths.nott.ac.uk


05 Jun 2007 20:53:29
Rodney
Re: Captain Henry Holden

Dr A. N. Walker wrote:
> In article <1181061060.612854.95470@p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>,
> <rodney.ulyate@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> " The gallant Captain was I presume not allowed to bowl, or he
>>> " would have given a good account of himself as he was very
>>> " dangerous in those days.
>> I wonder what that entails.
>
> HH was said to be a fast bowler; beyond that, your guess is
> as good as mine, and it could be that Browne was being ironic, &/or
> implying back-handedly that the danger would be to the close fielder

My money was on that one.

> or merely telling it as it was. I suspect that there is not much
> evidence that HH was fast -- perhaps even just based on the above.

If he was fast enough to be dangerous, surely he would have made a bit
more of a name for himself on the field of play.

>>> So: (a) Holden was drafted in; (b) but did not captain;
>>> (c) was *Hon* Sec
>> I didn't know that his job-title was a question under deliberation
>> here; probably I should have paid more attention. In a lot of the
>> accounts that I have read, though, Holden definitely had that title.
>
> Right, but if there was an "Hon Sec" *and* a real sec [as
> opposed to more recently when the "Hon Sec" *was* the real sec],
> then it explains why HH could be it. "Hon Sec" today, for a club,
> usually implies a degree of experience and authority, but also
> means dealing with day-to-day management of the club. It looks
> as though HH left that to Browne, but didn't let that stop him
> interfering. Which means, for example, that he may have had the
> technical right to be on the field dictating arrangements for
> rolling, but shouldn't really have been exercising it.

Erm ... that remark of mine was to do with my own incompetence -- I
could have set that matter straight had I been paying attention --
rather than querying what rights Holden did and didn't have, but I
totally agree with your point, Andy.

>>> [...] That HH forgot
>>> was unfortunate; that he was then ill-mannered towards Murdoch
>>> suggests that he didn't regard him as a a "gentleman", but rather
>>> as a tradesman who didn't "know his place". Still a "bad show",
>> Are you quoting a reference there with all of those inverted commas?
>
> No, rather thinking of the words that might have used in
> Bromley House [or wherever] when the local gentry were discussing
> the incident.

I see. Thank you.

Cheers,
Rodney Ulyate
My blog: http://crickets-rich-tapestry.blogspot.com/

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com



05 Jun 2007 20:47:21
sdavmor
Re: Captain Henry Holden

Rodney wrote:
> Dr A. N. Walker wrote:
>> In article <1181061060.612854.95470@p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>,
>> <rodney.ulyate@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> " The gallant Captain was I presume not allowed to bowl, or he
>>>> " would have given a good account of himself as he was very
>>>> " dangerous in those days.
>>> I wonder what that entails.
>>
>> HH was said to be a fast bowler; beyond that, your guess is
>> as good as mine, and it could be that Browne was being ironic, &/or
>> implying back-handedly that the danger would be to the close fielder
>
> My money was on that one.
>
>> or merely telling it as it was. I suspect that there is not much
>> evidence that HH was fast -- perhaps even just based on the above.
>
> If he was fast enough to be dangerous, surely he would have made a bit
> more of a name for himself on the field of play.
>
>>>> So: (a) Holden was drafted in; (b) but did not captain;
>>>> (c) was *Hon* Sec
>>> I didn't know that his job-title was a question under deliberation
>>> here; probably I should have paid more attention. In a lot of the
>>> accounts that I have read, though, Holden definitely had that title.
>>
>> Right, but if there was an "Hon Sec" *and* a real sec [as
>> opposed to more recently when the "Hon Sec" *was* the real sec],
>> then it explains why HH could be it. "Hon Sec" today, for a club,
>> usually implies a degree of experience and authority, but also
>> means dealing with day-to-day management of the club. It looks
>> as though HH left that to Browne, but didn't let that stop him
>> interfering. Which means, for example, that he may have had the
>> technical right to be on the field dictating arrangements for
>> rolling, but shouldn't really have been exercising it.
>
> Erm ... that remark of mine was to do with my own incompetence -- I
> could have set that matter straight had I been paying attention --
> rather than querying what rights Holden did and didn't have, but I
> totally agree with your point, Andy.
>
>>>> [...] That HH forgot
>>>> was unfortunate; that he was then ill-mannered towards Murdoch
>>>> suggests that he didn't regard him as a a "gentleman", but rather
>>>> as a tradesman who didn't "know his place". Still a "bad show",
>>> Are you quoting a reference there with all of those inverted commas?
>>
>> No, rather thinking of the words that might have used in
>> Bromley House [or wherever] when the local gentry were discussing
>> the incident.
>
> I see. Thank you.
>
> Cheers,
> Rodney Ulyate
> My blog: http://crickets-rich-tapestry.blogspot.com/

Looks like the Teranews finally propagated.
--
Cheers,
SDM -- a 21st century schizoid man
Systems Theory internet music project links:
official site <www.systemstheory.net >
soundclick <www.soundclick.com/systemstheory >
garageband <www.garageband.com/artist/systemstheory >
"Soundtracks For Imaginary Movies" CD released Dec 2004
"Codetalkers" CD coming very soon
NP: nothing


05 Jun 2007 13:54:59
Robert Henderson
Re: Captain Henry Holden

In message <f418pu$3o0$1@oyez.ccc.nottingham.ac.uk >, Dr A. N. Walker
<anw@maths.nott.ac.uk > writes
>In article <aXw33PCuZ9YGFwRe@jhall.demon.co.uk.invalid>,
>John Hall <john_nospam@jhall.co.uk> wrote:
>>>In the period under question Yorks produced Freeman, Emmett, Hill,
>>>Ullyett, Harrison, Peel, Peate, Wainwright, Bates. E Lockwood. Care to
>>>cite the Notts players in the period to match them? RH
>>That's Andy's job.
>
> No it isn't. As usual, RH just tosses out lists of names,
>with no serious attempt to evaluate them. Obviously, several of
>those listed are "big names" of the late 19thC.

Nope. All well within the period under discussion. RH

> Anyone who knows
>their cricket history could list a dozen similar names from Notts,
>or Surrey or Lancs. It's meaningless.

Only to the bounded mind. RH
>
> FWIW, Roy Webber, RH's favourite statistician, in his book
>on the CC, named the Notts championship-winning side of 1884 as
>probably the greatest county side ever.

Better than the Yorkskire side of the 30s? Better than the Surrey side
of the fifties? RH

>Ten of the regular side
>were Test players of the period.

So what? Only 8 or 9 counties were FC then. Also, many only played on
the commercial tours of Oz which were largely organised by Notts
players. RH

>From earlier than that, *at least*
>fifteen Notts players would have been automatic picks for the Test
>side [and were, eg, regular players in Gents vs Players or North
>vs South]. I'm sure RH would have no difficulty naming them.
>
>> In any case, it's irrelevant. Though the Championship
>>was unofficial, and there are disputes over a couple of years, a margin
>>in wins of 10 to Notts and 2 to Yorks leaves little room for argument.
>
> Just so. By 1890, Notts had a clear plus record against every
>other county.
>
Over what period? RH
--
Robert Henderson
Blair Scandal website: http://www.geocities.com/blairscandal/
Personal website: http://www.anywhere.demon.co.uk


05 Jun 2007 13:58:09
Robert Henderson
Re: Captain Henry Holden

In message <1180947472.005823.126960@q69g2000hsb.googlegroups.com >,
rodney.ulyate@gmail.com writes
>>
>> The CC title was unofficial until 1890. Many disputes over who was the
>> rightful champion for this year or that year.
>
>Indeed.
>
>> In the period under question
>
>I assume that you mean 1850 to 1890.

Well, with FC cricket one is really only taking the period after overarm
bowling was legalised in 1863. Moreover, the CC only dates from the
1870s even in unofficial form . RH
>
>> Yorks produced Freeman, Emmett, Hill,
>> Ullyett, Harrison, Peel, Peate, Wainwright, Bates. E Lockwood. Care to
>> cite the Notts players in the period to match them? RH
>
>I list my favourites (in alphabetical order, for convenience): Wright
>(Walter), Wootton, Walker, Shrewsbury, Shaw (Alfred and Jemmy),
>Scotton, Flowers, Daft, Hinkly, Jackson, the Gunns,

Only William before 1990. RH

> Brown (Charlie), Buttress, Bickley

Too far back. RH

>and Barnes (Billy).

--
Robert Henderson
Blair Scandal website: http://www.geocities.com/blairscandal/
Personal website: http://www.anywhere.demon.co.uk


06 Jun 2007 10:05:01
Rodney
Re: Captain Henry Holden

sdavmor wrote:

> Looks like the Teranews finally propagated.

Great, eh? No more Google Groups for me!

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com



06 Jun 2007 01:12:57
sdavmor
Re: Captain Henry Holden

Rodney wrote:
> sdavmor wrote:
>
>> Looks like the Teranews finally propagated.
>
> Great, eh? No more Google Groups for me!

Hallelujah!
--
Cheers,
SDM -- a 21st century schizoid man
Systems Theory internet music project links:
official site <www.systemstheory.net >
soundclick <www.soundclick.com/systemstheory >
garageband <www.garageband.com/artist/systemstheory >
"Soundtracks For Imaginary Movies" CD released Dec 2004
"Codetalkers" CD coming very soon
NP: nothing


06 Jun 2007 10:16:10
Rodney
Re: Captain Henry Holden

Robert Henderson wrote:
> In message <1180947472.005823.126960@q69g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
> rodney.ulyate@gmail.com writes
>>>
>>> The CC title was unofficial until 1890. Many disputes over who was the
>>> rightful champion for this year or that year.
>>
>> Indeed.
>>
>>> In the period under question
>>
>> I assume that you mean 1850 to 1890.
>
> Well, with FC cricket one is really only taking the period after overarm
> bowling was legalised in 1863. Moreover, the CC only dates from the
> 1870s even in unofficial form . RH

Agreed, but I had seen 1850-1890 mentioned in this thread and naturally
made the assumption.

>>> Yorks produced Freeman, Emmett, Hill,
>>> Ullyett, Harrison, Peel, Peate, Wainwright, Bates. E Lockwood. Care to
>>> cite the Notts players in the period to match them? RH
>>
>> I list my favourites (in alphabetical order, for convenience): Wright
>> (Walter), Wootton, Walker, Shrewsbury, Shaw (Alfred and Jemmy),
>> Scotton, Flowers, Daft, Hinkly, Jackson, the Gunns,
>
> Only William before 1990. RH

Sorry?

>> Brown (Charlie), Buttress, Bickley
>
> Too far back. RH

Not before 1850, surely?

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com



06 Jun 2007 10:17:55
Rodney
Re: Captain Henry Holden

sdavmor wrote:
> Rodney wrote:
>> sdavmor wrote:
>>
>>> Looks like the Teranews finally propagated.
>>
>> Great, eh? No more Google Groups for me!
>
> Hallelujah!

Indeed! And now I know how to put in a signature, too. Sheer paradise, this!

--
Cheers,
Rodney Ulyate
My Blog: http://crickets-rich-tapestry.blogspot.com/

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com



06 Jun 2007 12:00:46
Dr A. N. Walker
Re: Captain Henry Holden

In article <jD5DUbJj0VZGFw$x@anywhere.demon.co.uk >,
Robert Henderson <philip@anywhere.demon.co.uk > wrote:
>> [...] As usual, RH just tosses out lists of names,
>>with no serious attempt to evaluate them. Obviously, several of
>>those listed are "big names" of the late 19thC.
>Nope. All well within the period under discussion. RH

Are there any "RH Buzzword Bingo" points for "Nope" when it
means "Yes", "I agree" or "Just as you said"?

>> FWIW, Roy Webber, RH's favourite statistician, in his book
>>on the CC, named the Notts championship-winning side of 1884 as
>>probably the greatest county side ever.
>Better than the Yorkskire side of the 30s? Better than the Surrey side
>of the fifties? RH

Take it up with RW. The case is at least arguable.

>>Ten of the regular side
>>were Test players of the period.
>So what? Only 8 or 9 counties were FC then.

Chance for you to do some research, then, and find out how
many other county teams have ever contained 10 Test players.

> Also, many only played on
>the commercial tours of Oz which were largely organised by Notts
>players. RH

Perhaps you should learn to check your facts? Selby was the
only one of the ten in that category [even then only if you assume
that Lillywhite's team was "largely" organised by Shaw] -- and he is
the player you were promoting back in March. So was Selby Test class
or not? Do you want to concede the earlier argument or this one?

>> Just so. By 1890, Notts had a clear plus record against every
>>other county.
>Over what period? RH

Take your pick. 1880-1890, 1870-1890, 1864-1890, 1850-1890.
Jiggle a few years either way at either end if you like.

--
Andy Walker, School of MathSci., Univ. of Nott'm, UK.
anw@maths.nott.ac.uk


06 Jun 2007 18:09:24
Robert Henderson
Re: Captain Henry Holden

In message <f467le$orm$1@oyez.ccc.nottingham.ac.uk >, Dr A. N. Walker
<anw@maths.nott.ac.uk > writes
>In article <jD5DUbJj0VZGFw$x@anywhere.demon.co.uk>,
>Robert Henderson <philip@anywhere.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>> [...] As usual, RH just tosses out lists of names,
>>>with no serious attempt to evaluate them. Obviously, several of
>>>those listed are "big names" of the late 19thC.
>>Nope. All well within the period under discussion. RH
>
> Are there any "RH Buzzword Bingo" points for "Nope" when it
>means "Yes", "I agree" or "Just as you said"?
>
Status quo. RH

>>> FWIW, Roy Webber, RH's favourite statistician, in his book
>>>on the CC, named the Notts championship-winning side of 1884 as
>>>probably the greatest county side ever.
>>Better than the Yorkskire side of the 30s? Better than the Surrey side
>>of the fifties? RH
>
> Take it up with RW. The case is at least arguable.
>

Fancy digging him up for me? RH

>>>Ten of the regular side
>>>were Test players of the period.
>>So what? Only 8 or 9 counties were FC then.
>
> Chance for you to do some research, then, and find out how
>many other county teams have ever contained 10 Test players.
>
>> Also, many only played on
>>the commercial tours of Oz which were largely organised by Notts
>>players. RH
>
> Perhaps you should learn to check your facts? Selby was the
>only one of the ten in that category [even then only if you assume
>that Lillywhite's team was "largely" organised by Shaw] -- and he is
>the player you were promoting back in March. So was Selby Test class
>or not? Do you want to concede the earlier argument or this one?

What about all the Shrewsbury teams? RH
>
>>> Just so. By 1890, Notts had a clear plus record against every
>>>other county.
>>Over what period? RH
>
> Take your pick. 1880-1890, 1870-1890, 1864-1890, 1850-1890.
>Jiggle a few years either way at either end if you like.
>
OK. Post the status for each decade. RH
--
Robert Henderson
Blair Scandal website: http://www.geocities.com/blairscandal/
Personal website: http://www.anywhere.demon.co.uk


06 Jun 2007 18:21:57
Robert Henderson
Re: Captain Henry Holden

In message <f3vj2o$6d6$1$8302bc10@news.demon.co.uk >, Dr A. N. Walker
<anw@cuboid.demon.co.uk > writes
>> which, at that time, is
>>probably enough to explain how he got to be both Chief Constable and
>>Secretary of Notts CCC.
>
> The family clearly had influence! Chief Constable I can
>understand from this point of view. Running a reasonably new police
>force must have had certain similarities with running a ship. But
>Secretary of Notts CCC still seems a little strange. Even in modern
>times, it was a job that was sometimes dished out to retired
>high-ranking officers; but it's only in *very* recent times that it's
>had a proper staff. Letters to the Secretary used to get personal,
>hand-written replies until the 1980s. I don't suppose the job was less
>hands-on a century earlier.

The practice of appointing non-policemen as Chief Constables, often ex
military men, was a deliberate Victorian policy. It was thought to give
a civilian oversight and control to the new police forces, which were
widely resented and feared by the populace who viewed them as state
agents pure and simple. . RH
--
Robert Henderson
Blair Scandal website: http://www.geocities.com/blairscandal/
Personal website: http://www.anywhere.demon.co.uk


06 Jun 2007 18:07:38
Robert Henderson
Re: Captain Henry Holden

In message <466660e0$0$16393$88260bb3@free.teranews.com >, Rodney
<rodney.ulyate@gmail.com > writes
>Robert Henderson wrote:
>> In message <1180947472.005823.126960@q69g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
>>rodney.ulyate@gmail.com writes
>>>>
>>>> The CC title was unofficial until 1890. Many disputes over who was the
>>>> rightful champion for this year or that year.
>>>
>>> Indeed.
>>>
>>>> In the period under question
>>>
>>> I assume that you mean 1850 to 1890.
>> Well, with FC cricket one is really only taking the period after
>>overarm bowling was legalised in 1863. Moreover, the CC only dates
>>from the 1870s even in unofficial form . RH
>
>Agreed, but I had seen 1850-1890 mentioned in this thread and naturally
>made the assumption.

I think I made the original comment in response to Dr B-M mentioning CC
Championship wins. RH
>
>>>> Yorks produced Freeman, Emmett, Hill,
>>>> Ullyett, Harrison, Peel, Peate, Wainwright, Bates. E Lockwood. Care to
>>>> cite the Notts players in the period to match them? RH
>>>
>>> I list my favourites (in alphabetical order, for convenience):
>>>Wright (Walter), Wootton, Walker, Shrewsbury, Shaw (Alfred and
>>>Jemmy), Scotton, Flowers, Daft, Hinkly, Jackson, the Gunns,
>> Only William before 1990. RH
>
>Sorry?

Sorry Rodney, a typo. I meant 1890. RH
>
>>> Brown (Charlie), Buttress, Bickley
>> Too far back. RH
>
>Not before 1850, surely?
>
I have a difficulty with CC before the 1860s.It had only round arm
bowling and awas lso pretty restricted until the railway age was fully
under way (circa 1870). Before then regular matches between far flung
counties was next to impossible. RH
--
Robert Henderson
Blair Scandal website: http://www.geocities.com/blairscandal/
Personal website: http://www.anywhere.demon.co.uk


07 Jun 2007 12:49:03
Rodney
Re: Captain Henry Holden

Robert Henderson wrote:
> In message <466660e0$0$16393$88260bb3@free.teranews.com>, Rodney
> <rodney.ulyate@gmail.com> writes
>> Robert Henderson wrote:
>>> In message <1180947472.005823.126960@q69g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
>>> rodney.ulyate@gmail.com writes
>>>>>
>>>>> The CC title was unofficial until 1890. Many disputes over who was
>>>>> the
>>>>> rightful champion for this year or that year.
>>>>
>>>> Indeed.
>>>>
>>>>> In the period under question
>>>>
>>>> I assume that you mean 1850 to 1890.
>>> Well, with FC cricket one is really only taking the period after
>>> overarm bowling was legalised in 1863. Moreover, the CC only dates
>>> from the 1870s even in unofficial form . RH
>>
>> Agreed, but I had seen 1850-1890 mentioned in this thread and
>> naturally made the assumption.
>
> I think I made the original comment in response to Dr B-M mentioning CC
> Championship wins. RH

Oh. Right. My apologies, in that case. It was a touch vague.

>>>>> Yorks produced Freeman, Emmett, Hill,
>>>>> Ullyett, Harrison, Peel, Peate, Wainwright, Bates. E Lockwood. Care to
>>>>> cite the Notts players in the period to match them? RH
>>>>
>>>> I list my favourites (in alphabetical order, for convenience):
>>>> Wright (Walter), Wootton, Walker, Shrewsbury, Shaw (Alfred and
>>>> Jemmy), Scotton, Flowers, Daft, Hinkly, Jackson, the Gunns,
>>> Only William before 1990. RH
>>
>> Sorry?
>
> Sorry Rodney, a typo. I meant 1890. RH

No worries. I thought as much, but I do have this tendency to get myself
into a bit of trouble by making presumptuous corrections of errors
before consulting their makers.

>>>> Brown (Charlie), Buttress, Bickley
>>> Too far back. RH
>>
>> Not before 1850, surely?
>>
> I have a difficulty with CC before the 1860s.It had only round arm
> bowling and awas lso pretty restricted until the railway age was fully
> under way (circa 1870). Before then regular matches between far flung
> counties was next to impossible. RH

Good point, that, but take nothing away from players like the three Bs
whom I mentioned. By all accounts, they were forces with which to be
reckoned -- in their time, at least.

--
Cheers,
Rodney Ulyate
My Blog: http://crickets-rich-tapestry.blogspot.com/

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com



07 Jun 2007 12:50:51
Rodney
Re: Captain Henry Holden

Robert Henderson wrote:
> In message <f3vj2o$6d6$1$8302bc10@news.demon.co.uk>, Dr A. N. Walker
> <anw@cuboid.demon.co.uk> writes
>>> which, at that time, is
>>> probably enough to explain how he got to be both Chief Constable and
>>> Secretary of Notts CCC.
>>
>> The family clearly had influence! Chief Constable I can
>> understand from this point of view. Running a reasonably new police
>> force must have had certain similarities with running a ship. But
>> Secretary of Notts CCC still seems a little strange. Even in modern
>> times, it was a job that was sometimes dished out to retired
>> high-ranking officers; but it's only in *very* recent times that it's
>> had a proper staff. Letters to the Secretary used to get personal,
>> hand-written replies until the 1980s. I don't suppose the job was
>> less hands-on a century earlier.
>
> The practice of appointing non-policemen as Chief Constables, often ex
> military men, was a deliberate Victorian policy. It was thought to give
> a civilian oversight and control to the new police forces, which were
> widely resented and feared by the populace who viewed them as state
> agents pure and simple. . RH

Intriguing.

--
Cheers,
Rodney Ulyate
My Blog: http://crickets-rich-tapestry.blogspot.com/

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com



07 Jun 2007 11:32:57
Dr A. N. Walker
Re: Captain Henry Holden

In article <kJAiGxMEpuZGFwuU@anywhere.demon.co.uk >,
Robert Henderson <philip@anywhere.demon.co.uk > wrote:
>> Take it up with [Roy Webber]. The case is at least arguable.
>Fancy digging him up for me? RH

No, just thought you might like to win an argument once in
a while.

>>> Also, many only played on
>>>the commercial tours of Oz which were largely organised by Notts
>>>players. RH
>> Perhaps you should learn to check your facts? [...]
>What about all the Shrewsbury teams? RH

What about them? Are you trying to tell us that Shrewsbury,
Barnes, Gunn [etc] played *only* on the commercial tours?

>>>> Just so. By 1890, Notts had a clear plus record against every
>>>>other county.
>>>Over what period? RH
>> Take your pick. 1880-1890, 1870-1890, 1864-1890, 1850-1890.
>>Jiggle a few years either way at either end if you like.
>OK. Post the status for each decade. RH

1880s: 1st. 1870s: 1st. 1864-69: 1st. 1870-1890: 1st.
1864-1890: 1st. 1850-1890: 1st. Any more you want to know? Of
course there were individual seasons when other counties came top.

--
Andy Walker, School of MathSci., Univ. of Nott'm, UK.
anw@maths.nott.ac.uk