THE NINE RUN MATCH - THE OTHER SIDE OF IT
BY CANNON R.S. De SARAM
by Canon R. S. de Saram
Not every one who talks about the Nine Run
Match (and everybody talks about It) knows the facts.
Legend has been busy and many assertions are
confidently made which are simply not correct. One such is that the
Royal College Eleven disappeared In the course of the Match and were
later found in Kandy. That is not true. However, something out of
the usual did happen.
The Royal College (though not the Royal College
History) reckons the result of the match as a draw. St. Thomas'
claims it as a win.
Two contemporary written accounts of the match
exist, one In the St. Thomas" College Magazine of March—April 1885;
the other In the March 14th 1885 Issue of the 'Observer'. It is on
these two sources of Information that what is here written is based.
No Royal College Magazine existed at the time.
The match was played on Thursday and Friday,
March 12th and 13th, 1885. The ground was the one between Christ
Church, Galle Face and the Colombo Club. It then belonged to the
Colombo Cricket Club and was later the Sports Club grounds.
Times of play are a little difficult to
determine. Neither of our sources says at what time play started on
the first day and so we are dependent on deduction. There are,
however, some interesting and helpful indications of time In the
Magazine account of the Match.
The total number of runs made on the first day
was 147. Of this, the Royal College, going In first, made 9, St.
Thomas' 138 for 4. The Royal College Innings, the account tells us,
took half an hour of playing time. But at the fall of the first
wicket for one run In the fourth ball of the match, rain came down
and interrupted play for "half an hour or more." We conclude that
the Royal College Innings closed one hour after play started.
The first Thomian wicket fell at 3, the second
at 12, the third at 25. Thereafter, states the Magazine, "the score
was raised fast, and at about half past five the 100 went up amidst
cheers." So a hundred had been made with fast scoring by 5.30.
Suppose we say that St. Thomas' made those 100 runs in seventy five
minutes. That gives us one hundred and thirty five minutes after
play began. Add ten minutes for the Interval between Innings and
fifteen for a possible tea Interval and we have one hundred and
sixty minutes or two hours and forty minutes between the start of
play and 5.30. We cannot be far wrong if we say play began on the
first day at three o' clock.
As to when play started on the second day the
contemporary accounts supply us with Information. The examination
of It is highly Interesting and illuminating.
The 'Observer' account runs as follows :—
"Play was continued at 2.30 on Friday (I.e. the
second day) but after St. Thomas' had raised their score to 170 for
the loss of two more wickets rain again stopped play for about half
an hour."
The use of the word "again" Is curious. It must
mean that there had been an Interruption of play earlier In the day.
Very significant are the words "for about half an hour." More on
that point later.
The account In the St. Thomas' College Magazine
makes the following statement:—
"On Friday play was recommenced at about a
quarter to three; the score continued to rise until Thomasz was
caught at cover............Erskine then came in and played carefully
but Foenander was bowled after a few overs, having first put
together 19 including two fours In good style. At this Juncture rain
interrupted the game and the match was not concluded under
circumstances about which we shall say nothing."
The significant words here are 'recommenced'
and the whole of last sentence.
When did play begin on the second day? The
'Observer' states categorically 2.30. School Magazine, appears to
say 'at about a quarter to three' but does it really? Note word
'recommenced'. It is an odd word to use about the start of a day's
play. It would be the i word to use if there had been an
Interruption of play after the start. Further could anyone been so
vague about when the day's play started? It would appear, therefore,
that play started i, the second day at 2.30 as stated by the
'Observer' and "recommenced" after an interruption 'at about a
quarter to three' as stated in the School Magazine. This conclusion
is supported by the use of the word 'again' In the 'Observer'
account.
So the pieces of the puzzle fall into place.
Play started on the second day at 2.30, was almost immediately
interrupted by rain and 'recommenced at about a quarter to three'.
It continued I two more wickets had fallen and the score had been
raised to 170. Then rain again stopped play for about half an hour.
The second Interruption of the day's play must
have occurred between 3.15 and 3.30 for only 32 runs were made on
the second day and they could not have taken much more than half an
hour make after play had 'recommenced' at about a quarter to three.
To return to the 'Observer'. Note ft does not
say 'Rain stopped play for the rest of the day.' It stopped, for
half an hour. If there was no more play it was not rain that
prevented it. Son thing else did. The time must have been four
o'clock or thereabouts.
The reticence of the St. Thomas' College
Magazine at this point is tantalizing. It merit says, "The match was
not concluded under circumstances about which we shall say nothing."
Dignify perhaps, but not helpful.
Fortunately the Honorary Secretary of the St.
Thomas' College Cricket Club was not a reserved. He wrote to the
'Observer' and the 'Observer' of March 16th, 1885 under 'Local an(
General' has this: "St. Thomas' College Cricket Club—The Honorary
Secretary of the Club wishes« to state that no matches will in
future be arranged with the Royal College Cricket Club in
consequence of the latter Club refusing to continue the match played
last week."
So It was that, not the rain or the state of
the ground that stopped the match.
What has been written here is entirely based on
contemporary written accounts.
Only one conclusion is possible. Law 2 of the
Laws of Cricket Is as follows:
" The side which scores the greatest number of
runs wins the match. No match is won unless played out or given up."
Law 45 is as follows:— "When they (i.e. the Umpires) shall call
'play' the side refusing to play shall lose the match."
This match was given up by the Royal College.
The Umpires decided that the ground was fit for play (Vide "The
History of the Royal College") and called "Play" and the Royal
College refused to play. Accordingly the match was won by St.
Thomas'.
