Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Proof of Innocence?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by R. J. Palmer View Post

    Yes, it looks like they could. I was fixated on Pool Junction for some reason.

    They leave Corfe Castle at 10.27, arrive in Pool at 11.30, depart on the 11.57 and are in Blanford at 12.30 pm. A later arrival but a shorter layover, which could have made it a more attractive option.

    So it looks like the three possible times for arriving in Blandford on the same day would be 10.57 a.m., 12.30 pm and 3.03 pm.
    If so, that would make 1pm a far more believable starting time for the game than 12 noon, as it would allow the Corfe Castle players to have a journey of about two hours rather than three and a quarter. Surely only a sadist would force them to do that in order to start an hour earlier?

    Comment


    • We have a match that lasted around two and a half hours.
      We have rainy weather that lasted around two hours, with the probability of thunder and lightning, which must surely have stopped play.
      We have lunch.
      We have the waiting for the ground to dry or potentially dry.
      We have a train that leaves at 4.55 pm.

      Question.
      How on earth could any player catch that train?
      And don't forget the player has to change and get from the Recreation Ground to the station.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Edward Stow View Post
        We have a match that lasted around two and a half hours.

        We don’t know how long the match lasted but 87 runs could easily have been scored in 2 hours or less. But 2 and a half hours is also reasonable. In some games 87 runs might have taken longer in fact.

        We have rainy weather that lasted around two hours, with the probability of thunder and lightning, which must surely have stopped play.

        We don’t even know for a fact that it rained at that game but we certainly can’t say when it started or how long it rain for or how heavily or if it rained more than once. I don’t see where your positive statement comes from?

        We have lunch.

        Yes, we assume so but we can’t assume that it occurred before Purbeck reached 62.

        We have the waiting for the ground to dry or potentially dry.

        Unless the rain came down so heavily in a burst that all thoughts of further play were dismissed.

        We have a train that leaves at 4.55 pm.

        Yes.

        Question.
        How on earth could any player catch that train?

        Easily and with time to spare.
        Game starts 12.00-12.30 (this isn’t imagination as we know that Blandford did have games that started at these times)

        We don’t know how long the actual cricket would have taken but any cricket fan will tell you that 87 runs can be scored in 2 hours without anyone breaking into a sweat.


        So we could have…

        Teams play until luncheon at 2.00. After luncheon Purbeck come back out at 2.30. They get a few more runs and are all out for 62 in mild rain when heavy rain comes. They go back in at 2.45 or 3.00. 30 or 45 minutes or an hour of heavy rain and the game is called off. It’s between 3.15 and 3.45 - Druitt has ample time.

        Teams play until luncheon at 2.00 with Purbeck losing their last wicket just before luncheon. It’s started raining slightly. Then it gets heavy. By the end of luncheon or a few minutes after luncheon the pitch is too water-logged so play is called off at 2.45 or 3.00 or 3.25. - Druitt has ample time.

        Game delayed by an hour due to light rain. They play and by luncheon Blandford have been bowled out and Purbeck 25-3. They have luncheon. Play resumes at 2.30. By 3.15 Purbeck are all out and it starts to rain. After 45 minutes it’s obvious that the pitch is too waterlogged and the game is abandoned at 4.00. - Druitt has ample time.

        Game starts at 1.00 with luncheon at 2.30. By luncheon Purbeck are 40-6. Play resumes at 3.00 and Purbeck are all out by 3.45 in mild rain. The rain comes down really heavily and so 30 minutes tells them that there’s no chance of further play and the game is called off at 4.15. - Druitt still has time to get to his train.

        ​​​​​​……

        Of course there are scenarios where Druitt doesn’t have time but I see absolutely no reason why they are more likely than the ones above? We don’t know what time the game started but the small amount of evidence of start times that we do have point to an earlier start. We know that 87 runs worth of play could be achieved without issue in 2 hours but 2 and a half is also reasonable. We don’t know a single thing about any rain. When it might have started, when it stopped, was it one shower or more than one, how bad was the rain? These are all unknowns though it has to be pointed out that the report of the game makes no mention of rain.

        Absolutely nothing that we’ve learned so far makes it remotely unlikely that Druitt could have made train. He certainly might not have done. Evidence might still be found that proves that he couldn’t have. But nothing so far points to an issue.
        Regards

        Michael🔎


        " When you eliminate the impossible whatever remains no matter how improbable......is probably a little bit boring "

        Comment


        • I will post some extracts from Bradshaws August 1887. I have checked the times and they are virtually identical to those already quoted (it was 4.50 however not 4.55).
          I find it difficult to interpret the tables so I have included the key...
          Attached Files

          Comment


          • First the good old Swanage line...
            Attached Files

            Comment


            • Then the Somerset and Dorset Line through Blandford
              Attached Files

              Comment


              • And finally the Weymouth to London line on the London and South Western Railway - it includes the Salisbury and Dorset Junction Railway branch line, and importantly the connection at Wimborne to Waterloo - and connections from Wareham (the terminus of the Swanage line)
                Attached Files

                Comment


                • I don't kniow why that one comes out small but here's the second part
                  Attached Files

                  Comment


                  • Mr Banks
                    All your scenarios fail abjectly because you propose rainfall in every instance after 2pm.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Edward Stow View Post
                      I will post some extracts from Bradshaws August 1887. I have checked the times and they are virtually identical to those already quoted (it was 4.50 however not 4.55).
                      I find it difficult to interpret the tables so I have included the key...
                      Thanks for posting these. I understand the first one.

                      Comment


                      • Yes even I could have caught a train from Wareham to Swanage or from Swanage to Wareham and had no one to blame except myself had I missed it.
                        Correction.
                        I am told Victorian time keeping was so erratic that I would probably have got to the station up to 15 minutes too early or 15 minutes too late.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Edward Stow View Post
                          Mr Banks
                          All your scenarios fail abjectly because you propose rainfall in every instance after 2pm.
                          Mr Stow,

                          Prove to everyone when the rain fell please. Prove the duration of that rainfall or those periods of rainfall. You’re making a very convenient assumption despite a dearth of evidence. All that I’ve done is list a few possible, entirely plausible scenarios none of which I’ve claimed as a fact (as you appear to do on when the rain came) I’ve also accepted the possibility of other scenarios which could have meant the elimination of Druitt based on time. So basically, I accept that all possibilities are on the table but you only appear to be in favour of scenarios which either eliminate Druitt or make him unlikely in the extreme to have reached his train in time.

                          The only things that we know for certain are -

                          A game occurred which appears to have been a two innings game reduced to one innings but for reasons unstated. (Rain would seem a reasonable assumption.)
                          All other reduced-in-length games that we’ve seen have the fact that it was reduced mentioned in writing (not this game though - in actual fact it’s called ‘a decisive victory’)
                          Other games mentioned when they are weather affected but the report of this game mentions nothing about weather.
                          Other games by Blandford appear to have also been two innings games (including the first fixture against Purbeck)
                          We have no start or finish time for the game.
                          The only evidence that we have for start times in other games including Blandford are earlier start times. (a just before 12.00, a 12.30 or earlier, a possible [but debated] 12.30 or earlier and a 1.30) No mention of later starts.
                          We have low scores which could have been achieved in 2 hours (but also longer of course)
                          The only train that appears available for Druitt is the 4.55.
                          There was rain in other towns in the area.

                          Others might be able to add other ‘knowns’ but this is the list that I can come up with. We can weave numerous scenarios around these facts. Some would eliminate Druitt, many wouldn’t. You only appear confident in the ones that make Druitt unlikely to have reached his train.
                          Regards

                          Michael🔎


                          " When you eliminate the impossible whatever remains no matter how improbable......is probably a little bit boring "

                          Comment


                          • The Bradshaw is very helpful. It is available at the HathiTrust website if people want to see other parts of it:
                            https://hdl.handle.net/2027/umn.319510022004750

                            I set myself the easy exercise of tracing in the timetables the journey from Corfe Castle at 10.27 to Blandford at 12.30 indicated by RJ's newspaper extracts. I made much heavier work of it than it needed to be, but there is one genuinely confusing thing. One station changed its name frequently around that time, so it is called Poole Junction in the first newspaper extract but Broadstone (or Broadstone and New Poole Junction) in Bradshaw. And also a stop at that station that appears in Bradshaw seems to be omitted from RJ's second newspaper extract for some reason. Assuming that stop wasn't dropped between 1887 and 1888, the journey is simpler than appeared from the newspaper extracts. It would go as follows:
                            Corfe Castle 10.27 to Wareham 10.42 (Bradshaw page 52; Ed's post 940)
                            Wareham 10.49 to Broadstone/Poole Junction at 11.04 (Bradshaw page 45; Ed's post 942)
                            Broadstone/Poole Junction at 12.06 to Blandford at 12.30 (Bradshaw page 41; Ed's post 941)

                            If that stop didn't happen in 1888 (which seems very unlikely as it was an important junction), then it could be done as thought previously, by continuing the second leg to Wimborne at 11.10, then going back from Wimborne at 11.15 to Poole (town) at 11.30 (Bradshaw p. 49), and finally getting the same Blandford train as before from Poole at 11.57.

                            There's a very long wait at Poole Junction, but I can't see a quicker way of doing the journey in the morning.

                            Comment


                            • I am very used to black being presented as white, and what is asserted as plausible or even likely on one thread being dismissed, by the same person, as nonsense on another. C'est la vie!

                              We have an excellent example in this discussion over batting on a sticky wicket.
                              A sticky wicket being a wet wicket - after rain.
                              The term originated in 1882 when Australian batsmen were discomforted by a wet wicket after rainfall. They were batting on a sticky wicket.
                              A wet wicket was universally regarded as a difficult surface for batsmen, which resulted in a low scoring game and wickets falling left right and centre.

                              Yet... yet... the non Druittist Druittist claims the opposite!

                              And all the meterological data we have, tells us that any rain in Blandford was between around 12 and 2 pm. Not for a five minute spell. The rainfall that day included thunder and lightning. We also have newspaper reports explicitly saying the weather was bad in Blamdford... and the weather reports prove this can only have been between 12 and 2 pm - or at least in that ball park (or Recreation Ground).

                              Comment


                              • Just looking at the return journey to Corfe Castle from Blandford, the only option leaving Blandford later than 4.50 seems to be:

                                Blandford 8.51 to Wimborne 9.14 (Bradshaw p. 41)
                                Wimborne 9.44 to Wareham 10.05 (Bradshaw p. 44)
                                Wareham 10.55 to Corfe Castle 11.10 (Bradshaw p. 52)

                                (Edit. But I wonder whether they might have managed an alternative means of transport for those 4-5 miles between Wareham and Corfe Castle. It would almost have been quicker to walk.)

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X