James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Annnual 1881

CRICKETIN 1 8 8 0 . u b e 1 5 proved himself capable of getting runs against the best bowlers , he bids fair tob eofgreat assistance to Surrey. It is a matter for deep regret that there is no material improvementto ehronicle in connection with Sussex cricket . Early in the season , the reports of the young players were hopeful , but the results of first -class matchesshowtwo wins and those over Hants-against four defeats . The batting of Mr. R. T. Ellis was one of the leading features of County Cricket in 1880, and throughout his play was of the very best order. I n Messrs. M. P. Lucas, A. H. Trevor, H. Whitfeld, too, Sussex has three first -class batsmen, but the bowling is worse than that of Surrey . With Lillywhite getting plainer every year , and no one better than Mr. Sclater , Juniper , and WalterHumphrey's lobs to rely on, bowling is still in a very badway in Sussex, in all truth . Derbyshire is another of the counties struggling under the weight of continuous ill -success . Of late , the batting of the Derbyshire Eleven has been almost synonymous with small scores , and last season this defect was quite as marked as ever . Foster , a very dangerous hitter , began the season well, but he was impregnated with the general complaint of the team before the season closed , and, taken altogether , the Derbyshire batting averages are inferior to those of any other shire . William Mycroft and Hay, both bowled with the same success as in previous years , and Platts at times proved a useful change ; but the excellent bowling of the county was altogether neutralised by the sorry displays of the batsmen, and before Derbyshire can hope to come to the front , its batting will have to be very materially strengthened . Hampshire's re -appearance was certainly not followed by a very ambi- tious programme, and as the only leading county it met was Sussex , there is no need for lengthy remarks . The policy of confining the match list chiefly to fixtures with minor counties , to judge by the results of the two meetings with Sussex , would appear at present to be the only wise one , though everyone would be glad to see the once famous county regaining s o m eof its lost laurels . Cricket at Prince's was confined to a few unimportant matches , chiefly of military interest , and during the winter another large piece of the prettiest cricket ground London has ever had , has been swallowed up by the insatiate builder . In strong contrast was the extensive programme carried out by the Marylebone Club , and it certainly speaks very highly for the management of that famous society , that ninety -five matches were decided during the four months that form the cricket season , in a creditable manner, and without anything like a hitch . Truly there can be no com- plaint that the premier club does not fulfil the responsibility it has under- taken of promoting and developing the national game. Considering the unfavourable weather during some portions of the year ,w some of the principal batsmen have come out very well in the averages . Mr. W. G. Grace's professional duties have caused himto give up muchof his cricket , and hence the number of his innings was considerably reduced last season . It was feared that this reduction might have an effect on his play,but those who witnessed his brilliant performances during the month ofAugust, will be ready to admit that the days of his decadence have hardly arrived as yet . There was all the old wonderful accuracy of timing , the samejudgmentin placing the ball , and in fact , the same W. G. that w e have known, some of us, since he first dazzled the vision of the London cricket public sixteen years ago . As of old , his name figures at the head