James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Annual 1883

T H EC O U N T I E SI N 1 8 8 2. 8 3 wicket did not play particularly well , or the scoring of the Lancashire Eleven wouldhavebeen larger . Asit was they woneasily by nine wickets . Lancashire 178 and 54 (one wicket), total , 232, Somersetshire ; 74 and 157, total , 231 . Barlow(1st innings , Somersetshire ) Overs. Maidens. R u n s. Wickets. 8 (11) Lancashirev. Surrey. Oval, August 21 and22. 5 7 4 Thewicket did not play particularly well , and Crossland's delivery inspired such dread among the Surrey batsmen, that the issue was never in doubt. In Surrey's first innings the last five batsmen failed to get a run between them. Mr. Roller played well each time for 12 and 33, but excepting that of Maurice Readand Jones , the Surrey batting wasa very poor display . Lancashire wonby a n innings and 21 runs . Lancashire , 188 ; Surrey , 48 and 119 , total , 167. Crossland (Lancashire ). Overs. Maidens. R u n s. Wickets. 4 0 . 3 1 6 7 9 1 1 (12) Lancashire v. Middlesex. Manchester, Aug. 24, 25, and26. Middlesex had a strong batting side , but their bowling was very much weakenedby the absence of Burton. Mr. C. T. Studd, too, injured his hand, andwas only able to bowl during the early part of the innings . Throughout Middlesex hadmuchthe worst of the luck, and their only chance wasa draw. Inwinning the toss Lancashire gained an immense advantage ; anddespite somegood fielding , nine of the eleven got double figures , Robinson (101) and Mr. A. G. Steel (99) being the chief scorers . Middlesex , with 439 runs against them, hadonly the one outside chance of a draw. The wicket , though, as the sun dried it, was so utterly against the bat that Middlesex , though with a strong side , could do nothing with the bowling of Nash and Barlow, and were twice got out within three hours and a half for an aggregate of 168. Lancashire w o nby an innings and 271 runs. Lancashire , 439 ; Middlesex , 70 and 98 ; total , 168. Nash(Lancashire ) 4 7 . 3 Overs. Maidens. Runs. 2 9 1 8 W i c k e t s. 1 2 B A T T I N G A V E R A G E S . I n n s. R u n s. M o s tin Inns. T i m e s notout. Average. R. G. Barlow 3 6 8 5 6 6 8 8 3 0 . 1 6 F. Taylor 1 1 2 9 0 6 2 1 2 9 . 0 A .N .H o r n b y 3 6 8 5 2 1 3 1 2 2 5 . 2 Rev.V. Royle 1 4 3 0 8 6 3 1 2 3 . 9 W .Robinson. 3 2 6 7 4 1 0 2 2 2 2 . 1 4 A .G. Steel. 1 3 2 7 2 9 9 1 2 2 . 8 C.H a i g h... 7 1 3 0 8 0 0 1 8 . 4 S. S. Schultz 6 8 4 2 3 0 1 4 . 0 D .Q. Steel 4 5 3 1 9 0 13.1 E .R o p e r. 1 0 1 3 0 3 1 0 13.0 J. Crossland 3 1 3 2 0 4 8* 6* 12.20 A .W a t s o n . 3 1 3 3 1 3 9 5 12.19 R.Pilling 3 2 3 0 1 7 8 5 1 1 . 4 J.Briggs 3 0 2 7 2 3 0 3 1 0 . 2 E .H .Porter . 1 1 1 0 1 5 7 0 2 . 4 Lancashire. 2 2 1 5 2 3 2 0 6 . 2 0 G .N a s h 2 1 4 9 1 3* 7 3 . 7 B u t t e r w o r t h 3 3 3 0 1 . 0 * Signifies not out. Thefollowing played in one match only , and scored as follows :- W. S. Patterson , 1 and 6; R. O. Milne , 7 ; C. G. Hulton , 5; W. E. Openshaw , 3 ; C. L. Jones , 2 and 0 ; Calvert Yates, 24 and4; R. Horrocks, 1.