James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Annual 1883

C R I C K E TI N 1 8 8 2. 7 youngster , who made his first appearance in the eleven last year, batted inneat style , and is sure to train on. Chatterton , too , another colt gave great promise ; but otherwise there is no sign of promise in the batting . In bowling , the County seems to have a likely colt in Richardson ; but , but. all round, the cricket sadly needs renovation . It has in Disney, a young wicket- keeper, whois nowalmost , if not quite , in the front rank. Hampshire cricket was hardly of a kind to give any hope of an early revival ; and Somersetshire , despite its promise of 1881 , seems hardly strong enough as yet to justify its desire to take a place with the Counties of older growth , to judge by its experiences of last year . Amongthe other shires , Norfolk , on several occasions , showed very fair cricket , and it has the materials for the making of a good eleven . Bedfordshire , too , could place a strongish teamin the field ; and Essex, Herts , and Suffolk , have, all in their ownway, helped largely to develope County cricket . Warwickshire , too , has been unable to resist the growing tendency in the same direction ; and last season witnessed the formation of a Warwickshire CountyClub. Inthe two matches between the Gentlemenand the Players , the honours were fairly divided . The latter would have made a much better show at Lord's but for the absence of Peate and Morley, their best slow andfast bowlers . Theywonby sheer good cricket , at the Oval ; but luck was altogether against themin the return , and their weakness in bowling was very manifest . The Inter -University match resulted in an easy victory for Cambridge , as was generally foreseen ; and the Oxford bowling was so weak, that the result was neverin doubt. Public school cricket generally , was hardly up to the best standard ; partly owing to the prevalence of wet grounds , which made practice very difficult . Harrowhad rather the best of a drawngamewith Eton, and the latter were beaten very decisively by Winchester, who were above the average , and apparently the best team of the year. Rugbywere muchweaker than usual ; and Marlborough , who also defeated Cheltenham ,beat them without difficulty . Westminster had a run-getting bat in its captain , F. T. Higgins ; but the average of the Schools was rather lower than usual, a condition of things partly due to the heavy condition of the grounds during the early part of the s e a s o n . Prayed Insomerespects the individual play was rather disappointing . Mr. W. G. Grace wasout of health early in the season ; but towards the close , he batted withmuchof his old certainty . Mr. Hornbyhit vigorously at times ; but, on the whole, his cricket was hardly quite as good as in 1881. Among the amateurs, there was an apparent falling off in batting , though the grounds wereoften against the bat. Mr. C. T. Studd played, on the whole, brilliant cricket . H ehas certainly never showed to better advantage ; and, indeed , on last year's form, he was entitled to a place in the very front rank of cricketers . H ewas singularly unsuccessful in all his matches at the Oval ; but elsewhere , particularly at Cambridge and Lord's , he played brilliant cricket . Twice he gotover a hundred runs against the Australians ; and twice within a week, in twoofthe very best matches of the year , for M.C.C. and Ground v. Australians ; andfor the Gentlemen against the Players , he was credited with an innings of three figures . H ehad, indeed , few, if anysuperiors , as an all -round player in 1882, Mr. A. P. Lucas's batting was one of the very best features of the two matches last referred to. H edid not play so muchfirst -class cricket as might have been wished during the season, but what he did was as usual , thoroughly well done ; andhis style was as perfect as ever. Lord Harris , as has already been mentioned , was the mainstay of Kent in batting . Hisplay had lost none of its old resolution ; his hitting none of its freedom . The Hon. Alfred Lyttelton could not play until late in the season ; but there was no sign of any loss of power in his batting , and, indeed . considering that he was not, perhaps , in the best of practice , his play was the more creditable . Messrs . A. G. Steel , A. J. Webbe, I. D. Walker , T. S. Pearson , John Shuter , W. W. Read, A. H. Trevor , W. Newham, E. H. Tylecote , W. H. Patterson , Rev. V.