James Lillywhte's Cricketers' Annual 1884

T H EC O U N T I E SI N'1 8 8 3. 7 9 B A T T I N GA V E R A G E S (T H EE N T I R ES E A S O N) . M o s tin T i m e s I n n s. R u n s. a nInns. notout. Average. W .W .R e a d 4 1 1 6 3 7 1 6 8 6 46.27 E . J. D i v e r 2 4 6 5 7 9 8 2 2 9 . 1 9 MauriceR e a d 4 3 9 2 6 *1 1 3 6 25.1 K .J. K e y. 9 2 0 0 *6 0 1 2 5 J. S h u t e r 3 6 8 3 6 *1 0 8 2 2 4 . 2 0 W .E. Roller 3 7 8 7 4 *1 1 2 1 2 4 . 1 0 A b e l 4 0 7 6 5 8 3 4 2 1 . 9 C h e s t e r .. 1 8 2 7 4 *5 4 2 1 7 . 2 M .P. B o w d e n 1 3 1 8 7 *4 2 2 1 7 S. W .Cattley. 1 7 2 6 3 8 9 1 16.7 H e n d e r s o n 3 8 5 8 1 6 7 1 1 5 . 2 6 H. W . Bainbridge 9 1 1 2 6 0 1 1 4 M a t t h e w s . 6 7 8 4 5 0 1 3 C .E .H o r n e r 1 8 1 4 6 *3 7 6 12.2 Pooley 1 9 1 5 2 2 8 4 1 0 . 2 B a r r a t t 3 4 1 5 4 2 9 9 6 . 4 J o h n s o n 1 0 3 6 1 4 4 6 L. A. Shuter 4 1 5 9 0 5 . 3 V o s s 6 1 5 7 1 3 W o o d 6 1 4 7 0 2 . 2 Greenplayed two innings , scoring 2 and0, andW .H.G a m ein one, scoring 2. B O W L I N G A V E R A G E S . O v e r s. Maidens. R u n s. Wickets. Average. B a r r a t t 1637.1 6 7 1 2 6 2 3 1 7 6 14-159 MauriceR e a d.. 345.3 1 2 8 6 1 8 3 5 1 7 . 2 3 W .E .Roller 7 2 1 3 4 4 9 8 9 5 5 1 7 . 5 4 H e n d e r s o n 5 8 3 2 7 6 7 2 3 3 7 19.18 H.W .Bainbridge . 4 6 . 3 2 2 6 9 3 2 1 C. E.Horner 649.1 2 9 7 9 0 7 4 2 2 1 . 2 5 A b e l 2 3 2 9 7 3 6 1 1 5 2 4 . 1 J o h n s o n 3 4 3 1 4 0 5 7 6 2 3 25.1 V o s s 4 9 1 5 9 4 3 3 1 . 1 2 W .W .R e a d 8 3 1 7 2 1 2 5 4 2 . 2 J. K .K e y. 4 2 . 1 1 5 5 8 1 5 8 E . J. Diver 3 0 1 0 7 9 0 W o o dbowledin three innings -32, 14, 50, 1. E X T R A N E O U S M A T C H E SA T T H EO V A L. (In each case the winning side is placed first .) Contending Clubs. (1) Northv. South (2) Gentlemen v. Players 1st 2nd 1st 2nd W o nb y W h e nplayed . inn. inn. inn. inn. June21 , 22, 23 130 215 181 142 22runs 28, 29, 30 235 149 203 181 atie " (1) Northv. South. June21 , 22, and23. Amatch for Pooley's benefit , and on that account gratifying to record as a distinct success in every way. Rain interfered a little with the wicket on the first day, but afterwards there was little to prejudice the batsman. Neither side had quite its full strength , but the South had the worst of the comparison , and its eleven might have been materially improved. Loose fielding helped considerably to improve the second total of the North, or the result might possibly have been different . Thescoring on both sides wasbelow expectations , andthe gamewas rather in favour of the bowlers throughout . Woof's bowling