James Lillywhte's Cricketers' Annual 1884

C R I C K E TI N 1 8 8 3. 2 9 o f102 and29 not out were alone sufficient to m a k ethe matchmemorable. His aggregate is the largest made in an Inter -University match . Both the two matches between the Gentlemen and Players proved to be unusually interesting , though in different ways. Mr. W. G. Grace, for the first time for manyyears , w a san absentee from the fixture at the Oval ; butdespite that the elevens were not quite representative the game proved to be most exciting , and the finish w a sa tie , the first recorded in the series of matches. A t Lord's , the result wasthree days of very fine cricket , and the largest numberof runs recorded in animportant match during the season . Better cricket has not been seen for manyyears , and the play on both sides was fully up to the reputation of the best matchof the year. Rain again prevented the completion of the Etonand Harrowmatch, but notwithstanding , some promising batting was shown on both sides if the bowling generally was not of a very high order . There was apparently little to choose between the two schools , but I am inclined to think that neither , despite that I regard the decisive victory of the Wykehamists over Eton as something of a fluke , was quite as good as Winchester , who were probably the best Public School eleven of the year . Asuccession of dry weather and generally fast wickets was all in favour of run-getting, and, as a consequence , 1883 was emphatically a hatsman's year . Thetime has at last come when Mr. W.G. Grace, whose unapproachable ability has enabled him, for nearly twenty years , to stand alone as the best all round cricketer of the day, finds his position challenged by younger rivals . That in batting he has still no superiors there was plenty of evidence last season , and his last innings of 112 for Gloucestershire against Lancashire was quite up to his old form. Still it is only the natural result that younger players should be able to push their way to the front . Indeed, the most successful batsman of 1883 , amateur or professional , was Mr. C. T. Studd , and he was fairly entitled to be considered the best all round cricketer . Mr. W . W .Readquite confirmed the reputation he had gained in Australia during the previous winter , and throughout the season his batting for Surrey was consistently brilliant . To himbelonged the distinction of the largest number of runs in important matches. Lord Harris again stands out prominently among the highest run-getters in County matches, and Mr. I. D. Walker has the best average of a very strong batting side of Middlesex . Some of the latter's performances in the later matches with H o n. A. Lyttelton were exceptional , and their stand of 324 runs at Clifton for Middlesex against Gloucestershire is the best feat of the kind in an important fixture . Hall's unwearying defence enabled him, for the first time, to head the list of Yorkshire batsmen, a distinction of whichhe has every reason to be proud. Barnes' brilliant batting placed him well at the head of the Nottinghamshire averages , and Barlow played excellent cricket for Lancashire throughout the season . Mr. Cranston's batting for Gloucestershire was very successful , and Messrs . A. P. Lucas and Ridley , as also Ulyett , Lockwood , Shrewsbury and Flowers , upheld their reputations . Mr.Roller and Abelboth shewed great improvement as batsmen, and of the older hands mention m a yalso be made of Messrs . Whitfeld , Newham, Page, G. B. Studd , Paravacini , A. J. Webbe, F. Taylor , Gilbert , A. G. Steel , E. M. Grace, J. Shuter , C. W. Wright and H o n. M . Hawke, of Bates, Hearne, Humphreys, Selby, Gunn, Briggs and Read. promising young batsman was introduced into Surrey in the person of Henderson , and among the new amateurs Messrs . Diver . Keyand Bowden, of Surrey , and L u m bof Yorkshire , were the most promising . Mr. Hornbywas byno means as successful as in previous years , anddespite his fine innings for the Gentlemen at Lord's , Mr. E. F. S. Tylecote as well as Messrs . Townsend, W .H.Patterson , Leslie and Royle were disappointing . A Thecondition of the wickets was certainly not in favour of the bowlers , but none the less some very creditable performances with the ball were recorded . Curiously enough two veterans , and both slow bowlers , Alfred Shaw and Watson, stand out prominently in the figures of the season . Peate wasat times very effective , with anything to help him, but on the hard wickets