James Lillywhte's Cricketers' Annual 1884

$6 0 LILLYWHITE'SCRICKETERS' A N N U A L. for Gloucestershire , and their bowling was, therefore , altogether unequal to the requirements of such batting as that of Notts . Walter Wright's innings was the feature of the match. Hewent in first for Notts just at the finish of the first day and was not out on the third afternoon for 127. H ewas thus in on part of each ofthe three days of the match, andwas batting in all seven hours . His perform- ance was the more noteworthy as he was only put in first late at night to prevent the probable fall of a better wicket , and he had never before shown any great batting form. Barnes (120) and Wright added 188 runs while they were together , and the pair made 247 out of 347 from the bat. There seemed no possibility of acompleted match when Gloucestershire went in a second time on the third afternoon , but no one except Messrs . E. M. Grace (52) and Gilbert (29) madeany stand and, with Mr. Pullen an absentee , Notts wonrather unexpectedly by an innings and 36 runs. Notts, 371. Gloucestershire , 229 and 106 ; total , 335. (6) Gloucestershire v. Middlesex. Clifton , August 16, 17, and 18. The most extraordinary match of the county season . Middlesex treated the Gloucestershire bowling so lightly that their total reached 537, the largest total of 1883 in a county match, only excepting Surrey's 650 at the Oval against Hants. The Hon. Alfred Lyttelton (181) and Mr. I. D. Walker(145) in an hour andthree -quarters put on 226 runs , and while they were together 324 runs were made. This is the longest stand ever madeby two batsmen in a first -class match. Thefinish was very exciting on the score of time. Mr. Page, the last batsman of Gloucestershire in the second innings , came in ten minutes before time, and he kept up his wicket until the finish . The game was consequently drawn. Gloucestershire , with one wicket to fall , still requiring 114 to save an innings ' defeat . In all 960 runs were scored for 29 wickets . Middlesex , 537. Gloucester- shire , 189 and 234 (for nine wickets ) ; total , 423. (7) Gloucestershire v. Surrey. Cheltenham , August 20, 21, and 22. Surrey, in winning the toss , had the best of the wicket , but Barratt's bowling hadvery much, too , to do with the good show they made. Mr. H. V. Page, of Oxford University , contributed 50 out of 109 in Gloucestershire's first innings , and his cricket was perhaps the best of the match. Altogether Barratt was credited with twelve of the Gloucestershire wickets at a cost of 121 runs , a great performance against such a batting side . Surrey wonby nine wickets . Surrey 261and20 (for one wicket ) ; total , 281. Gloucestershire , 109 and 171 ; total , 280 Barratt (Surrey) Overs. Maidens. R u n s. Wickets. 1 2 8 7 . 2 4 6 1 2 1 (8) Gloucestershirev. Notts. Cheltenham , August 23, 24, and 25. Amatchproductive of high scoring . A tone time a victory for Notts seemed certain , but the excellent cricket of Messrs . Page and Vizard entirely saved the credit of Gloucestershire . Whenthey went in 115 runs were required to avert a follow on with only two wickets to fall , but they were not separated until the total had been raised by 159 ; Mr. Page 93, Mr. Vizard 49 not out. With the follow saved , there was no chance of a completion of the game, and when they wentin a second time the Nottingham batsmen hit vigorously , Selby to the tune