James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Annual 1885

T H EC O U N T I E SI N 1 8 8 4. 1 1 7 (3) Sussex v. Hants. Brighton, June2 and3. Hampshire was only fairly represented , and Sussex had an easy win. T h elatter had an advantage of 94 runs on the first hands, and though Mr. E. O. Powell (64) enabled Hants to makea slightly better show in the second innings , the result was never in doubt. Mr. Whitfeld (70 not out) and J. H i d e(50) scored morethanone half of the first total of Sussex. Hantswere beaten by eight wickets . Sussex, 231 and 83 (two wickets ) ; total , 314. Hants, 137 and 175 ; total , 312. (4) Sussex v. Australians . Brighton , July 24, 25 , and 26. A little more time and Sussex would have been able to claim a highly creditable victory . A sit was, their first total of 396 is the largest ever made by a County against an Australian team, and they deserve all the credit of a very fine performance . H a dtheir fielding been better they wouldhave made evenamuchbetter show, and this alone prevented their attainment of a victory . Thechief feature of the Sussex innings was the unexpected stand of the eighth wicket , and Mr. Wyatt (112 ) and Phillips (111 ) made 182 runs while they were together . Heavyrain on the second morning was all against the Australians ; but Murdoch(187), Midwinter (67), and Boyle (48), nearly enabled themto save a follow on. Humphreystook six wickets for 96 runs ; and it was chiefly to his bowling that the Sussex eleven were able to get rid of the Australians in the second innings for 144. Sussex at the close had 58 minutes in which to get 52 runs , and trying to score fast lost four batsmen, three of them run out. The gamewas drawn, the County wanting 33 to win with six wickets to fall , much. in their favour . In first innings of Australians , Humphreystook three wickets with successive balls . Sussex , 396 and 25 (four wickets ) ; total , 421. Australians , 309 and144; total , 453. (5) Sussex v. Hants. Southampton, August4, 5, and6. Sussex just managedto save a follow , and yet succeeded in winning this return match with three wickets to spare . This result was mainly due to the good batting of Mr. N e w h a m(57 and 48), and the effective bowling of Mr. Blackmanin the second innings of Hants. Sussex won by three wickets . Sussex, 235 and 171 (seven wickets ) ; total , 406. Hants, 307 and 96 ; total , 403. Overs. Maidens. R u n s. Wickets. 2 0 1 9 5 Mr.Blackman(2nd innings Hants). B A T T I N G A V E R A G E S . T i m e s 1 1 I n n s. N o to u t. R u n s. M o s tin a nInns. Average. W .N e w h a m 2 3 0 7 4 1 1 3 7 3 2 . 5 W .B l a c k m a n 2 1 5 4 5 4 *7 7 2 8 . 6 H . Whitfeld 2 2 2 5 1 4 8 0 2 5 . 1 4 E. J. McCormick 1 2 2 2 5 6 7 3 2 5 . 6 J. H i d e 2 8 1 6 6 3 1 1 2 24.15 W .Tester. 3 0 3 6 3 1 8 0 23.10 G.N.Wyatt 2 1 2 3 9 8 1 1 2 2 0 . 1 8 W .H u m p r e y s . 2 8 3 5 0 0 6 5 2 0 A .P a y n e 7 1 9 6 4 21 6 H .Phillips 2 6 5 2 9 3 1 1 1 13.20 R .T. Ellis 2 7 1 2 9 0 7 2 11.4 C. Sharp 9 0 7 6 2 9 8 . 4 2 6 2 6 4 Juniper A .H i d e. Quaife Thefollowing played in one match only :- C. M. Perkins , 11 and *1 ; A. Black-- 6 1 2 6 2 1 6 . 6 4 1 1 8 1 9 5 . 8 0 1 9 1 7 4 . 3 m a n, 7 a n d4.