James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Annual 1886

T H E C O U N T I E SIN 1 8 8 5. 7 9 all -round cricket reflected the greater credit on the team, and their record , which only showed three defeats -one of them by the bare majority of a wicket - w a svery satisfactory . The chief features of the season were the capital all- round play of Briggs , Barlow, and Watson, and it is worthy of remark that this trio obtained 167 of 191 wickets which fell to Lancashire bowlers . A protest , at the instance of Notts, resulted in the disqualification of Crossland , owing to a breachin the residential rules, andinhis absence the eleven wereleft without a fast bowler . Briggs , though , came suddenly into prominence as a slow round- a r mbowler, andhe showedsuch undeniable capacity as fairly to earn a place in the very first rank. The batting figures were altogether excellent , and in this department the eleven received a useful addition in the young Cantab, Mr. G. K e m p, whose performance against Yorkshire at Sheffield was sufficient to stamp h i mas a batsmanof no m e a npromise. R e s u l t sof M a t c h e s. Matches Played, 18 ; Won, 13 ; Drawn, 2 ; Lost , 3. Opponents. Matches Won(13) . *K e n t. (4) Sussex. Where played played . Manchester Brighton W h e n Club. O p n t s. 1 s t2 n d1st 2 n d i n n. i n n. i n n. i n n. W o nb y 42 runs 33 runs M y282930 J u2 22324 2 6, 27 وو 108 288 141 213 215 1 5 3 1 9 2 143 309 97 99 inns & 113 runs 118 157 9 wkts ; *1 w d 45 114 154r u n s Stockport Manchester July 2,3,4 208 *71 M a n c h e s t e r " Manchester ,, 3031 A g 1 324 1 2 8 104 inns& 92r u n s 108 87 10wkts; *now d (5) Cheshire. (6) Essex (9) Sussex 2 7, 28 1 0 5 208 *Gloucestershire . *Derbyshire D e r b y A u g .3,4,5 180 *16 (10) Cheshire M a n c h e s t e r 7 , 8 2 8 4 35 108 inns & 141 runs " *Gloucestershire . Clifton 131415 183 8 5 117 110 41 r u n s (12) Essex. Leyton ود ود 2 4, 25 342 116 97 inns & 129 runs E x t r aMatches. (1) Oxford University O x f o r d M y21 2223 124 149 115 108 50 runs (2) Oxford University Manchester J u151617 271 35 176 129 9 wkts; *1 w d *M . C . C. & G r o u n d L o r d ' s July20, 21 132 *229 122 236 8wkts; *2 w d Matches D r a w n(2) . R e m a r k s. (3) Yorkshire Manchester Ju1819 20 168 138 158 *75 *6 w d Liverpool J y161718 364 117 #213 *5 w d Matches Lost (3). Lostb y 73runs (7) Surrey.. *Derbyshire (8) Yorkshire (11) Surrey ManchesterJune4,5,6 215 8 4 54 318 HuddersfieldJ y232425 232 214 301 *148 Liverpool Ag171819 167 228 280 *116 *See reviews of M.C.C., Derbyshire , Gloucestershire , andKent. 8 wkts; *2 w d 1 wkt; *9 w d (1) Lancashire v. Oxford University (12 a- side ). Oxford, May21, 22, and 23. Rain interfered materially with the progress of the game, and the wicket , in consequence , was all in favour of the bowlers . In this respect the county hadthe advantage , and the play showed a slight preponderance in their favour throughout , though their eleven was not by any means their strongest . Messrs . Brain(36 and 13), Page (0 and 47), and Buckland (2 and 31), played well, but no one else on the Oxford side did muchagainst the bowling of Barlow, Nash, and Watson. Lancashire won by 50 runs. Lancashire (124 and 149) ; total , 273. Oxford115 and 108 ; total , 223. B a r l o w(Lancashire) Mr.Bastard (Oxford) . Wickets. Overs. Maidens. R u n s. 7 2 7 6 . 2 3 4 2 8 8 8 1 0 8 8 1 0