James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Annual 1886

1 1 8 L I L L Y W H I T E ' S C R I C K E T E R S ' A N N U A L . B O W L I N G A V E R A G E S . Overs . Maidens. Runs. Wickets. Average. C. H. Moline. 2 2 8 . 2 1 0 1 3 4 7 3 5 9.9 G . T. M i r e h o u s e 7 7 . 1 2 6 1 3 7 2 4 5 . 7 E .B .B r u t t o n 4 0 1 8 5 0 8 6 . 2 A .R o b i n s o n 3 0 6 7 2 7 1 0 . 3 A .M .Suthery 1 0 7 3 5 1 6 9 1 8 9 . 4 H .A .A r n o l d 5 1 1 0 3 3,3 Molinebowled 2 no-balls and 1 wide; Mirehouse, 1 no-ball ; Suthery , 3 no-balls . JESUS ELEVENIN 1885.-A. M. Suthery : Very fine bat, with strong defence and exceptional hitting powers , to which several long scores in the course of the season bear witness ; useful and often very effective fast bowler ; safe field . H. A. Arnold : Disappointing bat ; successful bowler on occasions , and a good field . E. B. Brutton : Rather uncertain bat, tremendous scorer against weakbowling ; very effective bowler , and a most brilliant field . A. Robinson : V e r ysteady bat and useful underhandbowler. E. M. Forbes : Amostsuccessful captain ; bats in good form, though unfortunate in his scores ; capital field any- where. J. H. Roberts : On his day a brilliant bat and very fast run-getter ; good field , and can bowl. F. H. Wheeler : Moderate bat, owing his average chiefly to one big score ; good field . G. G. Skipwith : Stylish , and often effective bat ; safe field . C. H. Moline : Had to sustain the chief burden of the bowling , and did so with marked success ; weak in defence as a bat , but has considerable hitting powers. G. T. Mirehouse : O nhis day a deadly bowler ; has improved wonder- fully as abat ; represented the College so little on account of taking part in several 'Varsity engagements . E. F. Slocock : Good college wicket -keeper , and useful bat, owing his position in averages to not-out innings . K I N G ' SC O L L E G E , C A M B R I D G E . Captain , H o n. C. M. Knatchbull -Hugessen. Hon. Sec ., F. Gillson . T H EE L E V E NIN 1885.-C.M . Knatchbull-Hugessen: A fine batsmanand wicket-keeper whenhe tries ; was not able to assist the College much; a good captain in the field . F. Gillson : Fair fast bowler, but somewhatunlucky his season ; hits hard. but is not generally successful as a bat ; fields well . L. G. B. J. Ford: Brilliant bat,hits very hard,but somewhatuncertain ; bowls slow, with varying pace and pitch , generally taking wickets ; outlandish action ; good field . A. H. Studd : Stylish bat, nearly always getting runs ; bowled well in the early part of the year , but was disappointing afterwards . P. Humphry : A fine free batsman, with great driving powers ; had a spell of badluck in the middle of the season ; capital field and useful as a change bowler. W. Marshall : Bats well, with lots of style ; sometimes successful as a fast bowler, but rather expensive ; owing to professional engagements often unable to play. T. W. Little : Not a punishing bat, but often scores ; has a tendency to play crooked ; energetic and safe in the field ; cheap bowler . W. A. Lewis : Outof form with the bat this year owing to ill -health ; often useful behind the wickets . P. A. Williamson : Fair, medium-pace , left -handed bowler, but less successful than he was last year ; cannot bat at all . L. J. Maxse : A hard-hitting left-handed bat, getting runs in his o w nfashion; fair field ; sometimescomesoff as abowler. D. N. Pollock : Hits higher than anymanin England; bowls on occasion with effect ; slow field , andnot sure .