James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Annual 1886

2 2 2 L I L L Y W H I T E ' SC R I C K E T E R S ' A N N U A L. C H A P T E R V I I I. T H EA V E R A G E S ( F I R S T- C L A S S) O F 1 8 8 5 .* [THEfigures which follow are taken from the chief fixtures of the MaryleboneClub, theUniversity matches, the principal representative contests , and the matches played by Notts, Yorkshire, Lancashire , Derbyshire , Gloucestershire , Surrey, Middlesex, Kent, Sussex, Hampshire, andSomersetshire .] T H EB A T S M E N . A swas only to be expected from the run-getting character of the wickets , the batting averages generally are high. Seven batsmen, it will be seen, have made over 1,000 runs , and of these Mr. W. W. Readcan claim to have been the most successful with an aggregate of 1880. His batting throughout the summerwas consistently brilliant , and he has never during his career been seen to better advantage . Mr. W. G. Grace, too , fully sustained his reputation , and his play at theendof the season showed that he has still no superior , despite that he has figured for over twenty years in first -class cricket . Shrewsbury , too, has never played better cricket ; indeed , he is certainly the best professional batsman at the present time. Ulyett , Bates, and Maurice Readall cameout well , andGunn showed a marked advance on any previous form, asserting his right to be con- sidered in quite the front rank of professional batsmen. Lee, of Yorkshire , too, played consistently well , and proved himself a first -class bat in every way. Of theyounger professors , Chatterton of Derbyshire , and Abel of Surrey, both did well; andPreston madea very favourable debut , showing distinct promise as an all -round cricketer . S C O R E R SO F 1,000R U N SA N DU P W A R D S . T i m e s M o s tin Inns. notout. R u n s. a nInns. Average. B a t e s 4 9 3 1 1 6 1 9 8 25.11 G u n n . 4 3 3 1 4 5 1 2 0 3 36.11 Grace,Dr.W .G. 4 2 3 1 6 8 8 *2 2 1 43.11 R e a d,M . 3 5 2 1 1 3 7 *1 8 6 34.15 R e a d, M r .W .W . 4 2 0 1 8 8 0 1 6 3 4 4 . 3 2 Shrewsbury, A. 2 4 4 1 1 3 0 *2 2 4 56.10 Ulyett,G. 4 7 1 1 3 3 7 9 1 2 9 . 3 A V E R A G E SO F 2 5 R U N SA N DU P W A R D S . T i m e s M o s ti n Inns. not out. R u n s. a nInns. Average. B a r l o w 3 2 4 8 1 6 1 1 7 2 9 . 4 Briggs 3 3 2 8 5 7 1 8 6 2 7 . 2 0 G r i m s h a w 3 8 2 9 4 6 *1 2 9 2 6 . 1 0 L e e... 3 2 3 9 0 1 1 0 1 3 1 . 2 Lucas, F.M . 1 0 2 5 5 4 *2 1 5 69.2 N e w h a m, W . 1 9 2 7 4 0 *1 4 1 4 3 . 9 Patterson, W .H. 1 4 1 5 4 8 1 4 3 4 2 . 2 Powell, E. O. 1 4 1 3 4 8 7 3 2 6 . 1 0 Roller, W .E. 2 4 0 7 2 9 2 0 4 30.9 Radcliffe, O. G. 1 3 0 3 5 9 1 0 1 2 7 . 8 Studd, G. B. 1 3 3 3 9 1 1 0 4 39.1 S u g g 1 9 2 4 6 2 1 8 7 2 7 . 3 Scott, S. W . 1 1 3 2 8 8 *1 3 5 3 6 Thornton, Rev. R. T. 1 6 1 4 6 0 7 9 3 0 . 1 0 W e b b e, A. J. 2 6 2 6 6 7 *8 2 27.19 *N obatsmanis included whohas not played teninnings .