James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Annual 1886

PUBLICSCHOOLCRICKETIN 1885. 3 9 respective schools will receive due attention in the more special notices , we m a ynowstate that Bromley-Martin (Eton), Ford (Repton), Bengough(Rugby), Rawlinson (Malvern ), Abney (Clifton ), and Campbell (Haileybury ), seem most likely to maketheir mark in this branch of the game. N o doubt, the weakness of the bowling must be held accountable , to some extent , for the long innings so common in school matches last year ; but wehave no hesitation in asserting that this was not the chief factor . A glorious season for cricket (though a little more sunshine would have been acceptable ) led to the wonderful advance in the batting powers of several boys , which, under less favourable circumstances , would very probably have remained undeveloped . That a good season , rather than bad bowling , was the chief cause , we mayinstance the fact that some of the " swells " of the year dis- played their best form in those matches in which they were pitted against m e n; for instance , Bradby was not content with knocking the Marlborough boys' bowling all over the field , but served the M.C.C. m e nin the same unmerciful way. Again, Rashleigh's splendid average of 63 was not due , as in the previous year, to anymammothscores against rival schools , but was the result of thoroughly consistent cricket . While Ford , whose presence would , w ebelieve , have strengthened the Middlesex team, seldom failed to score heavily , and, more than once , on difficult wickets and against good bowling , proved that for defence as well as for hitting power, he must be considered at least on an equality with the best boy of the year . In Meyrick , Cambridge have a batsman whose unwearied patience and straight bat will win manya matchfor them; indeed , he maynot unreasonably be called the " Ottaway" of the present day. It is a thousand pities he is not a better field , but we hope hewill improve. Uppinghamwere unfortunate enough to lose the services of Martineau in several of their matches . H eis undoubtedly a good all -round m a n, and we shall be surprised if he does not give us a taste of his quality before he leaves the 'Varsity. AtWinchester the Captain was far and away the best cricketer . Afirst -rate bat, with regular " stone -wall " defence , and plenty of hit on the off -side , Watson cannot fail to be useful to any team. Hisnamesake of Harrowis a really fine bat. His wonderful innings against Etonwas only one of several good performances , and he is almost sure to make a great name for himself in the cricket world. Harrowcould boast several other capital cricketers , notably Crawley , Watson's partner in the long stand at Lord's . At present he is small and young (faults that will mend themselves ), and we are led to expect great things from him. Butler proved himself at Lord's , and indeed throughout the season , a really good m a n. H e is a sound bat, but this is not all , for he has nerve and judgmentworthy of an oldhand. In the holidays he showed fine defence against the Notts bowling , andhis fielding at point was muchadmired, one catch he madebeing described as "simply marvellous ." WhatWellington would have done without Prince Christian and Markham aybe gathered from a mere glance at the table of statistics , given in another place . Markhamis , no doubt, the more dashing bat of the two, but we are of opinion that the safer , though less showy, batting of Prince Christian wouldbe of more service to a side . Last, but not least , comes Eton. Herewe find two first -class bats in Thomas and Philipson -the former's nervousness precluded him from doing himself justice in foreign matches , but if he can only conquer this serious fault , his " blue " would be a certainty . Philipson , on the contrary , is essentially a " matchplayer . " His performances at Lord's , when by-the -way, he was far from well , are worthy to rank with those of Watson and Crawley. Against Winchester he played a grandinnings of 141, but it is needless to say more; his high average speaks for itself , whenwe bear in mindthe calibre of the teams that the Eton boys have tomeet. Foley's steady defence was of the greatest service to his side , and bothhe and LordGeorge Scott give every promise of future excellence . W e havenow spoken of those boys w h o m, either for performance or promise , w e consider to have been the pick of the public school cricketers of the past year . A sto their comparative merits , we do not presume to offer any suggestions .