James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Annual 1886

T H EM A R Y L E B O N EC L U BIN 1 8 8 5. 5 5 thefirst innings of M.C.C. and Ground; and in the second Mr. G. B. Studd scored 59 (not out) of 97 for two wickets . M.C.C. and Ground wonby eight wickets . M.C.C. and Ground. 247 and 97 (two wickets ) ; total , 344. Cambridge University, 115 and 228 ; total , 343. Flowers (1st innings Cambridge) O v e r s. 4 5 M a i d e n s . 3 1 R u n s. 2 2 Wickets. 8 (10) M.C.C. and Groundv. Oxford University. Lord's , June 25 and 26. Though the Oxford Eleven were all dismissed for 100, they made a good fight against a certainly strongish team of M.C.C. and Ground , and were very near winning as it proved , though Marylebone had a lead of 94 runs on the first hands. Mr. Brain played such fine cricket for the University when they went in a second time that the game underwent a complete change . H ewas i nthree hours and ten minutes, and scored 135 out of a total of 227 from thebat, with no fair chance till just at the close of his innings . Mr. Marshall showedcapital cricket each time for the Club ; he was credited with 99 runs in all , and his second innings of 48 (not out) did much to decide the result . Mis- takes in the field , though , at the finish helped , too, to secure Oxford's defeat . M.C.C. and Groundwonby two wickets . M.C.C. and Ground, 194 and 140 (eight wickets ) ; total , 334. Oxford , 100 and 231 ; total , 331 . Flowers (1st innings Oxford) Overs. 2 4 . 3 Maidens. 1 5 R u n s. 2 6 (11) M.C.C. a n dG r o u n dv. Lancashire. Lord's, July 20 and 21. W i c k e t s. 6 Though Mr. W. G. Grace was in the eleven , Marylebone was otherwise only poorly represented , particularly in bowling , of which there was a very scant supply . William Mycroft bowled with great effect whenLancashire went in, and he was credited with the first seven wickets at a cost of only ten runs . Somebrilliant hitting by Mr. E. C. Hornby, a left -handed batsman, who scored 64of the next 94 runs , however, altogether altered the condition of affairs , and at the end of an innings the County were ten runs to the good. Whenthey went in a second time 227 were wanted to win, and this , through the good batting of Barlow (117) and Mr. O. P. Lancashire (76 not out), who put on 188 while they weretogether , were obtained for the loss of only two wickets . Lancashire won by eight wickets . Lancashire , 132 and 229 (two wickets ) ; total , 361. М.С.С. and Ground, 122 and 236 ; total , 358. Briggs(Lancashire) Mycroft(1st innings Lancashire ) O v e r s. M a i d e n s. R u n s. 6 2 2 9 9 9 2 8 1 5 4 5 W i c k e t s. 1 2 8 (12) M.C.C.a n dG r o u n dv. K e n t. Canterbury , August 6 and 7. Thesecond match of the Canterbury week. But for the absence of Lord Harris, Kenthad its full strength , and with, in addition , in going in first , all the best of the wicket , the eleven were seen to the best advantage against a moderate eleven of M.C.C. and Ground. Messrs . Mackinnon (49) and Patterson (58) put on90 runs for the first wicket , though the total only reached 257. O na drying wicket , however, Marylebone could do little with the bowling of Wootton and Alec. Hearne, and these two youngsters divided the wickets between them. Kent w o nbyan innings and 48 runs. Kent, 257. M.C.C. and Ground, 99 and 110 ; total, 209. Wootton(Kent) A .H e a r n e Overs. 7 3 . 2 Maidens. R u n s. 4 1 9 0 W i c k e t s 1 1 5 8 . 3 3 1 7 2 9