James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Annual 1887

1 4 LILLYWHITE'S CRICKETERS ' ANNUAL. no long -leg , greatly contributed to swell the Eton total . Ramsay was kept on too long , and the slower deliveries were not tried sufficiently . So long as the good rule is adhered to, that boys be left to themselves in the field , each side will occasionally suffer from errors of judgment, and there is no doubt that last year, Eton, whoin this respect were from first to last excellently managed, had the advantage . Aword of praise should be accorded to Harrowfor their good all -round fielding , chiefly attributable to the great pains taken by the cap- tain during the term . Individually , Crawley stands out prominent , as, in addi- tion to being far and awaythe best bat, he had no rival as a fieldsman , Dauglish excepted , and he should certainly makehis mark at Cambridge. Dauglish , as aschool wicket -keeper , is muchabove the average , and his proficiency in this respect should give him a good chance of the Oxford eleven . With a little more patience he maydevelop into a run-getting batsman . Fair showed excellent batting in the big match, and several others , without displaying any remarkable talent , possessed the average form usually associated with school elevens . For the first time for several years Harrowhad no reliable slow bowler ; Mackie, in w h o muchconfidence was placed , failed signally at Lord's , but it is only fair to him to state , that an accident in June kept him out of the cricket -field for three weeks . Ramsay did not bowl so well as in the two previous years , and McLaren, though as a rule very straight , does not, as yet at any rate , bowl a very puzzling ball . In short , bowling was undoubtedly the weakpoint of the 1 8 8 6t e a m. Lancing suffered two severe defeats at the hands of Brighton , but we cannot speak with any certainty as to the individual merits of the team , as we have been unable to get any definite information about them. T h ecalibre of the Malverneleven wasaltogether belowtheir usual standard, though they madea very good stand on the Rossall ground. The overwhelming defeat byRepton was partly due to one extraordinary mistake in the field , but theultimate result was in no wayinfluenced thereby , as the Worcestershire boyswereutterly outplayed in all branches of the game. W ehope this year's eleven will do well , but we are afraid that the interests of cricket are somewhat sacrificed to the attractions of cricket's greatest enemy, lawn tennis . Though Marlborough failed to win a match, they were by no means a bad team. Theymadean excellent fight with Rugbyat Lord's ; against the old boys they knocked up a huge score ; but weconsider that they showed their best form in the Liverpool match. The Liverpool matches have always been looked upon as a very good test of the respective merits of Marlborough , Cheltenham , and Clif- ton, but last year the test was delusive , as , after doing well against the Liverpool team , the Marlborough boys were easily beaten at Cheltenham . Bowling was the weakpoint in the eleven . Nockolds and Robertson were fairly straight and steady , but there was no " sting " in either of them; while Dawson-Thomas's deliveries were too short to be dangerous . Thebatting andfielding were respect- able . Poynton and Rowell were the most trustworthy bats , and played sound cricket in the second innings at Lord's . Kitcat , if once set , scored very fast , but hewastoo eager , and so did not do himself justice ; his fielding at point wasvery fine , andhe proved an energetic captain . W eare sorry his teamdid not meet withmoresuccess , and hope that this year's eleven will have better luck. Amonthof execrable weather at the beginning of term prevented Repton fromhaving a really high-class team. Withgood practice manyof the younger hands would have turned out well, but as it was, they had to play in foreign matches before they had had any half -holiday games , or any practice worth the name. Theresults of this were apparent throughout the season ; there was no confidence , and therefore the tameness of the batting , even whenthey did get runs , was deplorable . Of the old choices , Kelsey more than fulfilled expecta- tions ; bysteady honest practice he became one of the best (perhaps the best) school bats of the year . W h e nonce in form he will get runs in the best company, for on ahard wicket his play was quite first -rate ; he never took a liberty , and yet thepunishmenthe meted out to the loose balls was a treat to see . W eregret to say that he is not going to either University . Ford was certainly not in his form of