James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Annual 1888

T H EC O U N T I E SIN 1887. 8 3 M I D D L E S E X . OFFICERS FOR 1888. - President , Earl of Strafford . Vice - Presidents , Lord G. Hamilton , M.P. , V. E. Walker . Treasurer , W. Nicholson . Hon. Sec ., P. M. Thornton. Assistant Sec . , J. A. Murdoch. Committee , Hon. A. Lyttelton , R. Henderson , G. Lee, J. Robertson , E. Rutter , G. B. Studd , C. M. Tebbut, Harcourt Turner, C. I. Thornton, G. F. Vernon, I. D. Walker, J. G. Walker, A. J. Webbe. T H Erecord of Middlesex cricket in 1887 was, on the whole, a gratifying one. O ften county matches , four were won, two lost , and four undecided . Theeleven shared with Lancashire the distinction of beating Surrey, and, on the whole, Middlesex cricketers had good reason to be satisfied with the all -round play of the team. In batting the county has always been very strong , and a glance at the averages will showwhata formidable array of batsmen Mr. A. J. Webbe hadat his disposal . At the same time most of the credit of the run-getting reflects on Mr. Webbe himself , and has never , during the twelve years he has played for Middlesex , been seen to better advantage . In Augustin particular his play wasof the very highest order , and, as will be seen , his average for the year is nearly double that of Mr. O'Brien , the next on the list . BurtonandMr. Robertson , too , bowled with no small success , and their figures were the more creditable considering that the wickets were generally in favour of the bat. In Mr. Nepean, of the Oxford eleven , Middlesex is fortunate enough to have a new player of no small promise , and we shall be surprised if he does not prove to be of great use to the county as an all -round cricketer . R e s u l t so f M a t c h e s. Matohes Played , 10 ; Won, 4 ; Drawn, 4 ; Lost , 2 . W h e n Club. Opnts. Where played . played . 1st 2nd 1st 2nd W o nb y Opponents. i n n. i n n. i n n. inn. MatchesW o n(4). *Yorkshire. *K e n t.. (1)Surrey *Gloucestershire MatchesD r a w n(4). *Gloucestershire *K e n t (2)Yorkshire. (3)Notts Lord's J u n e6 7 9 9*116 55 159 6 wkts; *4 w d Lord's O v a l ,, 202122 327 *8 98 236 9 wkts ; *1 w d ,,30Jul 2 339 *78 176 240 9wkts; *1 w d Clifton A u222324 212*240 257 194 1wkt; *9 w d R e m a r k s. Lord's Canterbury Aug4 5 6 412 وو وو 151 6171 7 9*41 596 June2 3 4172 *25 197 84 *4wickets down 2 4 13 6 4 Huddersfield 111213 130 527 181 *13 *2 Nottingham *2 ود ود و و ود MatchesLost(2). *Surrey Lord's Lostb y My262728 Lord's J u n e91 0 81 134 294 8 6176 268 inns. & 7 9 runs inns. & 6 runs ChiswickP k. 232425 119 207 555 inns. & 229runs ود *N o t t s E x t r aM a t c h. (4) Oxford University..... * Havebeen treated in previous reviews . (1) Middlesexv. Surrey. Oval, June 30, and July 1 and 2. The first of Surrey's two defeats of 1887 in inter -county matches . The play of the home team was disappointing in all respects , but on the other hand it must