James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Annual 1888

T H EUNIVERSITIESA N DPUBLICSCHOOLSIN 1887. 1 3 1 Opponents. Resultsof M a t c h e s. Continued . W h e n C l u b. Opnts. Where played . played . 1st 2nd 1st 2nd i n n. i n n. i n n. i n n. W o nb y MatchesW o n(9). TonbridgeSchool Brighton July 9 O l dBrightonians Brighton " 26, 27 7 27 4 93 1 9 3 28 78 40 runs 95 126 65 runs MatchesD r a w n(2). R e m a r k s . BrightonClub CrystalPalace County G d. June13,14 Brighton 2 3 502 *1 3 4 1 8 4 *9 7 2 8 7 *3 wktsd o w n ود MatchesLost(2). BrightonClub Brighton M a y28 1 3 0*33 155 45 M . C . C .a n dG r o u n d Brighton J u n e9 1 0 7 *7 wktsd o w n Lostb y 25 runs; *3 w d 125*130 18 runs; *2 w d B A T T I N GA V E R A G E S . T i m e s M o s tin I n n s. n o to u t. R u n s. a nI n n s. Average. G .L.W i l s o n 1 6 0 8 6 5 1 5 2 54.5 N .C. Cooper 1 8 1 3 3 5 1 5 4 19.7 H .D. L.W o o d s 1 8 2 1 7 9 3 3 11.2 T. A. C h a l m e r s 1 7 4 1 0 4 *3 5 8 C.N .B a r t o n 1 6 4 2 4 2 *6 9 2 2 F .WA s t e 1 5 3 1 4 7 3 5 1 0 . 3 E. L. Copleston. 1 8 1 2 9 8 7 9 17.5 W .E .B o n d 1 7 3 8 5 3 1 6.7 C .R .F o r t 1 5 2 1 1 3 2 4 8 . 7 L.G a y.. 1 4 1 1 0 6 1 4 8.15 G .E. Bulmer. 9 0 4 4 1 4 4 . 9 B O W L I N G A V E R A G E S . Overs. M a i d e n s. R u n s. Wickets. Average. T. A. C h a l m e r s G .L.W i l s o n H .D. L. W o o d s F. W .A s t e E. L. Copleston C. N .B a r t o n 3 2 2 1 0 0 7 3 7 6 8 10.7 3 9 8 1 1 6 8 5 5 7 0 12.21 1 1 2 3 1 2 3 5 1 6 1 4 . 6 8 7 2 2 3 1 6 0 9 17.7 2 1 6 5 4 2 2 7 1 3 1 4 7 1 4 7 BRIGHTONELEVENIN 1887 .-*G. L. Wilson : Still a rattling hard-hitter , especially to the off , but played a steadier gamethan last year, and muchim- proved his defence ; proved himself indispensable as a bowler, and fielded bril- liantly . N. C. Cooper : Only came off on two occasions , seeming to have lost his nerve after his splendid innings v. Brighton Club; atoned somewhat for his failure in batting bygood fielding . H. D. L. Woods : Fielded brilliantly , and was useful as a fast change bowler ; his batting still owes more to luck than to science . *C. N. Barton : Showedsteady improvement in batting , andplayed at least one fine innings ; has learnt to cut well ; as a change bowler was a failure , andwas not always to be depended uponin the field . T. A. Chalmers : Per- sisted in batting in a style of his own, though it was not justified by success ; in bowling, however, improved both pace and pitch , and went far to fill up the gap caused by S. M. J. Woods' departure . *F. W. Aste : Bats left -hand, showed greatly increased powerin hitting , butfailed to acquire a really straight defence ; his fielding showed an amazing improvement, and was consistently fine ; his slow bowling was useful on more than one occasion . E. L. Copleston : Batted in excellent style , though without muchpower, and proved a great addition to the eleven ; a fair change bowler ; somewhatslow in the field . *W. E. Bond: W a s disappointing as a bat , but fielded smartly . L. H. Gay: Batted in a fine and dashing style , but showed little defence ; is a fairly sure , though not brilliant , wicket -keep. C. R. Fort : Showedwantof nerve in batting , and though he has amosttaking style , never got well set ; is a fair field . *G. E. Bulmer: Afluky bat, with a great deal too muchflourish , but a smart field .