James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Annual 1889

T H ECOUNTIESIN 1888. 7 9 batting altogether was hardly perhaps so strong as in some previous years , but the out-cricket was decidedly good, and the strength of the bowling can be proved by the fact that Wootton , quite in the front rank of slow bowlers , was left out more than once . InMartin , Alec Hearne , and Walter Wright , who played for Kent for the first time in 1888, Kent had three of the most dangerous bowlers of any county eleven last year, and their figures were all very good. Another fortunate addition to the eleven , too , wasthat of Mr. C. J. M. Fox, a heavy scorer with the Crystal Palace Club during the last two or three years . H e rarely failed to get runs against every kind of bowling, and proved himself to be one of the safest , as well as most consistent , batsmen in county cricket last summer. R e s u l t sof M a t c h e s. Matches Played , 14 ; Won, 7 ; Drawn, 2 ; Lost, 5. Club. Opnts. W h e n Opponents. Where played . played . 1st 2nd 1st 2nd W o nb y i n n. i n n. i n n. i n n. MatchesW o n(7) . (1) Lancashire *Middlesex . (3) Notts... (5) Sussex (8) Sussex (9) Lancashire (1 0) Middlesex (4) Yorkshire. (7)Notts... *Gloucestershire (2) Surrey... *Gloucestershire (6) Surrey (1 1) Yorkshire ExtraMatches(2). *M . C . C. a n dG r o u n d (12)Australians Manchester M y212223 169 116 123 129 33 runs Lord's " 31Jn1 271 *55 97 226 7 wkts ; *3 w d Nottingham Jn25 2627 283 *32 201 112 6wkts ; *4w d Brighton July5,6,7 146*109 107 146 5 wkts; *5 wd Tonbridge Aug.2, 3 103 *45 51 96 1 wkt; *9 wd Canterbury 9,10210 *23 98 135 9 wkts; *1 w d G r a v e s e n d ود ود 20,21 203 9 8 6 4 inns. & 4 1 r u n s MatchesD r a w n(2). R e m a r k s. Huddersfield J n282930 107 200 195 *31 *2 w d Maidstone Jy262728 159 *82 193 91 *6wd MatchesLost (5). Lostb y Blackheath M y242526 150 158 149 234 75 runs O v a l June11,12 67 107 145 *32 8 wkts; *2 w d Mreton-in-M h. Jy 192021 28 52 124 inns. & 4 4 r u n s B e c k e n h a m . . . وو 23, 24 85 53 142 85 89 runs M a i d s t o n e Aug.23,24 120 96 192 75 51 runs Lostby Lord's 5 wkts ; *5 w d M y141516 61 193 82 *173 Canterbury Aug. 6,7,8 107 80 116 152 81 runs * Seereviews of M.C.C. andGloucestershire . (1) K e n tv. Lancashire. Manchester , M a y 21, 22, and 23. Thoughwell represented , neither side had their full strength for this match. Kent, going in first , commenced creditably , thanks to an excellent 60 from Mr. Tonge. W h e nhe left the score was 142 for five wickets , but Briggs and Barlowwere too good for the rest , disposing of the remaining half of the side for an additional 27 runs . N oone but Briggs could makeheadwayagainst Walter Wrightand WoottonwhenLancashire went in, and the tenth wicket fell at 123 , of which Briggs accounted for 55 (not out). Kent, who had a useful majority of 46 runs, were even less successful in their second innings , being out for 116, of which Mr. Marchant's share was 30. Mr. Hornby and Barlow, as usual , started to wipe off the 163 runs required to win, and so well did they play, that at the close of the second day they hadput on 74, and were both not out . The next morning , though , saw a startling change , andWright and Martin , carrying all before them, disposed of the ten batsmen for an addition of but 56 runs, Kent thus gaining a most creditable victory by 33 runs . Kent, 169 and 116 ; total , 285. Lancashire , 123 and 129 ; total , 252 .