James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Annual 1890

T H EM A R Y L E B O N EC L U BIN 1889. 4 1 (1) M.C.C.a n dG r o u n dv. Lancashire. Lord's, M a y9 and 10. Rain, which had interfered with the game more or less throughout , brought it to a premature close early on the third afternoon -a fortunate ending for M.C.C., who at the finish wanted150 to win with only four wickets to fall , andhadno possible chance of winning as the ground was. Though going in first Lancashire had all the best of the game, their performance with the bat wasvery creditable , resulting in, under the circumstances , excellent scores of 189 and 134. The chief honours , too , rested with two newmen, both making their first appearance for the County, A. Wardand A. Paul. The former , w h oplayed once or twice for Yorkshire in 1886 , represented Lancashire under the residential qualification , and with remarkable success . He scored 95 in the matchfor once out, and his two innings of 33 and 62 not out, were of the greater merit , as the ground was not at all in favour of run-getting . His sound cricket on this occasion , and against such bowlers as Attewell , Hulme, Barnes , Mr. Nepean, Chatterton , and Davidson, gave promise that he would be of great useto the County, which was fully confirmed by his consistent scoring through- out the season . Barnes was the highest scorer in M.C.C.'s first innings . H e w a sin two hours and a half for his 42. T h e matchwasdrawn. M.C.C.and Ground, 131 and 43 (six wickets ) ; total , 174. Lancashire , 189 and 134 ; total , 3 2 3. Watson(2nd innings M.C.C. ) O v e r s. 2 1 . . . . . . M a i d e n s. 1 1 (2) M . C . C .a n dG r o u n dv. S u s s e x. Lord's , M a y16 and 17. R u n s. 1 6 W i c k e t s. 5 Lord's was at its worst under the influence of recent rains , andthe game only extended slightly into the second morning. The bowlers had things altogether their own way, and only an aggregate of 287 runs was recorded for 33 wickets . O n the first day 31 wickets fell for 252, but Jesse Hide and Majorhit with such freedom on the following day, that less than half an hour wasrequired to finish the game. M.C.C. wasweak in batting , and there were onlytwo innings of twenty or more in the match, and those by the not-outs at the finish , Major (26) and Jesse Hide (20). Bean, whowas not able to play at all in 1888 , reappeared in the Sussex eleven , and with success , as the figures below will show. Mr. W. G. Grace's bowling , too , was very effective . Sussex w o nb yseven wickets . Sussex , 72 and 72 (three wickets ) ; total , 144 . andGround, 59 and 84 ; total , 143 . B e a n(Sussex) Mr. W. G. Grace (1st innings , Sussex ) М.С.С. O v e r s. 45.3 2 3 Maidens, 1 7 6 R u n s. 6 7 3 7 W i c k e t s. 1 3 8 . . . . (3) M.C.C. and Groundv. CambridgeUniversity. Cambridge , M a y20 and 21 . M.C.C. was represented by quite a second -rate eleven , and there was really only one first -class bat (G. G. Hearne), and but one bowler in the front rank, Martin ,to wit . Of batting in particular there was a great lack , and the University bowlers had no difficulty in overcoming such slight resistance as their opponents could offer . Mr. C. W. Wright (39) and Hearne(32) were the only batsmen able to reach double figures in the first innings , and in the second six of the eleven between them could only claim four runs . Mr. De Little's fast bowling for Cambridge was quite the feature of the match. In twenty-nine overs he got eleven wickets at a cost of 52 runs . Cambridge wonby an innings and 10 runs . Cambridge, 175. M.C.C. and Ground, 104 and61; total , 165.