James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Annual 1890

4 2 LILLYWHITE'SCRICKETERS' A N N U A L. (4) M.C.C.a n dG r o u n dv. Notts. Lord's , M a y23 and 24 . Notts did not apparently deem it necessary to put its full strength into the field , and in addition to Mr. J. A. Dixon, the captain , and Arthur Shrewsbury, Shacklock , and Sherwin , Gunn and Richardson were all absent . The batting and bowling were both thus greatly weakened , and Mr. Beves , Mr. Wright , H. Robinson, T. Foster , Carlin , and Mee, who filled the six vacancies , hardly proved efficient substitutes . Notts made a bad start with six wickets down, but Barnes stayed the rot effectually , and Flowers and Mee lent him useful assistance , the latter helping to add 66 for the last wicket . Barnes carried out his bat for 90-morethanone-half of the total . H ewasbatting for three hours and ahalf , anduntil the latter part of his innings there was no fault of any kind. Scotton's defensive cricket was the feature of the County's second innings . First in, he was ninth out, having been at the wickets two hours and a quarter for his runs . M.C.C. had a far from easy task whenthey went in a second time with 157 to win. With George Hearne and Mr. Stanley Scott both out, too, for 36, their chances were considerably reduced . Frank Hearne (64) and Chatterton (not out 72), however , were in no waytroubled by the Notting- h a mbowling, and, thanks to their brilliant cricket , M.C.C. won with seven wickets to spare . M.C.C. and Ground, 106 and 157; total , 263. Notts . , 176 and 86 ; total , 262. (5) M . C . C .a n dG r o u n dv. K e n t. Lord's , June 6 and7. Thoughthere was only a difference of 26 runs, and that in favour of M.С.С. , on the first hands, Kent with the best of the luck had all the advantage of the latter part of the game, and w o n with plenty in hand. Though Gunn, Chatterton , Flowers , and Lord Hawkewere in the Marylebone eleven , it was not a strong combination at any point . Kenthada wicket easy after the rain onwhichto bat on the second day, and the brothers G. G. and F. Hearne and Mr. Marchant all scored well , contributing together 209 out of 284 from the bat. George Hearne (84 not out) and Mr. Marchant (72) were responsible for morethan one-half of the total , and in very different styles . Hearne,whowent in first wicket down, was credited with 84 out of 296 ; the amateur was only in two hours, andcontributed 72 out of 127 got while he wasin . Of 275 wanted to win, M.C.C. on the second night had secured 63 for the loss of two wickets . The ground on the third day favoured the bowlers materially , and the innings coilapsed towards the finish , the last seven batsmen only realizing 29 runs . In the second innings nine of the ten wickets fell to Walter Wright for an average of exactly eight runs. Kent w o nby 135 runs. Kent, 104 and 300 ; total , 404 . M.C.C. and Ground, 130 and139 ; total , 269 . (6) M.C.C.a n dG r o u n dv. OxfordUniversity. Oxford, June 6 and 7. Thelast of the homematches of the Oxford eleven , and, like its prede- cessors , with an unsatisfactory issue . Messrs . Rashleigh and Bassett were not able to play for Oxford, and Marylebone, with a fairly strong side , hadthe game well in handfrom the first . Lord George Scott's appearance strengthened the Oxford batting materially , and Mr. A. K. Watsonand he were responsible for morethan one-half of the runs from the bat in each innings . Messrs . Watson (89) and Croome (44) hit freely when Oxford went in again, and while the former was in 162 runs had been scored in an hour and three -quarters . Barnes was credited with 132 for once out on the side of M.C.C. He ought to have