James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Annual 1890

5 4 LILLYWHITE'SCRICKETERS' ANNUAL. wantof Woof's bowling was severely felt in Surrey's second innings . The first day's play was all in favour of Gloucestershire who, when stumps were drawn, hadscored 160 with only two batsmen, against a total of 210. The auspicious aspect of the game at that time was due to Messrs . W. G. Grace (94) and Cranston (55) who punished the Surrey bowlers severely , adding 126 runs for the second wicket in anhour and forty minutes . Unfortunately for Gloucestershire , however, heavy rain on the first night caused the wicket on the following morningto help the bowlers , and Lohmannand Sharpe turned their opportunities to such account that the last eight wickets only added 46. Though Surrey again beganbadly in losing Mr. Shuter, Read, and Abel; Mr. Key, Henderson and Lohmannall scored freely , and Mr. Shuter was encouraged to declare the innings at anend-the first employmentof the newrule in an important fixture - o nthe fall of the seventh wicket at 338, leaving Henderson to take out his bat for anextremely well -played 63. Gloucestershire going in a second time had only the chance of a drawto look for as they wanted343 to winwith only three hours andten minutes left for play. Mr. Grace hadmade34 of the first 5l when heplayed one of Lohmann'sinto his wicket . His dismissal practically decided the issue as the tail again madea poor show, and the last five wickets only added twenty. Messrs . H. W. Chard, of the Bristol Schoolmaster's Club , and Murch, thegroundm a nat the CountyGround, Bristol , madetheir first appearance for Gloucestershire in this match. I nWood'sabsence Mr. R. B. Brookswasintro- ducedinto the Surrey eleven for the first time and with satisfactory results , his wicket-keeping being decidedly above the average . Surrey wonby250 runs . Surrey, 210 and 338 (seven wickets ) ; total , 548. Gloucestershire , 206 and 92 ; total , 298. Overs. Lohmann(2nd inns. Gloucestershire ) .... 22.3 M a i d e n s. R u n s. 9 (2) Gloucestershirev. Sussex. Brighton , June 10, 11 , and 12 . 3 4 W i c k e t s. 7 Thoughwith only a weakside , and withal muchthe worst of the early part of the game, the Gloucestershire Eleven played up so pluckily , that the gamewas drawnall in their favour . Messrs . W. G. Grace (70) and Radcliffe (24) madean excellent stand against the Sussex bowling, and the first wicket realized 78 runs . Except Messrs . Cranston and Painter , however, none of the others did anything , andthe last six batsmen were only responsible for five runs betweenthem. The first innings of Sussex was almost as uneven. O f267 runs from the bat the colt Major (106 ) and Bean (59 ) contributed as many as 165 . Major, though he was lucky in placing the ball , gave no actual chance till his score was 106, andhis innings , of four hours and ahalf , was an exceptionally fine performance for a young player in his first year of county cricket . Though82 behind on the first hands, Gloucestershire made a good show in the second innings , andMr. Grace determined to put Sussex in whenthe total had reached 368 for nine wickets . Of this sumMessrs . Cranston (130) andJ. H. Brain (73) hadmademorethan one half, and while they were partners 178 runs were added. H a dthe Gloucestershire captain closed his innings earlier , it is quite possible he might have w o nthe match for his side . As it was, Sussex, who wanted283 to win, although they lost Quaife and Majorwithout a run, kept up their wickets for the remaining period of two hours and three quarters , and saved the game, having three wickets left , and 150 still to win. Gloucestershire , 192 and 368 (nine wickets ) ; total , 560. Sussex , 278 and 133 (seven wickets ) ; total , 411 . (3) Gloucestershirev. Yorkshire. Gloucester , June 27, 28, and 29 . Mr. Radcliffe and Woofwere absent from the Gloucestershire eleven , but Messrs . Townsend , Pullen , and Page , as well as Mr. Hale of Cambridge , were at