James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Annual 1890

5 6 LILLYWHITE'SCRICKETERS' ANNUAL. whohad87 to win, only pulled through after having apparently all the worst of the game. Seven of the best batsmen were out with the total at 57, but Messrs . E. M. Grace andCroome, bygreat judgment, without losing a chance of scoring , got the 28 still wanted, and Gloucestershire w o na most exciting match with three wickets to spare . Roberts and Woofcontributed in no small degree to the success of their side . Roberts ' eight wickets cost 65 ; Woof's nine , 91 runs . Pilling caught three of the seven batsmenout in Gloucestershire's second innings at the wicket. Gloucestershire , 89 and87 (seven wickets ) ; total , 176. Lancashire , 73 and 102 ; total , 175. (6) Gloucestershirev. Y o r k s h i r e. Bradford, July 29, 30, and 31 . Yorkshire's first victory of the season's important matches. The wicket at the outset was slow from recent rains , and the run -getting , though fairly good was not up to the average of the Bradford ground, the pitch assisting the bowlers to some extent throughout . The Yorkshiremen were able to get a lead of thirteen runs on the first hands, and Peel's 63 for them proved to be the highest score of the match. Messrs . Cranston (51) and Brain (50) had been the chief contributors in Gloucestershire's first innings , but Mr. W .G. Grace's 52 wasthe only score of any great value in the second, and it took him two hours and twentyminutes . At the finish Yorkshire wanted 126 to win, and thanks to the defensive cricket of Hall (42 not out), whoscored 76 in the match, the runs weregot for the loss of half the wickets . Driver, of Keighley, kept wicket for Yorkshire in this matchfor the first time. Yorkshire , 213 and128 (five wickets ) ; total , 341. Gloucestershire , 200 and138 ; total , 338. (7) Gloucestershirev . Notts. Nottingham , August 1 and 2. ThoughGloucestershire not only had its full strength , but in addition had the advantage of first innings , the result of the gamewas hardly ever in doubt. Attewell's bowling at the outset proved too muchfor the majority of the eleven , and Messrs . Cranston (28) and Pullen (24) were the only batsmen able to get over twenty runs . On the other hand, though Scotton was absent , and Gunn, owing to indisposition , was not able to go in as early as usual , the Gloucester- shire bowling did not seem to trouble the hometeam at all . Acolt , J. Butler (56), and Shrewsbury (47) put on 90 for the first wicket , and the former's innings was one of great promise . Later on, Gunn(61), Flowers (56), and Attewell all scored freely , and whenthe tenth wicket fell , Notts were 227 to the good . Gloucestershire's position , when they went in a second time , was almost hopeless , but it was madeworse by rain , which helped the Nottinghambowlers considerably , and the only stand was by Messrs . Page and Townsendon the fall of the seventh wicket. Sherwin caught Mr. W . G. Grace at each innings , and in all got eight batsmen at the wicket-five caught and three stumped. Notts w o nby an innings and 136 runs . Notts , 342. Gloucestershire , 115 and 91 ; total , 206. Attewell (Notts) O v e r s. 5 8 M a i d e n s. R u n s. W i c k e t s. 2 2 9 5 9 (8) Gloucestershirev. Sussex. Bristol , August 5 and 6. Sussex , though they had the advantage of first innings , failed to make any real use of it, and their show was singularly disappointing . Rain prevented a