James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Annual 1890

T H ECOUNTIESIN 1889. 6 1 cricket . The Kent eleven had, in fact , good reason to congratulate themselves on the good showthey madethroughout the summer. Dependent as the county is, in some measure , on amateurs , there is not quite the same cohesion , and the inability to place the same teams into the field , as is the case with Notts , Lanca- shire , and Surrey , places it at a disadvantage by comparison with those powerful rivals . Still in full force , Kent has an all -round eleven considerably above the average, and its cricket furnished on the whole a very satisfactory result . Lancashire was able to win both matches, and Surrey also claimed a double victory. One defeat byNotts though was its only other reverse , while against these failures were to be placed a success , both out and home, against Yorkshire , and three other wins against Notts , Middlesex , and Gloucestershire . Political duties limited Lord Harris's appearances to a few of the later fixtures , and it wasa great disappointment that Mr. Leslie Wilson, who played twosuch fine innings against Notts at Nottingham , was only able to play very rarely . Mr. Marchant , though , rendered loyal assistance , and, while his hitting on some occasions wasso brilliant as to turn the whole course of the game, his batting very seldom failed to be of use to the side . Mr. W. H. Patterson's defensive style formed a great contrast , but it was equally effective , and in the August matches his steady and painstaking cricket wasat times invaluable . In bowling, Wrightand Martin both had excellent figures , and on certain wickets they were as dangerous a pair as could well be found. Alec Hearnedid not appear to be as puzzling as in former years , and an accident to Mr. Stanley Christopherson early in the season , prevented any chance of his again supplying a want in the Kenteleven , of a reliable fast bowler. Resultsof M a t c h e s. Matches Played, 13 ; Won, 7 ; Drawn, 1 ; Lost , 5. . Opponents. MatchesW o n(7). (2) Sussex (3) Yorkshire. (6) Middlesex (7) Yorkshire (8) Sussex *Gloucestershire (11) Nottingham MatchD r a w n(1). *Gloucestershire MatchesLost(5). (1) Lancashire (4) Nottingham (5) Surrey (9) Lancashire (1 0) Surrey..... E x t r aM a t c h. *M . C . C. a n dG r o u n d W h e n Where played . played . Club. Opnts. 1st 2 n d1st 2 n d i n n. i n n. i n n. i n n. W o nb y J y8, 9, 10 410 143 172 inns. & 95 runs G r a v e s e n d M a i d s t o n e Canterbury Sheffield Brighton C l i f t o n B e c k e n h a m Canterbury " 1 51 61 7 239 Aug. 5,6, 7 256 ,, 262728 295 *61 ود ود 278 9 wkts; *1 wd 4 wkts; *6 w d R e m a r k s. 71 62 inns. & 106 runs 9 0 111 inns. & 55runs 1 2, 13 121 102 47 94 82 runs 1 5, 1 6 258 9 7 123 inns. & 3 8 runs " 77 29,30 118 *53 134 35 8,9,10 353 *71 217 214 *14 *68 Manchester June13,14 84 123 197 Nottingham July 18, 19 140 119 302 Blackheath Aug.1, 2, 3 164 155 252 M a i d s t o n e ,, 192021 128 52 215 O v a l Lord's ود 22,23 48 53 92 *11 June6,7,8 104 300 130 139 * Treatedinreviewsof M.C.C.a n dGloucestershire. *4 w d Lostb y 9 wkts; *1 w d inns. & 4 3 r u n s 7 wkts; *3 w d inns. & 3 5 runs 10wkts ; *n o w d W o nby 135runs N oplay took place in the first fixture with Middlesex , fixed for June 10, 11, and 12, owing t orain. (1) K e n tv. Lancashire. Manchester , June 13 and 14. Mr. A. G. Steel was able to play , a noteworthy incident in Lancashire cricket , considering that his last appearance for the county was against Surrey