James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Annual 1890

7 0 L I L L Y W H I T E ' SCRICKETERS' A N N U A L. at a great disadvantage . Mr. Hornby, winning the toss , made41 of the first 5 1 runs scored , and Ward(50), F. Sugg (69), and A. Ward(49), lent him such useful help that whenthe innings was over the total was 284, of which the last six wickets had contributed 56. Theground had already begunto wear, and Surrey hada very up-hill task before them on the second day. Theyproved, too, quite unequal to the effort , and, with the exception of Abel (15 and 38), and Mr. Shuter (15 and 37), the batting failed altogether against the bowling of Watson andMold. W o o dcaught four Lancashire batsmenat the wicket . Neither Barlow nor Mr. Eccles were able , we mayadd, to play for Lancashire . Lancashire w o n byaninnings and48 runs . Lancashire , 284. Surrey , 113 and 123 ; total , 236. (5) L a n c a s h i r ev. Y o r k s h i r e. Huddersfield , July 18 and 19. Oneof the most exciting finishes of the season . Rainhad affected the ground considerably , and the wicket from this cause played so false that the batsmen generally were unable to show to advantage . Ulyett's fast bowling proved very successful at the outset ; and though Yorkshire lost the toss , they did very well to secure the dismissal of their opponents for 81. Against this total the York- shiremen , thanks to the fine cricket of Lee (42), and the vigorous hitting of LordHawke(52 not out), whowas missed whenhe madefour, andin the face of the effective fast bowling of Mold, were able to place an aggregate of 160, so that Lancashire began their second innings 79 runs in arrear . So badly, too, did theycommence, that four of the best batsmen were out for only 22, and it looked as if Yorkshire would have an easy win. Fortunately for them, however, Briggs , w h oknocked up41 out of 62 while he was in, Frank Ward, Baker andthe tail generally , played up with great pluck , and as the last six wickets added 131 , the gametook a turn in favour of Lancashire . Yorkshire , wanting 75 to win, made even aworse stand than Lancashire , and the total was only nine whenthe fourth wicket fell . A stand by Peel (18) and Wainwright (27), however, gave them another chance , and if Peel had not unfortunately slipped downand been run out would in all probability have won. As it was, the match ended in a brilliant victory for Lancashire by three runs . Lancashire 81 and 153 ; total , 234. York shire , 160 and71; total , 231 . M o l d(Lancashire) Ulyett (Yorkshire ) O v e r s. 6 0 . 4 Maidens. 3 0 R u n s. Wickets. . . . 44.2 1 8 1 1 1 1 0 2 1 3 1 2 (6) Lancashirev. Yorkshire. Manchester , August 1 and 2. TheYorkshire eleven were seen to less advantage in the return than in the first match of the season , and Lancashire had the best of the gameat all points . This time Lord Hawkewonthe toss , but Hall (38 and 48) was the only one of the team who offered any real resistance in each innings , and the batting altogether was very disappointing ; though rain , just as the last Lancashire wicket fell , prejudiced their chances considerably when they went in a second time. Mr. Hornbywas in his best vein for hitting , and, though let off at the wicketwhenhehadgot 23, his innings of 78 wasawelcomerevival of his old form. O nthe first night Lancashire had made 151 for the loss of only two batsmen , but on the following morning there was a collapse , and the later batsmen only added 64. The commencement of the second innings of Yorkshire was delayed b yrain, but, as before stated , Hall alone madeany long stay against Briggs and Mold, and Lancashire , in the end , had only 42 to get to win, and Mr. Eccles (32), and Barlow (11), obtained them without trouble . Lancashire won by ten