James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Annual 1891

9 2 LILLYWHITE'SCRICKETERS' A N N U A L. Barnes and Scotton were replaced by Messrs . C. W. Wright and H. B. Daft . Theheavy ground rendered run -getting extremely difficult , and it took Lanca- shire three hoursanda half onthe first afternoon to score 118. Barlowwasat the wickets three hours for nineteen . W h e nNotts went in Briggs was in particularly fine form with the ball , and it was chiefly owing to his efforts that they weredismissed for the poor total of 83. Mr. Daft andAttewell , whoeach made 23 , alone played good cricket . The unwearying patience of Barlow (29 not out) wasagain the feature of Lancashire's batting , and after luncheon on the third afternoon Mr. Hornbydeclared the innings closed , nine wickets having fallen . There was at first every chance that the gamewould be drawn, as Mr. Dixonand Shrewsbury took an hour to score 36. WhenMold came on to bowl , though, he proved irresistible , and Lancashire was left victorious , only half an hour before time, by 68 runs . O fthe two great Nottingham batsmen, Gunn wasclean bowled each time without scoring , and Shrewsbury scored but 23 runs in the match. Lancashire , 118 and 120 ; total , 238. Notts , 83 and 87 ; total , 1 7 0. Briggs (Lancashire ) Mold(2nd innings , Notts ) O v e r s. 8 0 2 3 M a i d e n s. 4 9 R u n s. 8 5 1 0 2 4 Wickets. 1 2 6 (10) L a n c a s h i r ev. Australians. Manchester , M a y29 and 30. Theexcellent show made by the Australians was the more creditable , as Murdoch had to keep wicket in the enforced absence of Blackham . The Australians wonthe choice of innings , but despite some free cricket by Lyons (34), the total wasonly 72 whenthe fifth wicket fell . Fromthis point , however, the bowling was collared . Trott (61), Gregory (not out 59), Turner (48), Burn (35), Ferris (35), and Trumble (31) all played sterling cricket in their respective styles , with the result that a good total of 316 was attained . On the first night , the county had got 52 for two wickets . A heavy fall of rain , however, was prejudicial to their chances ; indeed , the ground proved so treacherous that Turner and Ferris dismissed the eight remaining batsmen for 26 runs ! Following on, the hometeam fared no better , Briggs' 30 being the highest contribution in either innings . Turner's bowling wasagreat factor in the decisive success of the Colonial team. The Australians w o nby an innings and 155 runs. Austra- lians , 316. Lancashire , 78 and 83 ; total , 161 . Turner(Australians ) Trumble(2nd innings Lancashire ) O v e r s. 2 7 . 3 9 9 4 M a i d e n s. R u n s. 6 3 1 3 Wickets . 1 1 4 (11) Lancashirev. OxfordUniversity(12 a side ) . Oxford, June 2 and 3. Amost creditable win for the Dark Blues , the more so as they were without their best bowler , Mr. G. F. Berkeley . The Lancastrians could only get 138 at their first attempt, and of these Mr. Hornbyand Pauleach subscribed 34. For the University , Messrs . Schwann (70), Palairet (45), and Llewellyn (37) headed the score , though there were several other useful contributors . Mr. Schwann's wasanunusually promising display of batting , and it was unfortunate that the old Cliftonian should be run out after making 70. Mr. Smith again bowledfinely whenLancashire went in for its second " hands," and this time Suggwas top scorer with a well -got 36. They just managed too to put Oxford in again , so that the University wonby ten wickets . Their success was the more noteworthy , as this was their first win since defeating Surrey at the Oval in 1887 . Oxford University , 274 and 8 (no wicket ) ; total , 282. Lancashire , 138 and 142 ; total , 280. Smith (Oxford )....... O v e r s. 46.4 M a i d e n s. 9 R u n s. 1 4 6 Wickets. 1 8