James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Annual 1891

1 0 LILLYWHITE'SCRICKETERS' A N N U A L. years , and Messrs . Marchant, Key, Stoddart , andN e w h a mdid not score so well as in 1889. Amongthe professionals Barnes was the greatest disappointment . H enever shaped in anything like his old form, and his aggregate for 37 innings was only 409, a woful falling off for undoubtedly one of the mostdangerous batsmenof the day. Albert Ward, whohad madesuch a promising debût in 1889 for Lancashire , though on the whole he did well , failed to come up to the expecta- tions based on his earlier performances . Painter , Chatterton , George Hearne, Hall , Ulyett , and Maurice Read, of the older players , did well , and of the younger , Lockwood, Paul, and Alec Hearne, the last of w h o mis developing into a most useful batsmanof the " stonewaller " type, for Kentseemed the most promis- ing. Amongthe amateurs Cambridge has one of the mostlikely youngbatsmen in Mr. R. N. Douglas, Oxford another of only slightly less hopes in Mr. W. D. Llewelyn, a son of an enthusiastic old cricketer . In Messrs . L. A. Hamilton and A. Daffen Kentintroduced two young amateurs who bid fair , the former in par- ticular , to play an important part in the county cricket of the future . Amateur bowling has of late been a negligible quantity , and the professionals are generally of course seen to the greater advantage . A sthe wickets , too , were all against rungetting the figures are on the whole very good. Briggs , Attewell , Peel , and Lohmann, a quartette whohave shared the honours in a great measure during the last few years in point of head bowling, all upheld their reputations . The last -named, taking into account the fact that he delivered considerably more overs than any one, hadremarkable figures , and in fact on his form of last year he is beyond a doubt the best all -round cricketer of the day. Mold's fast bowling , thoughthe wickets generally werenot in his favour , wasvery successful . Themost noteworthy feature of the season , though, was the marked advance of Martin and Sharpe. Martin has for the last two or three years been steadily increasing his reputation as one of the very best left -handbowlers , and his consistent success last summer, particularly against the Australian team, the majority of w h o mdid not shape well against him at any time , stamps him as in quite the forefront of bowlers . Sharpe's attainment of a foremost position has really been the work of a couple of years . Against every kind of batting he was alike successful , andlast season raised himat a bound into a place amongthe best fast bowlers . In the more important county matches he took over a hundred wickets at an average cost of a trifle over twelve runs, and as this brought him into favourable comparison with Lohmann, no higher proof of his efficiency will be required . Woof, too, proved extraordinarily effective when he was able to join the Gloucestershire eleven at the end of July, and his bowling changed the entire course of that county's cricket . Amongthe amateurs Mr. Woods, the Cam- bridge captain , has the best of records , and Mr. Nepeandid such good service for Middlesex whenhe was able to play as to cause it more regret at his inability to help more frequently . Mr. E. C. Streatfeild's figures , too , are noteworthy . H ebids fair to develop into the best amateur bowler of the day. Thevisit of the Australian team has been dealt with specially , and there- T h e fore a hasty glance at the general result of the tour will suffice for m e. promoters hadfondly hoped whenthey originally set about the task of collecting the seventh team for England that they would be able to secure as strong a combination as anywhich had been seen in this country . Thepromises they had secured fully warranted such an expectation , it must be admitted , and had Mr. H. F. Boyle only received the active co-operation he was justified in count- ing on he would have brought a team thoroughly representative of Australian cricket . As it was, George Giffen , the best all -round cricketer in the Colonies , after promising to accompany the party , withdrew, and H. Moses and A. C. Ban- nermanwereboth unable to join . Evenwithout them, however, those whowere responsible for the arrangement of the tour were confident that those who did come would render a good account of themselves . Unfortunately , though , several of the newplayers of w h o mgreat things were expected failed to play up to their Australian reputations . HughTrumble had proved himself to be beyond adoubt the best bowlerin Victoria , andP. C. Charlton , of N e wSouth Wales, was considered to be one of the most promising all -round cricketers in the Colonies .