James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Annual 1891

1 4 LILLYWHITE'SCRICKETERS' A N N U A L. or a Wilson there every summer, but the lustre of the famous trio of Brigh- tonians of a short time back still lends m u c hinterest to their immediate successors . Consequently we regret to have to pronounce a somewhat un- favourable verdict upontheir performances in 1890. It is true that they w o n their two school matches easily ,but the whole record showed only three victories as against six defeats . The reason is not far to seek , and it is a reason which, though often repeated , is never insufficient their fielding was bad. Thecaptain didnot attach sufficient importance to this branch of the game, and the result was, as it always must be, disastrous . W ehope that Picton will , next year, gives us no necessity to reiterate this complaint . The best individual players onthe side were Picton , Jupp, and Collins . The first -nameddefends his wicket well andplayed manyuseful innings . Jupphas yet to learn the art of standing still at the wickets , but he averaged 15, which is not bad for a batsman of the peripatetic school . In bowling he is easily first with 49 wickets for 16 runs apiece . Collins comes second of the batsmen with an average of 20. He is a capital player , but lacks power. Their best performance , perhaps , was in beat- ing a very strong lot of the Eastbourne Club , and in estimating their results as awhole, it must be admitted that they lost , as a rule , to powerful opponents . TheSouth Saxons, M.C.C. and Ground, Kensington Park, Crystal Palace , and Oxford University Authentics are clubs before which it is no disgrace for boys to go down. Still , accepting this as some palliation , it must be repeated that their worstenemieswerethemselves as fieldsmen. Charterhouse have a very moderate record indeed , but it m a yfairly be urged in their case that nervousness mayhave had something to do with this result , seeing that there were no fewer than ten newhands in the team. The batting averages rule low, Smith, the captain , coming first with 19. Amongthe bowlers Greenhill is pre-eminent with 42 wickets for 13 runs apiece . It was certainly a great disappointment , though possibly they felt it less than the Wellington boys, that the annual matchbetween these two schools did not come off. In connection with Charterhouse cricket , it m a ynot be out of place to notice the gratifying wayin which Streatfeild , their captain of 1888 , has ful- filled the promise of his early career as a cricketer . Theopinion which was given of him in these columns has been amply borne out during the past s e a s o n . Cheltenham had to contend with a difficulty which has afflicted other amateur teams before now. There was no bowling of any class to be found; whatthere wasproved to be all of one kind-right -hand medium. No slows of anysort transpired , and no search could discover that useful phenomenonthe left -hander. Quinton wasthe best , fastish right with somebreak fromleg, and putting in a good slow ball , but at present he is scarcely to be relied upon, although he came off nowand then. For instance , in the Marlborough match he established a panic , and got 8 wickets for 7 runs in the first innings ,but in the second innings he was collared . Of the rest , perhaps Nelson wasthe best. A m o n gthe batsmen Thesiger , although tame at first , is muchthe best player whenwell in. Brooke has a good eye and makesclean hits , but he is rawin style at present , andweakon "that off ball " which is, alas ! so often thebeginning of the end. Harrington and Campbell are good, steady batsmen, andAustenshoweda good deal of improvement. A younger scion of the race of Champainbids fair to follow in the footsteps of his brother . The eleven werevery fortunate in possessing a good wicket-keeper in Macpherson, who is m u c habove the average . The fielding wasvery fair , and the bowling was the only weakpoint of the side . Veryfavourable reports reach us from Clifton , where the school was stronger at cricket than it hasbeen for some time past. Considering whata nursery of well-knownplayers Clifton has been, this is high praise . Muchwasdueto the markedevenness of the batting . Ten of them a criticism which is somewhat invidious to the eleventh -were likely to get runs, and several were really dangerous , while all of them, without any exception , were likely to field well . The catching in particular was exceptionally safe . Of bowlers there were