James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Annual 1892

CRICKETIN 1891. 7 cricket lost its attraction , and the public turned to other sources of amusement . Insome respects , too, those whohave been responsible for the administration of thecounty can hardly be held altogether blameless for the marked decline in the quality of Notts cricket of late . If you seek its monument, look around. Hardlya county of the front rank, with the one exception , perhaps , of York- shire , but has been able to utilize during the last quarter of a century the ser- vices of cricketers born in Notts. George Howitt was one of the mainstays of Middlesex bowling two decades ago . Lancashire , Surrey , Sussex , Kent, and Gloucestershire have all latterly seen good reason to avail themselves of the services of men qualified for Notts , by right of birth . Of course they have been strictly within their rights ; the law has provided a residential qualification whichhas permitted such adoption . But a little foresight would have consider- ably reduced the migration of likely cricketers to other counties , even if it had not the effect of completely checking it . A judicious encouragement instead of whatwas really discouragement could at least have had only one result , to inspire the young players with a feeling of confidence that they would have a fair trial , rather than , as was undoubtedly the case , of alienating the sympathy of the majority , at least , and forcing those whohad a natural belief in their own powersto seek engagementswith other counties wheretheywouldhavea better chance. Thoughlate in the day, it is , however, satisfactory to note that the Committee have at last been roused to the necessity of action to prevent the immigration of their young players into other counties . Whatthe result will be in the near future of course depends on the quality of the youngsters available at the present , which, from appearances , would hardly seem to be up to the best standard of Notts cricket . Still , the move is in the right direction , and time will prove its efficacy . Asit is , we are inclined to think that the Notts eleven were a better side than they looked on paper. Shrewsbury was altogether out of form in the earlier matches , and the moral effect of his ill -success on the whole team cannot , of course , be over-estimated . The difference was at once visible whenhis confidence was restored and his play cameback to him. In Shrews- buryandGunnNotts had the two best batsmen of the day, as their position at the head of the averages well show. With a trio like Barnes , Mr. Dixon, and Flowers, it can hardly be said that there is muchfault to be found with the batting of Notts . If the out-cricket had been of the same class , there would h a v eb e e nn ocausefor fear as to the result. B u tit is the out-cricketw h i c h has of late been defective . In Attewell the county has a bowler with hardly a superior . But he is , after all , in a class by himself . After him there is ahuge gulf, and though Barnes , Flowers , and Shacklock are any and all of them effective on their day, the day does not come so frequently as could be wished. Strangely enough , the bowling , which has in the past been the chief source of strength for Notts , is now its weakpoint . It was in the out -cricket that Notts wasseen to disadvantage in 1891. It is indeed a strange commentary on the policy of late years that a county which in the past has sent out year by year native players to all parts of the kingdom should nowapparently have little or no reserve of any value . Yet the fact is beyond dispute . Else how account for the resurrection of a veteran like Richard Daft, whohad not taken part in a county matchfor twenty years ? O ntheir form of 1890 there was every reason to believe that the Kenteleven w uldbe high up amongthe leaders of county cricket last summer. Andthough theywereby no means successful , we venture to think that they were a much better side than their record would seem to indicate . Thestars in their very courses fought against them ! Until the end of the season ,Kentis not able to putanything like its best team into the field . Butcricket in August was at the best amockery. Thecontinuous rain upset every reasonable calculation . The rain , it could be truly said , it raineth every day. Of the eight matches in which Kenttook part inAugustnone, or hardly one, was played out without the interference of rain . Whatluck there was, too , was certainly more against than for them. Undersuch circumstances it was hardly surprising that the team seemed to lose heart ; at all events in the later matches the batting was comparatively tame and lacking in