James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Annual 1892

T H ECOUNTIES IN 1891. 4 9 (8) Gloucestershirev. Yorkshire. Sheffield , July 27 and 28. Messrs . Cranston and Townsend were away from Gloucestershire , but Dr. W .G. Grace was again available , though lame. Yorkshire gained too long a lead on the first day to makethem fear the result . Hall (60), Wainwright (68), and Lord Hawke (36) ( were principal contributors to their total . In Gloucester- shire's second innings Messrs . Pullen (86, a fine display ), Radcliffe (50 ), and Sainsbury (36) hit hard. Yorkshire won by ten wickets . Yorkshire , 283 and 31 (no wicket) ; total , 314. Gloucestershire , 91 and 221 ; total , 312. Wainwright (1st. innings ,Gloucestershire ) . . . . O v e r s. M a i d e n s. R u n s. 2 4 9- 4 7 (9) Gloucestershirev. N o t t s. Nottingham , July 30 and 31 . Wickets 7 O nthis occasion Gloucestershire accomplished a really fine performance , though they had all the best of the wicket , so much so, indeed , as to make the result almost a certainty . Painter headed the score with a finely -hit 101 ; Mr. Radcliffe scored 41; and there were several other valuable contributions . Painter deserves every credit for his fine batting . In this match Mr. W. G. Gracehad the misfortune to strain his back. O na treacherous ground Notts, who werewithout Shrewsbury , madea poor display each time, only Flowers (32 and 31) being seen to advantage twice . Gloucestershire wonby an innings and 122 runs . Notts, 78 and94 ; total , 172. Gloucestershire , 294. (10) Gloucestershirev. K e n t. Canterbury , August 3, 4, and 5. A gamecompletely spoilt by wretched weather. Gloucestershire was addi- tionally weakenedby the absence of Dr. W . G. Grace, whodid not feel suffi- ciently himself to play. So far as it went it was an even game, but there wasnot m u c huse in declaring the innings closed on the third day. The best cricket was playedby Messrs . Pullen (33 and 8) and Radcliffe (16 and 31) . Thegamewas drawn. Kent, 94 and 38 (one wicket ) ; total , 132. Gloucestershire , 110 and 101 (innings declared ) ; total , 211 . (11) Gloucestershirev. S u s s e x. Clifton , August 6 and 7. Alow-scoring match, owing to the soft state of the ground after the heavy rains . Nobody was able to get 40 runs , the chief scorers being Mr. Wilson (36 and1), Mr. C. A. Smith (6 and 31), and Mr. Brann (7 and 27) for Sussex ; and Dr. E. M. Grace (10 and 24), andRoberts (0 andnot out 22) for Gloucestershire . Mr. N e w h a mfailed to score either time for Sussex , who, however, wonby 55 Dr. W. G. Grace reappeared for Gloucester after being absent from two matches . Gloucestershire , 37 and 130 ; total , 167. Sussex , 91 and 131 ; total , r u n s . 2 2 2. Tate(Sussex ) O v e r s. 3 7 . 2 M a i d e n s. 1 4 (12) Gloucestershire v. Surrey. Clifton , August 10 and 11 . R u n s. Wickets. 6 1 1 2 A n yadvantage which the home team might have gained in getting first knock, wasminimized by the failures of their earlier batsmen . Except , indeed , 5