James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Annual 1893

T H ECOUNTIESIN 1892. 8 7 w o nby 112 runs . Lancashire , 55 and 206; total , 261. Sussex , 72 and 77 ; total, 149. Tate (1st innings Lancashire ). W a t s o n(Lancashire). M o l d ( " ).... O v e r s. M a i d e n s. R u n s. 2 3 . 3 1 1 2 1 W i c k e t s. 6 4 5 . 2 1 9 3 7 1 0 3 3 . 3 1 2 5 3 8 (2) Lancashirev. Yorkshire. Sheffield , June 6 and 7. Continuous rains just previous to the match had affected the wicket con- siderably , and the bowlers had so muchthe best of it, that the gamewas completed well within the second day. Lancashire had the good luck to win the toss , but failed to makeany great use of the opportunity , and, indeed , the endof the first dayleft Yorkshire with a lead of 41 runs on a completed innings . This advantage was chiefly due to the good all -round cricket of Peel , who, besides taking six wickets for 43, added a very useful score of 33. Thoughthe early part of Lancashire's second innings was suggestive of a better show, when Hirst , the fast bowler , came on at 44 he worked a greatgre change ,so much so that the last eight wickets only added 57 runs . Yorkshire had at the finish only 61 to get to win, but as the wicket was, even this was no easy task . Briggs and Watson, too, bowled with such success that whenthe sixth wicket fell the total was only 33. Tunnicliffe , the colt , whohad batted well in the first innings , and Wainwright, however, played with great confidence , as well as judgment, at the crisis , and the 30 still wanted were got while they were together . York- shire wonby four wickets . Yorkshire , 159 and 63 (six wickets ) ; total , 222 . Lancashire , 118 and 101 ; total , 219 . Peel(Yorkshire )... Briggs (Lancashire ). Overs. 5 1 6 3 M a i d e n s. 2 2 R u n s. 7 0 3 5 6 9 Wickets. 9 7 (3) L a n c a s h i r ev. N o t t s. Nottingham, June 16, 17, and 18 . A nexcellent performance by the Notts eleven , whowonby six wickets after a little the worst of the first innings . Raindid not admit of a commence- menttill after luncheon on the first day, and then Lancashire , with the advantage of an easy wicket , played out the afternoon with , as the result , a creditable total of 217. The chief feature was the resolute hitting of S. M. J. Crosfield , who knocked up 82 of the last 131 without a chance , and carried out his bat. Fortunately for Notts , the wicket dried more quickly than might have been expected , and mainly through a good stand by Gunnand Barnes, who put on 73 for the third wicket , were only 39 behind whenthe tenth wicket fell . The commencement of Lancashire's second innings was by no means promising , and with six wickets downfor 58, the gamepresented a better appearance for Notts . A son the first day, the Lancashire captain came to the relief of his side , and with some good hitting by Baker and A. T. Kemble, the last four wickets added 124 runs . With222 to win and a pitch just recovering from rain , Notts had a difficult task before them for the fourth innings . The young Cantab , A. Ο. Jones , and Shrewsbury, however, made a good start , scoring 75 for the first wicket . Gunn, Barnes , and Flowers , too , subsequently all played fine cricket , and ultimately Notts were left with a brilliant victory bysix wickets . The total of 222 was madein three hours and twenty minutes , an exceptionally good per- formance at the end of the match and on a drying wicket . Notts , 178 and 222 (four wickets ) ; total , 400. Lancashire , 217 and 182 ; total , 399 .