James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Annual 1893

2 LILLYWHITE'SCRICKETERS' A N N U A L. C H A P T E R II. C R I C K E TIN 1 8 9 2. B YI N C O G. SURREY'S defeat by Notts on Whit Monday, followed by a long series of victories to the latter , seemed to forecast the premiership of county cricket as a fairly goodthing for Notts . A similar victory in the return at the Oval seemed to place Surrey quite out of the running for the first position , and, indeed , prepara- tions weremadein anticipation to celebrate the triumph of the Notts eleven in a becoming manner. But the prophets were reckoning without their hosts . Thehosts in this case were represented on the one hand by the proverbial un- certainty of the game, on the other by the excellent all -round cricket of the Surrey eleven . Evenup to that time the Surrey menhad only gone downbefore onecounty, andthat county Notts . Their subsequent show was of a still more brilliant kind. Thereappearance of Wood, whowas absent on the occasion of bothdefeats by Notts, and in his very best form, too, at the wicket , brought newluck to their side , and their all -round cricket in August was of a very high order . O n their form in the later matches the Surrey eleven were beyonda doubtthebest combination in county cricket , and their attainment of the first place, especially after it had apparently gone quite out of their reach , was only a fitting tribute to a consistently brilliant display of exceptional all -round form. There were some of opinion that Surrey's cricket generally was hardly up to the standard of 1891 , and to a certain extent circumstances seemed to favour such a notion . Still , it was at the most a merely superficial falling off --the effect of a lack of the high scoring which markedthe previous season . In one particular respect the eleven might have been in a knot-in the loss of Sharpe's bowling , whichhad been a comparative failure during the tour of Lord Sheffield's team in Australia , and certainly lacked the devil which had contributed so muchto its success in the past. Fortunately a by no means unworthy substitute was found in a native cricketer , H. Richardson , of Mitcham. In most of the less important matches he was singularly successful , and it remains to be seen whether as a fast bowler he is likely to take a place in the front rank. Lock- wood's bowling, though, was one of, if not the chief , factor in Surrey's success . Inevery match, almost without exception , he proved very effective . With great pace, andmaking the ball get up very quickly , he is quite the most difficult bowler of the day. Thoughnever quite fit , Lohmannbowled with all his wonted skill and judgment, if not with quite the same amountof success , and on several important occasions he practically won the match for his side . In batting , W. W .Read, in spite of early failures , was again at the head of the averages , and in the later matches he played with all his old power and judgment . Henderson , always reliable , was more successful than in previous years , and there was another defensive bat in Baldwin, who madea very creditable first appearance . Wood'sabsence from the wicket , owing to ill health , handicapped the side heavily . Anotice of Surrey cricket , too, wouldobviously be incomplete without a tribute to the skill andjudgment with which the eleven were captained by J. Shuter. The sportsmanlike spirit which actuates him could hardly be better illustrated than byhis conduct in closing his innings at Leeds, where Surrey onlyw o nwithin three minutes of time.