James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Annual 1894

8 6 LILLYWHITE'SC R I C K E T E R SA N N U A L. R e s u l t so f M a t c h e s . Matches Played, 16 ; Won, 3 ; Drawn, 2 ; Lost , 11 . Opponents. Club. Opnts. W h e r eplayed. W h e nplayed. 1st. 2nd 1st 2nd W o nb y Ins. Ins. Ins. Ins. MatchesW o n(3). (3) K e n t (a) Middlesex (14) Surrey MatchesD r a w n(2). (5)Kent M a i d s t o n e L o r d s C l i f t o n M a y25, 26, 27 و د 2 9, 30, 31 Aug. 21, 22, 23 218*106 130 1938wkts. *2 wd 222 214 202 119 115 runs 105 216 131 157 33 runs Bristol June6, 7 1228243 *167 157 drawn. § 9wins.cl *9win.c l. n o w (11) Sussex Bristol 11 Aug.7, 8, 9) 273 *94 258 275 *4 w d+6wdins.clo MatchesLost (11) (1) Yorkshire (2) Sussex (4) Surrey (6) Notts (7) Lancashire Gloucester M a y11, 12, 13 Brighton 22, 23, 24 O v a l و د B r i s t o l (8) Yorkshire Huddersfield " (9) Notts (10) Lancashire Nottingham M a n c h e s t e r " 31Aug.1 (1 2) Middlesex. (1 3) Somerset Clifton 10, 11, 12 235 (15) Somerset ... و د 28, 29 1 2June 1, 2 105 92 180 *19/ 7wkts . *3wd Cheltenham T a u n t o n - 22, 23, 24 July13, 14, 15 2 7, 28 Aug.4, 5 183 248 273 *159 5 wkts. *5 w d 235 152 385 *3 9wkts. *1 w d 297 196 202 2943runs 177 88 159 281 175 runs 7 491 162 72 105 71 273 77*308 *410wkts. *nowd inns. & 1 3 0r u n s in.&126rns.*8 w d inns. decl. c l o. 52 385 inns. & 98runs inns. & 1 7 0r u n s E x t r aMatches. Bristol 15, 16, 17 41 ود و د (16) Australians (17) Australians C h e l t e n h a m 1 4, 15, 16 166 174 197 270127runs 1 2 7 115 4 1 2 5 0 8 d r a w n 17, 18, 19 207 *37 109 131 wonby8wkt*2wd (a) Hasbeen treated in previous review of M.C.C. (1) Gloucestershirev. Y o r k s h i r e . Gloucester , M a y11 , 12, and 13. T h ec o m m e n c e m e n tof a seasonfull of disaster for the Gloucestershire eleven . In this case , although they were without Messrs . F. S. Jackson and E. Smith, and also had the bad luck to lose the toss , the Yorkshiremen had an easy win. W. G. set his side a good example with a faultless score of 54, and his partnership with Painter was the stand of the innings . These two batsmen put on 104 in just over an hour, and Painter's 81 was an excellent display of punishing batting without a mistake . The weakness of Gloucestershire's bowling was proved by the length of Yorkshire's innings , which lasted five hours and a half. Tunnicliffe and Wardall at the outset , knocked up 92 in about the same number of minutes , and the latter was the highest scorer with 106, in which was only one mistake at 28. Gloucestershire's second innings was so far disappointing that the usually reliable batsmen failed , and Yorkshire in the end had only three runs to get to win, which were got at the cost of one batsman. Yorkshire, 385and3 (one wicket ) ; total , 388. Gloucestershire , 235 and 152 ; total , 387. 9 (2) Gloucestershirev. Sussex) ft of moitinров Brighton , May 22, 23 , and 24. ) saintrag zou to OnlyW i t honly moderatebowlingon each side and a good wicket to boot, the odds wereall in favour of high scoring . Theywere justified , too, in the result if hardly totheextent that might have been anticipated , asthe totals of the four innings varied from196to 297. Therewere three scores of over a hundred, one of 106 b y Mr. Ferris in the first innings of Gloucestershire , and two in the second of Sussex (Bean's 120 and Mr. Wilson's 105). The performance of the two Sussex batsmen. wasone of exceptional merit . Theyput on the first 217 runs in two hours and twenty minutes, and the only flaw in either innings was a hard chance by the amateur whenhe had made68. At the finish Gloucestershire had 200 to win, and