James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Annual 1894

8 8 LILLYWHITE'SCRICKETERS' A N N U A L. (6) Gloucestershirev. N o t t s . ổ i qu 721 dhe Bristol , June 22 , 23, and 24. For once W. G. was only moderately successful , and the burden of the run- getting for Gloucestershire rested on other shoulders. Notts werein mostofthe first day for a total of 273, to which Shrewsbury (76) aud Flowers (74) were the chief contributors . A peculiar incident occurred during the innings . Mr. C. W . Wrightremoved a ball from Roberts which had lodged in his pad, and was given out for handling it. Gloucestershire did perhaps as well as could be expected with totals of 183 and248. For these they were chiefly indebted to Messrs. Radcliffe (13 and73), R. W. Rice (34 and 64 not out), and Ferris (64 and 11). Shrewsbury wasnearly as muchin evidence in the second as in the first innings . In the match altogether he scored 140 runs . Attewell's all -round cricket for Nottingham was, too , one of the best features of the match. Besides taking six wickets he scored 62 for once out. Daftcameoff with trifling suceess as a bowler at the end of Gloucestershire's second innings . Notts wonby five wickets . Notts 273 and 159(five wickets ) ; total , 432. Gloucestershire , 183 and 248 ; total 431. Daft(2nd innings Gloucestershire ) O v e r s. M a i d e n s. R u n s. W i c k e t s. 6 . 3 1 1 3 2 (7) Gloucestershirev. Lancashire. Bristol , July 13, 14, and 15. Owingto rain the wicket was slow at the outset , and as it never really got right the fourth innings was anything but desirable . As it was though they had to go in second , thanks to a fine score of 70 by Painter , Gloucestershire were able to get a lead of 18runs on the first hand. Therethoughtheir success ended. The advantage Lancashire gained in the second stage of the gamewas the out- comeof some really fine batting by A. Ward, and the effective bowling of Briggs andMold. Wardgoing in first , was at the wicket four hours and a half , and saw thewhole side go, scoring himself exactly one half of the total of 280 from the bat. 'Gloucestershire hadnochance of getting the 264wantedto winon a wornwicket. Briggs and Mold, indeed , bowled unchanged, and in alittle over two hours the wholeside wereout for 188. Lancashire w o nby 175 runs. Lancashire 159 a n d 279, total 438 ; Gloucestershire 177 and 88, total 263, (8) Gloucestershirev. Yorkshire. Huddersfield , July 27 and 28. O na pitch materially affected for the worse by recent rains , the Yorkshire eleven wereseen to great advantage , as was only to be expected . The supcriority of their bowling would have in all probability given them the victory , under any conditions . In this case too, they had the good fortune in addition to win the toss , andthe result was really never in doubt. The Gloucestershire tail shewed up very badly, and indeed the last eight batsmen on the side only accounted for 61 betweenthem. In the two innings , Hirst , the fast bowler , who took six wickets , wasalso the chief scorer for Yorkshire , with 35 not out. Oddlyenough , three of the four Yorkshirebowlers had42runs scored off them-Peel andHirst with a credit of six, and Mr. Jackson of five wickets . Yorkshire wonby ten wickets . Yorkshire 162and4 (no wicket ), total 166. Gloucestershire 74 and91, total 165. O v r s. Peel (1st Innings , Gloucestershire ). 17 M d n s. R n s. 9 2 7 (9) Gloucestershirev. N o t t s. Nottingham , July 31 and Aug. 1. W k t s 6 The choice of innings in this match went a long waytowards ultimate victory . Nottshadall the advantage in going in first , of an easy wicket , andthe success of their early batsmen while the ground was wet and easy , determined the result . Mr. J. A. Dixon, who opened the batting for Notts himself , mademore than the