James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Annual 1894

1 0 0 LILLYWHITE'SC R I C K E T E R S' A N N U A L. Brockwell , that enabled Surrey to get ahead of their opponents . Mr. Read's 147 (not out)wasone of, if not quite his best display of the year . Thoughin for three hours and a half , he gave nothing like a chance . As in the first innings , Lancashire opened well , but fell short of their early promise . Still though , Baker and Tinsley hit freely , the result was only a moderate total of 121. At the finish , Surrey wanted 89 to win , and Abel , who made 54 of the number , was in when the game was won. Surrey wonby seven wickets . Surrey , 263 and 92 (three wickets ) ; total , 355. Lancashire , 230 and 121 ; total , 351 . Lockwood(2nd innings , Lancashire ) O v e r s. M a i d e n s. 24.1 1 1 (3) L a n c a s h i r ev. N o t t s. Nottingham, June 15, 16 a n d 17. R u n s. 3 8 W i c k e t s . 5 The primary stage of the game was suggestive of a favourable result for Notts . Theywere batting all the first day and a small part of the second for a total of 316. More than two-thirds of these were the work of two batsmen, Shrewsbury and Daft. They put on 189 while they were together , and Shrewsbury's share of the 271 got when he was out was 148. Upto 90 it was faultless , but subsequently he gave more than one chance . Eight batsmen on the Lancashire side got double figures in their turn . Sugg was this time the chief figure in the team. H e lost no chance of scoring , and though a little lucky towards the finish , on the whole it was a fine exhibition of good defence and vigorous hitting . U pto the end of the second day the game had not advanced very far-indeed , only to the extent of an innings to each side . Thethird day's cricket was a complete contrast . The wicket had already begun to wear, and it was only some free hitting by Shacklock and Mee late in the innings that pro- duced even the small total of 92 by Notts . With89 to win Lancashire began so badly that the score was only 39 with half the side out . At the crisis , however , C. Smith, the wicket -keeper , and Baker got fairly well set, and they w o na capital match for Lancashire with four wickets to spare . Lancashire , 322 and 92(six wickets ) ; total , 414. Notts, 318 and 92 ; total 410. Briggs (second innings Yorkshire ).. O v e r s. M a i d e n s. 2 2 . 4 8 (4) Lancashirev. Yorkshire. Leeds, June19 and20. R u n s. 3 5 W i c k e t s. 6 Thewicket was not in the best condition , and as a consequence , with good bowling on both sides , the scoring was below the average , Yorkshire opened withplenty of promise , and with eighty upand only two batsmen out, their chances seemed very hopeful . The tail though, failed completely before the bowling of Moldand Briggs , so muchso that the total had only been increased by 27whenthe tenth wicket fell . Lancashire's batting was not quite so uneven, though the chief credit rested with one batsman, Mr. McLaren. The old Harrovian played all the Yorkshire bowling with equal credit , and his fifty -four took him no less than two hours and three -quarters to make. Though only 62 behind, Yorkshire found this score beyond their power. Briggs however, proved too muchfor most of the eleven except Wardall, and his figures were extra- ordinary , (eight wickets for nineteen runs ). Lancashire wonbyaninnings and nine runs . Lancashire , 169. Yorkshire , 107 and53. Mold(1st innings , Yorkshire ). Peel (1st innings , Yorkshire )... O v e r s. M a i d e n s. R u n s. W i c k e t s 2 4 . 2 2 3 1 0 1 3 4 0 2 8 6 5 (5) L a n c a s h i r ev. S o m e r s e t s h i r e . Taunton, July, 17, 18, a n d19. Thewicket owing to heavy rains favoured the bowlers throughout , and the scoring was low all round. The three completed innings indeed only varied very