James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Annual 1894

1 1 8 LILLYWHITE'SC R I C K E T E R S' A N N U A L. (1) Surreyv. Yorkshire. Sheffield , June12a n d13. The wickets at Sheffield in the early part of the season were not by any means up to the mark. Nor was that provided for this match any exception . O n the contrary , though the weather was fine , the batsmen on both sides found the pitch so treacherous that four innings were completed early on the second day, with no total higher than 98. It was in every way, a bowlers ' match, as the figures belowwill shew. The fielding too, had m u c hto d o in determining the result . In this respect , Surrey were not seen to advantage . Still Moorhouse's batting h a d m u c hto do with Yorkshires' victory . H ewas in fact, the only batsmanon either side to m a k ea stand each time, and his 77 for once out w a s far andawaythe best contributed . Yorkshire wonby 58 runs . O fseveral good bowling performances , Wardall's was distinctly the best . Yorkshire , 98 and 91 ; total , 189. Surrey , 72 and 59 ; total , 131 . -Lockwood(1st innings , Yorkshire ) Richardson(2nd Wardall (Yorkshire ) . O v e r s. 19.3 1 2 14.1 M a i d e n s. R u n s. W i c k e t s . 5 5 4 7 3 9 1 9 Itsasthira و و (2) Surreyv. Yorkshire: Oval, June29 a n d30. This time, Surrey had the opportunity of playing on a better wicket , with the natural result of improved cricket . Going in first , they were in practically the wholeof the first day, for a total of 356. Eight of the eleven got into double figures , but the main credit of the performance rested with Mr. Keyand Lockwood, w h obetween them accounted for 161. Mr. Key was in just two hours for his 100, but still his performance was hardly superior to that of Lockwood, w h o after making 61 out of 83, by very fine batting , carried out his bat. Fortunately for Surrey , too , who might have missed Richardson's bowling badly , Lockwood was in equally good form with the ball . In the second innings , Yorkshire , w h o h a dto follow onin a minority of 23, m a d ea very different show. A tone time, 220wasup, with only six batsmenout, but the last three wickets only added1 7, so that Surrey in the end, had an easy victory by ten wickets . Surrey , 356 and 10(no wicket ) ; total , 366. Yorkshire , 125 and138 ; total , 363. I al Lockwood(Surrey ) Overs. Maidens. 5 3 . 4 2 0 (3) S u r r e yv. S u s s e x. Brighton, July 3 and 4. Runs. 1 2 0 Wickets. 1 1 o n c e Though Richardson was still unable to bowl for Surrey he wasnot really wantedas events proved . Lockwood and Brockwell were enough at all events to getrid of the Sussex eleven for an aggregate of 344, a good performance on a wicket such as is provided at Brighton. Surreyhad meanwhilebeen dismissed for a total of 235, of which the two, Read and Baldwin were responsible for 176. It was Maurice Read's day, quite , for he followed up an excellent score of 87with a second of 56 not out, which latter had a very great effect in deciding the result . The highest scorers on the side of Sussex were Mr. G. L. Wilson, with 46 and 30, and Murdochwith 19 and 52. Surrey wonby seven wickets . Sussex, 235 and 110 (three wickets ) ; total 345. Sussex , 153 and 191, total 344. Brockwell (2nd Innings , Sussex) h O v e r s. 2 5 . 1 M a i d e n s. 1 2 (4) S u r r e yv S u s s e x. Oval, July24, 25, and26 R u n s. 3 9 W i c k e t s. 5 In spite of the heavy rainfall before the match the scoring was generally so goodthat 1001runs werescored in the three day's . Stili the last day's play w a s spoiled by the wet, and the fourth innings was anything but a good thing for Surrey. Though Sussex had opened well with a good score of 268, Surrey were able to head it by 57. For this advantage they were mostly indebted to Mr. Key and Brockwell who made the stand of the innings , adding 121 in an hour andquarter . The great batting performance of the match though, was that of Marlow. H ehas rarely been seen to better advantage and his two scores of 80 and