James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Annual 1896

LILLY WHITE’ S CRICKETERS* ANNLAL# matches in particular was so consistent as to place him in the first rank, \k?BStmo5 excellent cricket for Kent was the more meritorious in face oi the frequen t failures of the side. Maurice Read s continuous success was a matter of sound batting thoroughly worthy of his best days Always a plucky player, Moorhouse proved himself to be the most successful batsman in the Yorkshire eleven, of itself a convincing proof of his ability and consistency. Davidson s all-round cricket was of a high standard ; on his form of last summer he was quite one of the best all-round players. Of the younger professionals Hayward and Carpenter both upheld their reputations, the last-named rather increasing his by a succession of good innings throughout the season. The still younger race found a capable exponent in Denton, of Yorkshire, who did quite an exceptional performance for a first season in County cricket in scoring over l,00u runs. Holland, of Surrey, though he fell off towards the end of the season, proved himself to be a youngster of great promise. Nor should the young Irish amateur, Mr. L. H. Gywnn, be overlooked; his batting for the Gentlemen against the Players was one of the best displays of the year. The chief honours in bowling were shared by the two fast bowlers1 Richardson and Mold. Both took over 200 wickets, but Richardson’ though he only delivered sixty overs more, took seventy-seven more wickets, and at a lesser average of more than a run. Altogether Richardson took 290 wickets in first-class cricket, a performance which in a bowler’s season would have been out of the ordinary, but in a batsman’s year was unprecedented. Generally the fast bowlers came off well, as instance Davidson, Hirst, and Woodcock, though the last-named had apparently over-bowled himself before the end of tlie summer. Of the older bowlers Peel, Briggs, and Attewell were all successful, more particularly Peel, who took 180 wickets at a cost of less than fifteen runs apiece. Mead, of Essex, improved his reputation considerably. He is quite one of the best bowlers of medium pace now. Baldwin, of Hampshire, wras consistently successful, and fully deserved the high position he gained as one of the six best bowlers. But perhaps the most striking feature of the bowling of the year was the continuous success of the young amateur, C. L. Townsend. He only came regularly into the Gloucestershire eleven when the season was half over. Even then he took l.U wickets, and when it is considered that he bowled considerably h ss than half the number of overs delivered by Richardson it will be seen that he has little or none the worst of a comparison with even that bowler, adjudged, and not unfairly, to be the best bowler of the year. a^ e. .fTI! f ! r BjSOnu • ^ happened the Oxford bowlers of whom most was pec e n not nng, and the bulk of the work was done by Fry , Leveson- u , ^ f a^ i a\ e9-.the la8t, ° f ,wh?m was only Put ^ t o the eleven at the last fnrtnn<!t\Wl the best results to the side. Cambridge were i J ] ‘ -A ° wm the toss, and Oxford, in more than one respect it must th<^ Lmltm,\h|Ud- hi « r rH r°f *he hlc^ Fr?> too, who had batted brilliantly in jnnj ' ux-M 1 mn ‘ \ unfortunately for his side, only got one run in the two all no7r ti Mr ’ fTV 10 ^amo went, Cambridge were seen to better advantage at II L r/ . . ! i °PPonents, and their victory was thoroughly well deserved, excep- lesser general in