James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Annaul 1897

P U B L I CS C H O O LC R I C K E TIN 1 8 9 6. 9 cannot be termed strong , but they were by no means weak, and as they were excellently captained , and as a rule fielded well , they enjoyed a fair measure o fsuccess. The WestminsterEleven of last year was one of the best , if not , the very best the school has ever turned out . Seeing that they were beaten by the Carthusians , who were by no means strong this may appear a some- what rash statement . None the less we hold to our opinion , which is , we think, fully borne out by the results of the season . O fthe twelve matches played no fewer than seven ended in victory , the only defeat experienced being that at the hands of the Carthusians . Whatever the reason of this defeat-perhaps it was the pace of the Charterhouse wicket , perhaps it was that luck was against them at any rate , the Westminster boys were entirely off colour on that day, and in neither innings could they total three figures . Fisher, the captain, heads both batting and bowling averages , and is said to be the finest cricketer the school has hadfor m a n y a long day. H eis n o wat Oxford, and it would give us the greatest pleasure to see him in the Dark Blue eleven , as it is indeed a long time since Westminster have had a Cricket Blue at either 'Varsity . Moon, too , has earned a great reputation both as a batsman and a wicket -keeper , his batting average being quite as good as Fisher's ; while in the disastrous Charterhouse matchhe played a plucky game. These twoandMorewere the mainstay of the side , More averaging thirty -three and taking fifty wickets for fourteen runs apiece . H eis n o wcaptain andshould do even better this year. O fm a n ygood performances by the Westminster eleven last season , the victory over the M.C.C. was perhaps the best , while the Authentics sustained a crushing defeat ; and against the I Zingari a really fine batting achievement was accomplished . 1896 saw a great and genuine revival of Westminster cricket , andwe only hope that the good example set by the cricketers above mentioned m a ybe kept up, and that the school will continue to send out players of the stamp of Fisher , Moon, and More. W ehave no hesitation in saying that U p p i n g h a mhad the best eleven of the year . Ofeight matches played only one was drawn, that against a very strong Quidnuncteam, which included no fewer than five of this year's Cambridge eleven and R. N. Douglas . Of the other seven , three were wonin an innings , one by ten wickets , two by nine and seven wickets respectively , and the last by two hundred and fifteen runs , after the innings had been closed with six wickets down. The school matches , including that against Haverford were very satisfactory from anUppingham point of view . Haileybury and Haverford were defeated with ahandsome margin, while the defeat inflicted upon Repton was positively crushing . Thesuccess of the team was principally due to four men, viz ., Taylor (the captain ), Parkes , Wilson , and Hind. Taylor is said to be a really first -class wicket-keeper, while as a bat his succession of big scores was really quite monotonous! The present writer saw him play on a very bad wicket at Horsham, and took away with him the highest opinion of his skill as a bat . H eis now at Cambridge , and we shall be extremely surprised if he does not get into the Cambridge eleven next year . Parkes , whose average of seventy- onewasgained by play of the most consistent description , is a fine free bat , being especially strong on the off -side . Wilson and Hind did practically all the bowling , and did it right well , as a glance at the averages will show. Wilsonbowls both round and under, the latter being often particularly deadly , while Hind kept a beautiful length all through , and though not blessed with