James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Annual 1898

1 0 0 LILLYWHITE'SCRICKETERS' ANNUAL (5) Lancashirev. Warwickshire. Manchester, June 28, 29 and 30. Therewasno chance of adefinite result ,thanks to the rain ,which interfered with the progress of the game throughout . Warwickshire made fairly good use of the opportunity of first innings , and in four hours scored 227, of which W . G. Quaife (64) and Mr. J. F. Byrne(63) accounted for more than one-half. Rainkept the wicket pretty easy on the second day. Asa consequence the early batsmen of Lancashire were seen to advantage , particularly Baker (83 ), Briggs (74), and A. Ward(56) . ThoughWarwickshire were 122 to the bad onthe first innings , they played up so well in the second that the gamewas very creditably drawn. W. G. Quaife (64 and 48 not out ) scored 112 in the match for once out. Warwickshire, 227 and221 (6 wickets ) ; total 448. Lancashire , 3 4 9. (6) Lancashirev. W a r w i c k s h i r e . Birmingham, July 5, 6 and 7. If for nothing else the matchwould have been memorable for the excep- tional performance of Tyldesley for Lancashire . In each innings he scored 100(106 and 100 not out), and as this has only been done in first -class matches by seven other batsmen, the feat is one to be proud of. It was as well for the side that he cameoff , as excepting Frank Sugg(51 and 27) and Cuttell (33 and 43), no one else did very much. Warwickshire's batting was decidedly above the average . Eight of the eleven got double figures in the first innings , with Diver's 59 the best of them. The Lancashire captain declared his second innings whenTyldesley had got his 100, in the hope of getting Warwickshire out again. Instead , they scored 154 for the loss of only three wickets , thanks mainly to Messrs . Bainbridge (60) and J. F. Byrne (58). The game was drawn. Lancashire , 292 and 276 (9 wickets ,innings declared ) ; total , 568. Warwickshire , 305 and154 (3 wickets); total , 459. (7) Lancashire v. Sussex. Manchester , July 15, 16 and 17 . Arun-getting wicket and batsmenseen to the full advantage throughout . Sussex were in all the first day, and at the finish had only lost six wickets for a total of 407. Theinnings ultimately realised , 476 to which Ranjitsinhji (87), Messrs . Murdoch(77), Brann(69), N e w h a m(61) and Bean,(64), subscribed most largely . Tyldesley was again very much in evidence for Lancashire . H e m a d e174out of a total of 403fromthe bat, andthe nextscore to h i mwasA. Ward's 67. Goingin a second time with a lead of 56 Sussex again showed up well . Mr. Brann(107) was once morein his best form, and with Marlow(61) heput on123 for the first wicket . Altogether the match produced 1,150 runs for 26wickets . Sussex , 476 and 254 (6 wickets ) ; total , 730. Lancashire , 420. (8) Lancashire v. Yorkshire. Bradford, July 19, 20 and 21 . Amatchfor the benefit of D. Hunter, the Yorkshire wicket -keeper , and, in spite of the bad weather on the second day, a very great success . Yorkshire hadthe good luck to go in first on a good wicket , and most of themdid well , though Moorhouse's 61 was the best score . Showers kept the wicket fairly easy on the second day while play lasted , and Mr. MacLaren (152 ) and Albert W a r d(55) put on 167 before a wicket fell . Eventually Lancashire were out for 354, or nine runs ahead. Yorkshirehadto bat for their secondinnings on avery difficult wicket , and had not the tail played up well even their total of 66wouldhave been considerably reduced. Thegamewas drawn. Yorkshire , 345 and 66 ; total , 411. Lancashire , 354. Hallam(2nd inns . Yorkshire) O v e r s. 3 7 M a i d e n s . 2 4 R u n s. Wickets. 1 7 4