James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Annual 1899

THE UNIVERSITIES A N D PUBLIC SCHOOLS IN 1898. 1 5 1 B A T T I N G A V E R A G E S . I n n s. T i m e s n o to u t. R u n s. C. L.A. Smith 1 3 2 4 5 6 M o s tin anInns. 1 7 3* Average. 41-45 B .F . Blois 1 5 3 2 6 3 . 8 5 2 1 . 9 1 C .C .M a c L e o d 1 4 1 1 6 7 2 9 1 2 . 8 4 L .F .P. d eS m i d t -15 2 1 4 0 3 2 10.76 R .B. Umfreville 1 5 1 1 4 2 6 8 1 0 . 1 4 D .H .R .Giffard 1 3 0 1 1 9 2 8 9 - 1 5 F. L. K i n g 1 3 3 8 5 2 7 8 . 5 A .C.B r o w n 1 4 1 8 4 2 4 6 . 4 6 W .H. M. Selby 1 0 2 4 5 2 1 5 . 6 2 G .G .Willis 1 5 0 8 1 2 3 5 . 4 0 F. E.Maltby 1 3 1 4 1 1 2 3 . 4 2 B O W L I N G A V E R A G E S . Overs. Maidens. R u n s. Wickets. Average. C. C. M a c L e o d 1 7 7:2 4 9 4 6 7 3 1 15.064 G .G . Willis 7 0 8 2 3 5 1 5 1 5 . 0 6 6 C. L .A .S m i t h 165.1 5 2 4 9 3 3 1 15.90 L.F.P. deSmidt 4 1 1 0 1 2 7 8 15.99 B .P . Blois... 3 8 1 1 1 3 4 8 16.75 D .H .R.Giffard.... 9 3 . 1 1 3 3 1 2 1 8 1 7 . 3 3 F .E.Maltby 3 6 7 1 0 2 4 25.5 B R I G H T O NE L E V E NI 1 8 9 8 . - C .L. A . Smith: H a sbattedi n m u c h steadier and m o r econsistent style thanbefore, and has at the same time developed his hitting powers. Is a brilliant field ; and, with good fielders in the slips , his fast bowling will always be useful . C. C. MacLeod: Still shows great power in hitting , and always shapes well with the bat ; but somehow nevergot into form, andmadebut poor scores . H a sdeveloped into an excel- lent bowler , varying his pace with judgment . Is a fine fielder . D. H. R. Giffard : Hasgained in power, but not in nerve , and his neat and taking style only produced a small average of runs . His medium-paced bowling was useful, and he fielded excellently . G. G. Willis : Showed more promise than performance with the bat, but was very successful whentried as a bowler. Alsofielded well . H eshould develop into a good cricketer . L. F. P. de Smidt : Hisleft -handedbowling is still too guileless , though occasionally useful ,but his batting has much improved , though he is too eager to score . H eis a good hard-working fielder . R. B. Umfreville : Avigorous , straight -hitting bat ,but often spoils his innings by impatience . Safe fielder . F. L. King : Bats in a rather mechanical style , and, though he watches the ball , lacks vigour andwrist power. Is a hard-working fielder . B. F. Blois : Has a watchful , defensive style in batting , and great patience , and is seldom dislodged until tempted to hit . Fields well , and canbowl a little . W. H. M. Selby : Bats awkwardly , but with vigour . Was very useful as a wicket -keeper , standing back. F. E. Maltby : A slashing left -handbat, spoilt by want of nerve and patience . Brilliant fielder and useful change bowler . A. C. Brown: A plucky bat, with plenty of power, but times the ball badly , Most useful in the field , especially in the deep . Can also take wicket . K. D. R. Morrice : Has a good eye and a vigorous style , but lacks patience . Bowls with little craft , but great energy and surprising success . Fields well .