James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Annual 1899

C R I C K E TIN 1 8 9 8. 1 1 brilliant exceptions . Later on C. B. Fry came into the team, and with an amount of success which challenged comparison with the best performances of Ranjitsinhji for Sussex . As a set -off illness took Brann out of the Eleven, andto makematters worse W . N e w h a m, too, for the same reason wasnot in form, andhadultimately to stand down. Another blow was in store , as Bland also injured himself , and the loss of his bowling was even more serious . Asit was, under all the circumstances , Sussex perhaps did well to win three matches . C. B. Fry's batting was far and awaythe most striking feature of the cricket . In all he scored six hundreds for Sussex, three of them against Middlesex , two in the same match at Brighton . In the match against Hampshire , on the same ground, he had massed another double century , scoring 99 and 133. His aggregate of 1,604 for 27 completed innings was a remarkable performance . Tate, considering the generally run- getting character of the wickets , bowled well , adding to his reputation . In C. L. A. Smith , the captain of Brighton College , and P. H. Latham, the old Cambridge Blue, Sussex last year received two important additions to the batting strength . The Hampshire Eleven were severely handicapped by disablilities , in their case their inability to get together the full strength . Capt . Wynyardonly played rarely , and his absence made all the difference to the side . Consider- ing all things , the team did not, perhaps , do so very badly . Major Poore proved a useful addition to the batting , particularly as he was able to play pretty well throughout the season . Capt . Quinton , too , was successful when hewasable to join the Eleven , and A. J. L. Hill's all -round cricket was of great service . The latter's exceptionally fine innings of 199 against Surrey at the Oval will , in particular , be long remembered . Barton , unfortunately , did little with the bat , and was far from being up to his old form . Still , inbatting , Hampshire had a fairly good side , one that could have , at its best , rendered a good account of itself against any bowling . Of the bowlers Baldwin was the most reliable . Taking into account the wickets and the batsmen hehad to oppose , his figures were very creditable . Leicestershire redeemed itself from complete failure by beating Derby- shire quite at the end of the season . This wasits one success . Therewas onthe whole, it maybe, little cause for satisfaction in the record . Still , it canhardly be argued that there was no ground for hope . Onthe contrary , in the batting or some of it-there was distinct promise . C. J. B. Wood, L. Brown, King, and Knight all came off well , as did Coe mostly . Unfor- tunately , C. E. De Trafford was not in luck , and his hitting might have made all the difference . H. H. Marriott would have been of great assistance had hebeen able to play regularly . The bowling was weak, but that was not a defect confined to the County alone . All the same, in the matter of its out- cricket generally , Leicestershire would have compared unfavourably , perhaps , withmostof its rivals . The exception would have been Somersetshire , whose bowling was of the weakest . On the run-getting wickets mostly prevalent Tyler was more expensive . Capt . Hedley only played very rarely , and the changes , with S. M. J. Woods practically incapacitated , were very harmless . Better fielding would have assisted the bowlers materially . Asit was, the batting , of which there was a fair amount, was neutralised to a great extent . S. M. J. Woods and Lionel Palairet were always reliable , G. Fowler and W. T. Stanley often of great use . F. A. Phillips and W. N. Roe were