John and James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Companion 1882

172 BOWLING AVERAGES. Ba lls . M a idens Runs . W ickets . H. S. Walker . ............................. . . 410 20 196 19 R. E I n g l i s .......................................... . . 162 11 72 G W . M a x w e l l .......................................... 24 259 17 C. A. W r igh t ................................. . . 610 31 338 21 H. W. C a v e .......................................... 672 57 292 18 H. T . A rna ll . t _ _ _ T . . 741 36 377 22 B. A. Cohen . . , t ....................... . . 647 30 319 10 E. Bowden -Sm ith ....................... . . 332 17 155 7 H. M a r t i n .......................................... . . 601 33 257 9 Walker ge ts the A ll-round and B ow l in g C u p s ; K em pson the B a tt in g Cup. Runs per Wkt. 10.6 12 15.4 10.2 1B.4 17.3 19.15 22.1 28.5 W I N C H E S T E R C O L L E G E . Matches, 11—w on 7, lost 2, drawn 2. H on . J . W . M ansfield ,* a pa in s tak in g captain, and managed to ge t a good e leven t o g e th e r ; h is b a t t in g improved as w e ll as his w icket-keep ing , wh ioli were both qu ite up to a p u b l ic sch oo l a v e ra g e ; a good field. W. N. L ea * was not qu ite so su cce ss fu l in his b a t t in g as had been exp e c ted , he oc- cas iona lly hit very hard , but was not to bo depended u p o n ; a fa ir field, and a fast though not a lways a straight bow ler . C. L. H ickley * im proved aga in last season in his ba tting , and was not in su ch a violent hu rry to g e t runs on first g o in g i n ; far aw a y the best bow ler in the e leven , as his average w ill p r o v e ; a m odera te field. C. M . L ambrick ,* a v e ry patien t and successfu l bat, though still not so good on the off side as he should b e ; fielded w e ll at point throughou t the season . H. G. R uggles B risk (cap t. for 1882) did good serv ice to the e leven w ith the bat, though not always in the best fo rm ; m ight be a usefu l bow ler with p r a c t ic e ; a fair field. N. E. W. S tainton * neither im proved nor fell off m u ch from what he was in the prev ious season; had a n ice cu t , and was a pa t ien t b a t ; a m oderate bow ler , and fa ir field. G. F. H ornby * m ight be a good bat i f he wou ld make m ore use o f h is a b n o rm a l ly lon g reach; sometimes bow led e f fe c t iv e ly ; a moderate field. A. R . C obb ou gh t to be a useful man next year ; a fair bat, w ith some idea o f w icket-keep ing , and a moderate field. G. W. R icketts ough t to practise b ow lin g and f ie ld in g ; as a ba t he wants to com e o u t more and p la y harder. G. S. S. V idal * cou ld hit v e ry hard all round , though ho had not much sty le as a b a t ; a fair field. H. G. S aunders D avies , an im p rov in g ba t , and with p ra ct ice m ay do w e l l ; a moderate field. * Has le ft . BATTING AVERAGES . Times Most in Inns. not ou t. Runs . an Inns . Aver. Hon. J. W. Mansfield . . 0 371 75 30.11 W. N. Lea ....................... . 12 0 193 41 16.1 O. L. H ick ley . . . # . . • • 9 • • . 10 4 91 18 15.4 C. M. Lambrick . , . . . 12 1 351 81* 31.10 H . G. Rugg les Briso . . . 11 1 2G7 94 26.7 N. E. W. Stainton . . . , . 9 0 102 35 11.3 G. F, H o r n b y ...................... . 11 1 124 59 12.4 A. R . C o b b ................... ... . 12 0 219 50 18.3 G W. R icketts . # . . . 10 3 159 61 22.5 G. S. S. V ida l . . . . . 9 1 104 54* 13 11. G. Saunders Davies . . . io 0 253 118 25.3 * Not out. BOWLING AVERAGES . Runs Balls. Maidens. Runs. Wides. No Balls. ' Wkts. per Wkt. W . N. Lea . . . . 336 29 178 G 0 10 18.4 C. L. H ick ley . . 1,027 74 387 0 1 45 8.28 H . G. Rugg les Brise 65 2 40 0 1 2 20.1 N. E. W. S ta in ton 255 10 150 4 0 7 22 G. F. H ornby . . 905 54 404 2 5 30 11.15 G. W . R icketts . . 249 5 139 0 0 10 13.9