John and James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Companion 1882

BOWLING AVERAGES. No Matclies.Iinis. Over*. Maidens. Runs. Wkts.Wides.Balls. Jones ••• ••• • •• 10 18 508.3 310 664 45 0 2 J . J. Parfitt • • • 6 11 273.3 122 395 22 3 0 Har ru11 ••• 13 22 838.2 306 14"9 78 1 0 A. I \ Lucan •*• 6 8 86.3 27 165 8 0 0 #•« *»« • •• 3 4 40 16 60 2 0 0 W. W. Read • •• 9 9 41 8 113 4 0 0 \V. E. Roller M l 8 11 137.2 67 200 7 0 0 Pot to r .......... • •• 6 8 202.2 82 332 11 0 0 Blamiree ... • •• 4 7 196.3 84 305 8 0 0 Runs pot Wkt. 14.31 17.21 19.7 19.3 25 28.1 28.4 30.2 38.1 1.3 1.1 r KENT. S ecretary , JAMES J. LANCASTER, E sq ., 30, S t . G eorge ’ s S treet , C anterbury . a S cb -C omktttee , 1881; L ord HARRIS, H on . I to BL1GH, and H. KNATCHBULL-HUGESSEN, E sq . T h a t r e n t s h o u l d h a v e h a d a n u n s u c c e s s f u l SEASON is in no way surprising. The County had to contend against many disadvantages, and though the results—three victories and seven defeats—look very bad on paper, they are no worse than might have been expected. The first, and chief misfortune, was Lord Harris's departure from England after playing in three matches. Indeed, the loss of tine a player, and one who had done so much to revive cricket feeling in the county was, in itself, sufficient to disspirit the team. Scarcely less gerious wits the absence of Mr. Frank Penn, who suffered severely from gun-stroke, and did not take part in one of the County matches. Apart, however, from the absence of these famous batsmen, there were difficulties in plenty. Mr. C. M. Cunliffe, who howled so well in 1880, was away in Australia for the benefit of his health during the greater part of the season, and was not strong enough to play when he came back ; the Hon. Ivo Bligh, owing also to the state of his health, only played in live matches; Mr. K. S. Jones only played in four matches, and Messrs. A. Penn and Foord-Kelcey each in three. As a partial set-off the County enjoyed the assistance of Mr. E. F. S. Tylecote and Mr. Renny-Tailyour. Both these gentlemen batted finely, but they were only available in July, and for the Canterbury matches, which are not included in this review. Barring the first game with Yorkshire, Mr. W. II. Patterson was always at his post, and though he made only one long score, his batting was capital. But for the injuries to his hand, sustained at Lord's and Canterbury, he would no doubt have been seen to still better advantage. He is a slow run-getter, but bis cricket is of a very high class. Except for the occasional efforts of Mr. Alfred Penn, the bowling all through the season was very weak- George Hearnc and Wootton did a lot of hard work, but they were rarel) dangerous, and their wickets cost a lot of runs. Wootton, indeed, was f&r from fulfilling the promise held out by his performances in 1880. At time9 he bowls a very good ball, but though well able to vary his pace, his pitch is sadly uncertain. Mr. J. Patterson (slow left hand) may, perhaps, he