John and James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Companion 1882

94 BOWLING AVERAGES. Kung Matches. Inns. Overs. Maidens.Runs. No Wkts .'IViiles.Bal 1 s. per Wkt. 11. Evans ... ... 3 0 107 44 189 16 0 0 11.13 Mycroft ... 8 13 642.2 276 771 41 0 0 17.2 r ia t t s ......... ... 8 13 369.2 164 621 25 0 0 20.21 llay ... ... ... 6 10 129.1 37 263 10 6 0 26.8 Foster.......... ... 4 4 10 3 3 24 0 1 0 SUSSEX S ecretary , G* GOLDSMITH, E fq ., P ortslade , B righton , S ussex . r p H E EFFORTS OF LORD SHEFFIELD, on behalf of Sussex I cricket, were attended with so small a measure of success, that th County is once more at the bottom of the list. Apart from the engagements with Hampshire, which we cannot rank among the first-class matches of the season, the team only gained one victory, and against thi< there is a set-off of no fewer than eight defeats. To our thinking, thi? thoroughly unsatisfactory and almost disheartening state of things wa< brought about by two causes—very weak bowling and the arrangement of too ambitious a programme. As regards the bowling the average table vrili tell its own tale. Lilly white alone obtained wickets at a cost of less than 20 runs each. Then as to the programme. To play Yorkshire and Not­ tingham was simply to court disaster, for against neither County, fully represented, was there any real prospect of success. The temporary breakup of the old Nottingham team was of course quite unexpected when the season’* fixtures were made. Far better would it have been to have waited a little longer before challenging such formidable opponents. Mr. R. T. Ellis and Mr. Greenfield played in the ten matches, and did all they could to achieve success. Mr. Ellis, however, as a batsman, did not bear out the hopes that had been formed of him. Four times at least he played admirable cricket; but he was not, as in 1880, to be regularly trusted for runs. Let us hope that bis falling-off may only prove one of the fluctuations of form to which even the best of cricketers are subject. Mr M. P. Lucas only played in four of the ten matches under review, and Mr. Trevor in two, while Mr. Whitfold did not appear at all. The thorough co-operation of these capital batsmen would have strengthened the team immensely, but for some reason it could not be obtained. It may be men­ tioned here that in one of the Hampshire matches Mr. M. P. Lucas played an innings of 131. I Amid many disappointments, however, the Sussex Committee can a* least congratulate themselves on bringing out two amateurs of more than ordinary promise—Mr. W. A. Bettesworth and Mr. W . Blackman, both connected with Ardingly College. These gentlemen are young and entlm*