James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Companion 1884

m ^ -p* . • r f ^ .p The victory of the North was mainly due to the fine hatting 0f Hin who went in first wicket down with the score at 12, and took out his i . ! f,,r 127. His innings, though not hy any means free from fault ‘ admirable display of cricket, Valuable support was rendered him V Mills (41), Watson (37), Butler (33), and Robinson (31). In the second innings of the South, the batsmen could do little against Crossland w), took 8 wickets for 57 runs. The chief scorers for the South’wu ’ Mr. W. G. Grace 27 and 41, Mr. Gilbert 48 and 26, and Humphreys 4 and 19. ‘ ’h = OXFORD v. CAMBRIDGE. t “ * * » f * « , • * B EFORE THE COMMENCEMENT OF THE MATCH public opinion was all ill favour of Cambridge, and the result proved that the preference was fully justiried. We have no doubt that the better eleven won, but under more favourable circumstances Oxford would certainly have'made a better fight As we shall presently show, the Hark Blues had decidedly the worst of the luck. In the Cambridge team there were four new choices—Mr. W. N. Hue (a Senior from the Clergy Orphan School, Canterbury, who in 1881 made 415 (not out), the highest score on record), Hon. J. W. Mansfield (a Senior from Winchester), Mr. H. G. Topham (a left-handed slow bowler from Bepton), and Mr. J. A. Turner (a Freshman from Uppingham). Oxford had six new men—Mr. IJ. V. Page (a Freshman from Cheltenham), Mr. H. G. Euggles-Brise (a Freshman from Winchester), Mr. T. B. Hine-Haycock (a Senior fnm Wellington), Mr. W. E. T. Bolitho (a Senior from Harrow), Mr. A. G. Grant-Asher (a Senior from Loretto), and Mr. E. W. Bastard (a Senior from Sherborne). " : Cambridge bad the good fortune to win the toss, but though the score was up to 158 tor 5 wickets, the total only amounted to 215. The fifth, sixth, and seventh wickets fell for one run. The feature of the innings was the very fine batting of Mr. C. W. Wright, who was at the wickets for about three hours and a half, and only gave one chance. He seemed in no way affected by the importance of tlie match, and played with remarkable coolness and judgment. His 102 is the eighth score of 100 or more obtained in the Oxford and Cambridge matches. At the close of the day, Oxiord had made 27 without the loss of a wicket, and there seemed every prospect of a good game. The wicket was very wet and treacherous on the second morning, and rain caused several in­ terruptions. Still, however, there was no sufficient excuse for the lamentable breakdown of the Oxonians. The whole 10 wickets actually fell for 28 runs. After this there was little chance of saving the g&me; but Oxford played up very well, and at the call of time had made 150 in the second innings for 3 wickets. Messrs. Walker and Page batted with great resolution, but each gave two chances to the wicket-keeper, Mr. 0. W. Wright. On the Wednesday morning, the last 7 wickets oulv added F,5 runs, and Cambridge obtained the required runs for the Joss of 3 batrrnen, thus winning the match by 7wickets. It is specially worthy of notice that Messrs. tSmitli and C. T. Btudd took 17 Oxford wickets between them, the other three being run out. ~