James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Companion 1884

H on . Sue., HENRY BROMLEY, Esa., N orth L dffenham H ai . l , S tamford . A T THE CLOSE OF THE SEASON there was considerable discus- sion as to whether the title of champion county belonged to Nottinghamshire or to Yorkshire. Iteasonable arguments were advanced on each side, and some rather laboured efforts were made to decide the point by a mere question of arithmetic. As a matter of fact there was little to choose between the two counties, but as Nottingham­ shire suffered only one defeat in twelve matches, and Yorkshire two defeats in sixteen matches—and, moreover, Notts won the only match played out between the two counties—we have followed the precedent of former years and given Nottingham the first place. Notts cricket presented a curious contrast to that shown in the previous year. In 1882, the County commenced brilliantly, and then showed a gradual falling o ff; while last season the team was twice as strong in August as it had been in June. Batting and fielding both improved, and the bowling was maintained throughout at a good standard. Perhaps the most striking feature of the season’s work was the remarkable run-getting power exhibited against the weaker counties. No long score was made against Yorkshire or Lancashire, but the moderate bowling of Gloucestershire, Middlesex, and Surrey was punished with a vigour that would have done credit to a first- late Gentlemen of England Eleven. Shrewsbury was fortunate in enjoying capital health throughout the season, and though he only comes out third on the averages, he wras on all grounds, and against all bowlers, the finest batsman in the team. Barnes had fully recovered his form before the majority of the County fixtures came on, and was never seen to better advantage. Flowers batted far more successfully for the County than he had ever done before; and Gunn justified the confidence of those who, on his first appearance, predicted for him a first-class position. Morley was only able to play in one match, but his absence was not so much felt as might have been expected. Alfred Shaw was still equal to any slow bowder in England, and the support he received was generally good. Sherwin, throughout the season, kept wicket superbly. In four of the seven unfinished matches, Notts had a manifest advantage, and it is specially worthy of mention that the highest innings scored against the County wras 236. 1st Inns. 2nd Inns. Total. May 14, Notts 188 — It 8 Nottingham. Surrey 87 43 130 Notts w'on by an innings and 58 runs. At this early period of the season the Surrey men were in nothing like the form that they stibsequently displayed, and their easy defeat on