James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Companion 1884

72 Aug. 2, Nottingham. 2nd Inns. Total. 371 335 let Inns. Notts 371 — Gloucestershire 229 106 Notts won by an innings and 36 runs. Walter Wright scored 127 (not out) and Barnes 120 for Notts, the two batsmen during their partnership putting on 188 runs. Wright’s inning3 was of a most remarkable character. It commenced on the first evening, extended over the whole of the second day, and was still unfinished when, at five minutes to three on the third afternoon, the tenth Nottingham wicket fell. Wright went in first, and carried out his bat. He gave several chances at the wicket, but, apart from these blemishes, his display was a fine one, immensely in advance of anything he had previously accomplished as a batsman. Barnes’s hitting was most brilliant. At the conclusion of the match a collection was made for the two players, and a sum of £16 was divided between them. It is but fair to state that the Gloucestershire bowling was greatly weakened by the enforced absence of Woof, who was suffering from a bad hand. Mr. E. M. Grace scored 36 and 52, Mr. Townsend 65 and 3, Mr. Moberly 48 and 6, Mr. Gilbert 22 and 29, and Mr. Pullen 31 and (absent) 0. On the first day Alfred Shaw took 6 Gloucestershire wickets for 62—a fine performance on hard ground—and Scotton, in catching Mr. W. G. Grace in the long field, severely injured his hand. Aug. 6. — Oval.—Notts v. Surrey.— Surrey Review.) Aug. 9.—Manchester.—Notts v. Lancashire.—( See Lancashire Review.) 1st Inns. 2nd Inns. Total. August 20, Notts 288 254 542 Nottingham. Middlesex 224 76 300 Drawn. Middlesex had lost 6 wickets. Time alone saved Middlesex from defeat. By an arrangement made at the commencement of the match, stumps were drawn on the third evening at a quarter to six, both teams having to leave for other engage­ ments. The time thus lost, however, was made up for by commencing earlier on the Monday and Tuesday. From first to last the match was full of interest. The special feature of the cricket was the batting of Barnes and Flowers. The former scored 91 and 85, and the latter 87 and 79. In the first innings the two professionals put on 122 runs while they were together, and in the second, 134 runs. The hitting of Flowers was as brilliant and effective as the defence of Barnes was patient and careful. A single mistake had a vital effect upon the game. Had Mr. G. B. Studd accepted an easy chance offered him by Barnes on the Wednes­ day morning there would have been five wickets down in the second innings of Nottingham for 30 runs. As it was the fifth wicket fell at 155. Gunn made 52 and 0, and Mills 6 and 38. For Middlesex, Mr. Alfred Lyttleton made 40 and 28, Mr. I. D. Walker 62 and 6, Mr. G. B. Studd 53 and 4, Mr. C. T. Studd 15 and 34 (notout). The Notts bowling was of exceptional excellence. Flowers, in the last innings, when the ground was breaking up, took 4 wickets for 15 runs. August 23.—Cheltenham.—Notts v. Gloucestershire.— (See Gloucester­ shire Review.) August 27.—Brighton.—Notts v. Sussex. — (See Sussex Review.) September 13.—Nottingham.—Notts v. M.C.C. and Ground.— (Ses M.C.C. Review.) Matches played, 12—won 4, lost 1, drawn 7.