James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Companion 1885

m 95 batting averages . • f • • • • • * • H»!I • I'lyett JjC&JfatCS ••• w . H. Woodhouse*.. flrimshaw Harris Peato Peel Emmett Harrison Rnwlin Hunter Hay Ic y Hon. if. B. Hawke Baker ... Lockwood • • • • • • • • • « • • • « « • • • • » • • • * • 0 0 • * • • * • • • • • • Emmett Peate Ulyett... Peel ... Rawlin Harrison Bates ... The following bowled M a tches , Inna . Runs. Moat in an Inns . Most in a Match . T im es not out. Aver . ... 15 24 759 135 231 1 33 15 23 672 107 114 0 24.20 ... 9 14 327 64 90 0 23.5 ... 15 24 609 116 117 1 22.3 ... 4 5 101 62 63 0 20.1 . j ... 15 23 437 71 71 0 19 ... 2 4 36 25 31 2 18 ... 11 22 * 315 95 108 3 16.11 ... 15 24 310 50 65 5 16.6 ... 15 24 268 37 46 5 14.2 ... 6 9 64 26* 26 4 12.4 ... 7 1 ) 84 27 27 1 9.3 ... 15 24 137 27 27 9 9.2 ... 2 4 32 24 32 0 8 1 •* • X 8 43 23 22 0 5.3 ... 5 9 39 13 21 1 4.7 ... 3 5 21 10 16 0 4.3 layed in n one ini * Not out. three innings, scoringn 0, 16, and 10. The [lings •Pullan, 14; and A. Snowden, 37.1 BOWLING AVERAGES . Runs. Wkts. Inn s . Overs. Maidens. Runs . Wkts. per Wkt. per Inns . ... 27 677.2 315 697 61 11.2G 2.7 ... 25 734.3 406 770 61 12.33 2.11 ... n 328.3 154 635 38 14.3 1.14 ... 22 327.3 153 468 33 14.6 l . i l ... 8 91.1 46 155 10 15.5 1.2 ... 11 86.2 35 159 9 17.6 .9 ... 26 391.1 170 564 25 22.14 .25 in one innings:—Puilan, 2 overs, 5 runs- Harris, 4 overs, 2 maidens, 11 runs; HalJ, 4 overs, 1 maiden, 8 runs- and Hayley, 3 overs, 11 runs. * S U R R E Y . S ecretary — C. W. ALCOCK, E sq ., K exxingtok O val , B.E. m E NCOURAGED BY THE SUCCESS that attended the experiment of 1883, the Surrey committee again arranged a much longer programme than that of any of the other counties, playing in all Ho fewer than twenty-four matches. Sixteen of these matches were home engagements with the other eight flrst-class counties, and the Remainder comprised fixtures with the Australians, the two Universities, and some of the minor counties. Following the plan we adopted last year we publish, at the end of this review, the Surrey averages in two tables, one being restricted to the first-class County matches, and the other ’ embracing the whole twenty-four contests. The results are curiously like those of 1883, such little change as there is being an im­ provement. Of the first-class County matches Surrey Avon seven, lost four, and drew five, as against seven won, five lost, and four drawn in 1883*5 at»d in all matches the record shows thirteen won, six lost, and five drawn, as against twelve won, seven lost, and five drawn in the