A HISTORY OF NOTTINGHAMSHIRE 



in America in 1879 consisted of Barnes, Os- 

 croft, Selby, Shrewsbury, Shaw, Morley, Bates, 

 Emmett, E. Lockwood, Finder, and Ulyett. 



The championship in 1880 rightly remained 

 with Nottinghamshire, who had eight victories 

 to set against their defeat by Yorkshire by five 

 wickets. The sensation of the season was the 

 dismissal of Surrey for 16 at the Oval, Morley 

 claiming seven for 9, and Shaw three for 6, 

 whilst Barnes was in great form with the bat. In 

 1 88 1 Shaw, Shrewsbury, Barnes, Morley, Selby, 

 Scotton, and Flowers ? making a deliberate combi- 

 nation against recognized administration, refused 

 to play for Nottinghamshire unless all received 

 an engagement for the season. With great 

 pluck the executive stood to their guns, and 

 brought out a new eleven including Butler, a 

 good bat, Walter Wright, a left-handed fast 

 bowler who was afterwards useful to Kent, and 

 Attewell, one of the finest and steadiest bowlers 

 ever known. William Gunn was gradually 

 developing into a great bat, though he unduly 

 curbed his great punishing powers. Sherwin, 

 burly in figure, popular with the crowd, was 

 recognized as a wicket-keeper of consummate 

 ability. 



At full strength in 1882 Nottinghamshire 

 again won the championship, the extraordinary 

 partnership at the Oval between Shrewsbury 

 (207) and Barnes (130) producing a record in 

 county cricket of 289. Shacklock replaced Mor- 

 ley in 1883, without, however, greatly improving 

 the attack ; but in the following summer Not- 

 tinghamshire enjoyed an undefeated season with 

 nine victories and a draw. Shrewsbury headed 

 the list, while Scotton became the best left-handed 

 batsman, only ruining his cricket by his stone- 

 walling propensities. Shaw, at the age of forty- 

 two, took sixty-eight wickets for 10 runs apiece 

 on hard wickets a marvellous performance 

 while Attewell took seventy-one for 12. 



Only one crushing defeat from Yorkshire in 

 1885 marred the triumph of the Nottingham- 

 shire eleven, who won five of their victories with 

 an innings to spare. Gunn at last became 

 recognized as Shrewsbury's chief colleague with 

 the bat. In 1886 there was not one reverse to 

 set against seven victories. Lockwood, after- 

 wards so famous for Surrey, played in a few 

 fixtures. Scotton took three hours and thirty- 

 five minutes for his 45 against the Australians. 

 For the Players at Nottingham against the 

 Colonials, Barlow scored 1 1 1 and took five for 

 51. In 1887 the bowling seemed to lack sting 

 and the fielding was unsafe. Surrey gained a 

 wonderful victory by 157 runs after Mr. J. 

 Shuter aroused controversy by ordering his later 

 batsmen to get out. The way in which Gunn 

 played Lohmann's bowling was admirable, 

 while Shrewsbury was the greatest batsman of 

 the year. That keen cricketer, Mr. J. A. Dixon, 

 began to be regarded as a capital bat, fair 



bowler, and alert field, as well as a judicious 

 captain. 



The absence of Shrewsbury left an irreparable 

 gap in 1888, and in other respects the play fell 

 off. The two great Bank Holiday struggles 

 ended in favour of Surrey, and the best feature 

 was the slow bowling of H. Richardson. After 

 winning six matches off the reel in 1889, Not- 

 tinghamshire fell away despite consistent batting 

 by Gunn and admirable bowling by Attewell. 

 Flowers did capital work in all departments, and 

 some extraordinary results were credited to the 

 team. Until the end of July in 1890 the side 

 was equally fortunate, and so long as Shrewsbury 

 and Gunn were defying attack the falling off in 

 the bowling was not perceptible. Shrewsbury's 

 267 against Sussex was not really so meritorious 

 as his 117 and 76 not out in the Lancashire 

 match. Attewell received far too little support 

 with the ball, but he also batted with consider- 

 able success. 



In the early nineties the splendid traditions of 

 the Nottinghamshire team began to be tarnished, 

 and their tiresome deliberation in scoring seemed 

 to alienate the support of the local public. At 

 Brighton in 1891 Shrewsbury and Gunn added 

 312, and in the match against Kent they made 

 232. Richard Daft reappeared at the age of 

 fifty-six, but, except for Attewell, the weakness 

 in bowlers was obvious. After playing twelve 

 matches without a reverse in 1892, Nottingham- 

 shire had to take second place to Surrey. Mr, 

 A. O. Jones, a pupil of Shrewsbury, came for- 

 ward, but it was not yet that he made his mark 

 as a delightfully keen cricketer, superb field, and 

 a most attractive and aggressive bat as well as an 

 energetic captain. H. B. Daft, though a tame bat, 

 was splendid at third man. It was as usual the 

 batting of the two stars that accounted for the 

 success, but the bowling improved. In celebra- 

 tion of the victory over Surrey by four wickets 

 the sum of 200 was subscribed and presented 

 to the team. 



There was a sad falling off in 1893. Not- 

 tinghamshire men, however, showed to advantage 

 in Shrewsbury's benefit match between the 

 Australians and an England eleven, when the 

 English side Dr. W. G. Grace, Messrs. A. E. 

 Stoddart, L. C. H. Palairet, and W. W. Read, 

 with Shrewsbury, Gunn, Peel, Wainwright, 

 Lockwood, Attewell, and Storer won by an 

 innings and 153 runs. Peel claimed eleven 

 for no, twice defeating Mr. J. J. Lyons. In 

 1894 Shrewsbury's inability to play and Gunn's 

 ill-health produced a depressing effect, and though 

 matters improved somewhat next year the form 

 was on the whole mediocre, and the play was 

 singularly tame. A revival with six victories 

 against as many defeats came in 1896, when 

 Mr. A. O.Jones did great things. H. B. Daft's 

 defensive 77 in the Surrey match was a notable 

 effort. 



408 



