NEIL FAIRBROTHER today reflected on his first century of the season - and labelled John Crawley "the best batsman in England".
Fairbrother made up for his near-miss in Lancashire's last championship game against Middlesex at Uxbridge, when he scored 97, with a superb 132 - his first-ever century against Sussex.
But afterwards he preferred to give praise to Crawley, whose 112 was his second century in a week against Sussex.
"It was great to watch John from the non-striker's end," said Fairbrother, who now has a century against all but two of the other 17 first class counties.
"I Know it's a bold statement to call him the best, but it's definitely my opinion."
The Cheshire duo put on 243 for the third wicket in 58 overs to take Lancashire to a powerful position of 380-5 after visiting captain Pete Moores had put them in.
But things could have been very different if Keith Greenfield hadn't dropped Crawley at slip before he had scored, as that would have left Lancashire 67-3.
In last week's NatWest tie at Hove, Greenfield hit a match-winning century for Sussex after Crawley dropped him on 81.
"It's funny how things go round in circles," agreed Crawley. "But it's worked for me this time. Neil also played very well to keep the momentum going and after our best session for a long time, we're in a good position where we should go on and win." Fairbrother's innings showed how much Lancashire missed him in the NatWest game, when he was ruled out by a thigh strain. His century came off 161 balls, 21 fewer than Crawley's, with both batsmen hitting 13 fours.
Meanwhile the second team slumped into deep trouble against Essex at Chelmsford despite another impressive performance from Gary Keedy.
Keedy, left out of the first team despite taking 13 wickets against Kent at Haslingden last week, claimed 5-62 off 33 overs as Essex reached 360-9 dec in their first innings - only for Lancashire to collapse to 23-5 in reply.
Paddy McKeown, Nathan Wood, Mark Chilton, Chris Brown and Mark Harvey were all out cheaply.
Converted for the new archive on 14 July 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article