List of English cricket matches to 1725

1610 to 1725
Cricket formats village, first-class and single wicket

This is a list of known cricket matches played until 1725 and complements History of cricket to 1725. The list is not necessarily exhaustive but does seek to highlight and summarise those matches that are significant in the sport's early history. The earliest matches played by parish teams are examples of what is now called village cricket. In the course of the 17th century, cricket evolved into a major sport staging lucrative eleven-a-side matches featuring the earliest professional players. The information is subject to change in the light of ongoing research.[fc 1]

List of matches

Unlike similar lists in the seasonal reviews, this one is fully chronological and does not separate matches by form or status. It therefore includes examples of both first-class and village cricket. Although single wicket was in vogue at the time, the earliest definite record of a match is in 1726. Note that the matches designated "first-class" are unofficially first-class.[fc 2]

date match title venue result source
unknown date, c.1610 Weald and Upland v Chalkhill Chevening result unknown [1]
notes

The earliest known village cricket match; and the earliest known organised match in Kent, in England and in the world. Deduced from a 1640 court case which recorded a "cricketing" of "Weald and Upland" versus "Chalkhill" at Chevening "about thirty years since" (i.e., c. 1610). The case concerned the land on which the game was played.

28 August 1624 (Sa) Horsted Keynes v West Hoathly Horsted Keynes result unknown [2]
notes

The earliest definite mention of cricket in Sussex is dated 1611 but this is believed to be the earliest known organised match in the county. Knowledge of it stems from the death thirteen days later of Jasper Vinall, on whom an inquest was held. He had suffered a head injury during the game when accidentally hit by the bat. As Vinall came from West Hoathly, it is assumed that the event was a village cricket match between the two parish teams.

c.30 June 1697 (W) "A Great Match" Sussex result unknown [3]
notes

A historically significant event which is recorded by numerous sources, starting with G. B. Buckley in his FL18C, but has been ignored by CricketArchive. It is the world's earliest known first-class match (possibly Sussex v Kent or Surrey) and, as Buckley said, "the earliest record of an eleven a side match". Following the decision of the English government in 1695 to allow freedom of the press (i.e., they decided not to renew the Licensing of the Press Act 1662 which had inhibited the scope of publications), it was possible for sporting events to be reported; however, it was a long time before editors gave sport any priority so coverage remained low key and infrequent for several decades. The 1697 match was reported in a periodical called the Foreign Post and described as "a great match at cricket" that was played "the middle of last week" in Sussex with "eleven of a side" and "they played for fifty guineas apiece". The stakes on offer indicate the importance of the fixture and the fact that it was eleven a side suggests that two strong and well-balanced teams were assembled. There is no scorecard and hence no statistics, so the match is outside the scope of the sport's statistical record, but it is the earliest-known example of first-class cricket in the more important historical record.

1 April 1700 (M) series of ten-a-side matches Clapham Common, near Vauxhall results unknown [4]
notes

The participants were all "gentlemen" though "others" could attend as spectators. Classification is uncertain, though it must presumably be viewed as a minor event given the limited social status of the participants, the relatively low stakes (£10 and £20 are mentioned in the newspaper report) and the ten-a-side teams. It is nevertheless the earliest known organised match in Surrey; the earliest definite mention of cricket in the county was the 1597 court case in Guildford.

unknown date, 1702 Duke of Richmond's XI v Arundel Sussex result unknown [5]
notes

Verified by a receipt for the purchase of brandy which describes the purpose of the transaction (i.e., to celebrate a cricket match). The venue was probably either Goodwood, where Richmond had his estate, or Arundel, possibly on Bury Hill which was used for cricket in later years. Arundel was a prominent centre of cricket in the 18th century.

7 August 1705 (Tu) West of Kent v Chatham Maulden (sic) result unknown [6]
notes

"Maulden" may have been East or West Malling. The title "West of Kent" suggests a team representative of several parishes, so this is arguably the earliest known first-class match in Kent. There were several matches throughout the 18th century involving teams called "West Kent" and "East Kent". Chatham was a prominent centre of cricket in the 18th century.

26 June 1707 (Th) London v Mitcham Lamb's Conduit Field, Holborn result unknown [7]
notes

The earliest known first-class match in Middlesex and possibly the earliest known to involve the original London Cricket Club, though the date of the club's formation is uncertain and the team here might have been an ad hoc London XI. Interestingly, given the "All England" term used later in the century, the source calls the team "All London". Mitcham Cricket Club, which is extant, was founded in 1685.

1 July 1707 (Tu) Croydon v London Croydon, possibly Duppas Hill result unknown [8][9]
notes

The earliest known first-class match in Surrey. As with the previous match, it is not known if the teams at this time represented formally constituted clubs and it is possible that both were ad hoc teams drawn from local residents. Croydon and London both had major teams in the first half of the 18th century.

8 July 1707 (Tu) London v Croydon Lamb's Conduit Field, Holborn result unknown [8][9]
notes

A return match to the one on 1 July above. There has been some confusion about the date following a misreading of the original source by H. T. Waghorn, who was the first modern researcher, but Tuesday, 8 July is believed to be correct.

23 June 1708 (W) A Canterbury team v Ash Street venue unknown A Canterbury team won [4]
notes

Probably a minor match only but it illustrates the popularity of cricket in Kent. The original source is the diary of one Thomas Minter, a Canterbury resident, who wrote: "We beat Ash Street at Crickets (sic)".

29 June 1709 (W) Kent v Surrey Dartford Brent result unknown [10][9]
notes

Although this is the earliest known inter-county match by title, it may only have involved two parish teams, one from each county. Dartford was a major club in the first half of the 18th century and its team at this time featured William Bedle. The match is the earliest known mention of Dartford Brent as a venue.

31 May 1717 (F) "A cricket match" Sussex result unknown [11]
notes

Thomas Marchant, a farmer from Hurstpierpoint in Sussex, first mentioned cricket in his diary. He made numerous references to the game, particularly concerning his local club, until 1727. His son Will played for "our parish", as he invariably called the Hurstpierpoint team. In total, his diaries mention 21 village matches and the entries provide evidence of the widespread popularity of cricket in Sussex.

1 Sept 1718 (M) London v Rochester Punch Club White Conduit Fields match abandoned [12][9]
notes

This match is the earliest known mention of White Conduit Fields as a venue. The game was abandoned on Monday, 1 September 1718, because three Rochester players "made an elopement" in an attempt to have the game declared incomplete so that they would retain their stake money. London was clearly winning at the time. The London players sued for their winnings and the game while incomplete was the subject of a noted lawsuit in which the terms of the wager were at issue. The court ordered that the match must be "played out" (see next entry).

early July 1719 London v Rochester Punch Club White Conduit Fields London won by 21 runs [12][9]
notes

The continuation of the September 1718 match (see above entry), which was abandoned by the Rochester players. Following a legal action in which the London players sued for their winnings, the court ordered that the match must be "played out". The exact date in July 1719 is uncertain but it was before the 4th. Rochester with four wickets standing needed 30 to win but were all out for 9. It is not certain if 30 was their overall target or if they needed thirty more in addition to runs scored in the original encounter; equally, it is not known if 9 was the innings total they achieved or if they added nine more to their "overnight" score. London's 21-run victory is the earliest known definite result of any cricket match.

19 August 1719 (W) London v Kent White Conduit Fields Kent won [8][9]
notes

Reportedly played for "a considerable sum of money". There is an insight into the priorities of early 18th century cricketers as the contemporary report concludes with: "The Kentish men won the wager" (i.e., the wager was more important than the match).

6 July 1720 (W) Kingston v Richmond venue unknown Kingston won [13]
notes

The secondary source is uncertain about the date due to a slight ambiguity in the primary source, a contemporary newspaper published Saturday, 16 July, which refers to "Wednesday last". The date of the match must therefore be either 6 or 13 July. The source says 5 or 12 July but this is an error as those dates were Tuesdays. Kingston and Richmond both had major teams in the first half of the 18th century.

9 July 1720 (Sa) London v Kent White Conduit Fields London won [8][9]
notes

Two London fielders were seriously injured by a clash of heads when chasing the ball. Waghorn speculated that their injuries may have caused a perception that the sport is "dangerous" as the next report he could find was for a match in 1726. If there was a lapse in cricket at this time, the more likely causes would be either: (a) the South Sea Bubble which ruined many investors and so could have reduced cricket patronage; or (b), as Waghorn himself mentions, "the (news)papers were small, and space limited, the advertising and reporting (of) matches ceased".

unknown date, 1721 English sailors Cambay, India result unknown [14]
notes

Not a match in England, but one involving English sailors of the East India Company, who played a match at Cambay, near Baroda. It is the earliest known reference to cricket being played in the Indian sub-continent. One of the players wrote: "When my boat was lying for a fortnight in one of the channels, though the country was inhabited by the Culeys (sic), we every day diverted ourselves with playing Cricket and to other Exercises, which they would come and be spectators of".[15]

18 July 1722 (W) London v Dartford Islington, probably White Conduit Fields result unknown [16][17][9]
notes

The subject of a letter in The Weekly Journal dated 21 July 1722. The exact venue may have been White Conduit Fields. The match was abandoned following a dispute. The letter said: "A Match at Cricket was made between the little Parish of Dartford in Kent, and the Gentlemen known by the name of the London Club". Teams styled "London" were already in existence, as above, but this is the first actual reference to a "London Club".

unknown date, 1723 Surrey v London Moulsey Hurst result unknown [18]
notes

The source states that "XI Gentlemen of Surrey played XI of London at Moulsey Hurst during the summer". It is the earliest known mention of Moulsey Hurst as a venue for cricket.

unknown date, 1723 Dartford v Tonbridge Dartford Brent result unknown [16]
notes

The subject of a diary entry by Robert Harley, Earl of Oxford, who wrote: "At Dartford upon the Heath as we came out of the town, the men of Tonbridge and the Dartford men were warmly engaged at the sport of cricket, which of all the people of England the Kentish folk are the most renowned for, and of all the Kentish men, the men of Dartford lay claim to the greatest excellence".

11 June 1724 (Th) Dartford v London Dartford Brent result unknown [19]
notes

This match is a recent discovery so the next match, which has been in the records a long time, was actually a return.

18 June 1724 (Th) London v Dartford Kennington Common result unknown [20][9]
notes

The earliest known match on Kennington Common and a return match to the one on 11 June above.

10 August 1724 (M) Penshurst, Tonbridge & Wadhurst v Dartford Penshurst Park result unknown [21][19]
notes

Recorded in a diary entry by one John Dawson, who may have attended, and described as "a great match". Note that some sources have mistakenly given the venue as "Islington" but the researches of Messrs McCann and Maun have proved that it took place at Penshurst Park.

unknown date, 1724 Edwin Stead's XI v Chingford Dartford Brent result unknown [22]
notes

Dartford Brent is assumed to have been the venue because of the wording used by a primary source (see below). If, however, the venue was in Chingford, then this is the earliest known match in Essex. In an attempt to nullify the wagers, the Chingford team refused to play to a finish when Stead's team had the advantage. A court case followed and, as in the London v. Rochester match in 1718, it was ordered to be played out so that all wagers could be fulfilled. Lord Chief Justice Pratt presided over the case and he "referr'd the said Cause back to Dartford Heath (i.e., Brent), to be played on where they left off, and a Rule of Court was made accordingly".[23] The game was completed in September 1726. The final result is not on record, and there is no confirmation that Stead's team held their advantage and won.

15 July 1725 (Th) Sir William Gage's XI v another XI unknown venue Gage "shamefully beaten" [24]
notes

Charles Lennox, 2nd Duke of Richmond wrote to Sir William Gage in July 1725 and issued a challenge for a match to be played at Goodwood. Gage replied to him by letter on 16 July and confirmed that his team would play the Duke's on Tuesday, 20 July (see below). Gage then stated that he is "in great affliction from being shamefully beaten yesterday the first match I played ys (sic) year". He went on to wish the Duke success in everything except his cricket match.

20 July 1725 (Tu) Duke of Richmond's XI v Sir William Gage's XI Bury Hill, Arundel Richmond's XI won by "above forty (runs)" [24][25]
notes

The subject of Gage's letter to Richmond on 16 July (see above). Richmond had challenged Gage to a match at Goodwood. However, the report in the Daily Journal newspaper on 21 July confirms Bury Hill (then called Berry Hill), near Arundel, as the venue. The match, played before "a vast Concourse of People", was hosted by Thomas Howard, 8th Duke of Norfolk who gave a ball at Arundel Castle in the evening.

County cricket

From a very early stage in cricket history there are references to counties in use as team names although it is generally believed that the earliest "inter-county matches", especially the Kent v. Surrey one in 1709, were really inter-parish matches involving two villages on either side of a county boundary.[10]

It was probably not until the 1720s or 1730s that county teams began to be formed which were representative of several parishes within their respective counties and could therefore be deemed a "county XI". The official County Championship was constituted in December 1889 and first contested in the 1890 season. For about thirty years before that, there were "Champion County"[fc 3] claims in the newspapers. The earliest use of the term is in the 1820s and, much earlier still, there is evidence of what may be called "bragging rights" between Kent and Sussex in the 1720s, when both these counties are known to have sought ascendancy over the other.[26]

In the absence of an official championship before 1890, historians have sometimes used reverse analysis to put forward a view re which was the best team in a given season. It is not always possible to be conclusive about it and there are several seasons, especially from 1864 when there was a general increase in the number and frequency of inter-county matches, in which rival claims exist. A difficulty in the 18th century is posed by the original London Cricket Club which was ostensibly based at the Artillery Ground in Middlesex. It has been suggested that London was representative of Middlesex but London played matches against Middlesex. It also played Surrey and, to complicate things further, it played some "home" matches at places like Kennington Common which are in Surrey. In many ways, the old London Cricket Club was a precursor to both Marylebone Cricket Club and W. G. Grace's Edwardian London County Cricket Club and, for the purposes of county cricket, is itself considered the equivalent of a county team that was not the same as either Surrey or Middlesex.[26]

First mentions

Counties

The first definite mentions of cricket in the following traditional counties occurred between 1597 and 1724:

Clubs and teams

With the exception of Mitcham, club and team foundation dates cannot be determined, but it is known that the following clubs or teams were active during the period:

Players

The contemporary sources rarely mentioned players by name but it is known that the following were active during the period:

Venues

The following venues are known to have been used during the period:

Footnotes

  1. ↑ Note that surviving match records to 1825 are incomplete and any statistical compilation of a player's career in that period is based on known data. Match scorecards were not always created, or have been lost, and the matches themselves were not always recorded in the press or other media. Scorecard data was not comprehensive: e.g., bowling analyses lacked balls bowled and runs conceded; bowlers were not credited with wickets when the batsman was caught or stumped; in many matches, the means of dismissal were omitted.
  2. ↑ "First-class cricket" was officially defined in May 1894 by a meeting at Lord's of Marylebone Cricket Club (MCC) and the county clubs which were then competing in the County Championship. The ruling was effective from the beginning of the 1895 season. Pre-1895 matches of the same standard have no official definition of status because the ruling is not retrospective and the "unofficial first-class" designation, as applied to a given match, is based on the views of one or more substantial historical sources. For further information, see First-class cricket, Forms of cricket and History of cricket.
  3. ↑ An unofficial seasonal title proclaimed by media or historians prior to December 1889 when the official County Championship was constituted.

Notes and citations

  1. ↑ Underdown, p. 4.
  2. ↑ McCann, pp. xxxiii–xxxiv.
  3. ↑ Buckley (FL18C), p. 1.
  4. 1 2 Waghorn, p. 4.
  5. ↑ McCann, p. 1.
  6. ↑ Maun, p. 7.
  7. ↑ Maun, p. 9.
  8. 1 2 3 4 Waghorn, p. 5.
  9. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ACS, Important Matches, p. 19.
  10. 1 2 Buckley (FLPVC), p. 1.
  11. ↑ McCann, pp. 1–5.
  12. 1 2 Buckley (FL18C), p. 2.
  13. ↑ Maun, p. 23.
  14. ↑ Bowen, pp. 261–267.
  15. ↑ Guha, p. 3.
  16. 1 2 "Our history: Cricket in Dartford". Dartford Cricket Club. 2012. Retrieved 14 February 2015.
  17. ↑ Maun, pp. 26–27.
  18. ↑ Maun, p. 27.
  19. 1 2 Maun, p. 28.
  20. ↑ Buckley (FL18C), p. 3.
  21. ↑ McCann, p. 18.
  22. ↑ Waghorn, pp. 5–6.
  23. ↑ Maun, p. 33.
  24. 1 2 McCann, p. 19.
  25. ↑ Maun, p. 31.
  26. 1 2 Leach, John (2008). "Champion cricket teams since 1728". Stumpsite. Archived from the original on 29 August 2008. Retrieved 28 February 2015.

References

External links

This article is issued from Wikipedia - version of the Friday, April 01, 2016. The text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share Alike but additional terms may apply for the media files.