1774 English cricket season

Last updated

1774 English cricket season
1773
1775

The Laws of Cricket were substantially revised before the beginning of the 1774 English cricket season. The scorecards of five important matches have survived and there are reports of other senior matches, including two single wicket events. [note 1] Hampshire did much better than in 1773, and were unbeaten in their known results to the end of July but then they lost twice to Kent in August.

Contents

Single wicket

Records have survived of three matches played under single wicket rules. The first on 6–7 June was a five-a-side match between Hampshire and Kent at Moulsey Hurst for a stake of 100 guineas a side. Lumpy Stevens and Samuel Colchin played as given men for Hampshire and John Minshull as one for Kent. Hampshire scored 118 and 127; Kent scored 21 and 36. Hampshire won by 188 runs. Tom Sueter with 74 in the second Hampshire innings scored more than both innings of Kent on his own. [5]

The Kentish Gazette on 22 June advertised a single wicket match at Sevenoaks Vine on 27 June for £100 a side between the Kent professionals John Wood (i.e., the bowler from Seal) and William Bullen of Greenwich. The outcome was not reported. [6] On the same day, there was a five-a-side match between teams called Middlesex and London on Marylebone Fields. The stakes here were £20. [7]

Scorecards

The scorecards of five senior matches, all involving Hampshire, have survived. In these five, Hampshire played twice each against England and Kent. The fifth match was against Surrey. Limited information about other matches has been found in contemporary newspapers. [8]

England v Hampshire

22 to 24 June

Scorecard : Hampshire v England.

The first match between Hampshire and England was played 22 to 24 June on Broadhalfpenny Down. [8] Hampshire won by an innings and 52 runs [9]

England batted first and were dismissed for 122, of which Minshull scored 37. Hampshire responded with 307. The scorecard shows that nine Hampshire batters reached double figures, and the other two both scored 9. Their top scorers were Sueter (67) and John Small (47). In their second innings, England were all out for 133, Minshull scoring 38, and so Hampshire gained an innings victory. [9] Scores and Biographies has Laleham Burway as the venue, but research by The Association of Cricket Statisticians and Historians (ACS) has confirmed that it was Broadhalfpenny Down. [8] No bowling or fielding details are known, but Hampshire's attack was strengthened by the addition of star bowler Lumpy as a given man. [9]

8 and 9 July

Scorecard : England v Hampshire.

The return match was played 8 and 9 July on Sevenoaks Vine. [8] Hampshire won by 169 runs. [10]

Hampshire, batting first, scored 139. James Aylward (29) and George Leer (28) were their top scorers. Bowling for England, William Bullen took five wickets, all bowled. This is the first time that a bowler can definitely be credited with the 5wI feat. [note 2] England were all out for 88 after Lumpy, Thomas Brett, and Nyren took two wickets apiece. Hampshire, with a first innings lead of 51, extended this to 233 by scoring 182 in their second innings. Aylward scored 61 and Sueter scored 30. In their second innings, England were dismissed for 64, Lumpy taking four wickets. Hampshire were greatly helped by having Lumpy as a given man.

Both of John Wood (Kent) and John Wood (Surrey) were playing for England. One of them made the top score of 27 in England's first innings, and one of them took three second innings wickets (they might well have shared the wickets). However, it was definitely John Wood of Surrey who took a catch in the first innings. [10]

This was the final appearance in known senior matches by John Frame, the Kent fast bowler who was held by John Nyren to have been "the other principal with Lumpy" (i.e., in opposition to Hambledon). His greatest years were behind him when the statistical record began (he would have been 39 in 1772). He started playing in 1749. The bulk of his career was through the 1750s and 1760s and Scores & Biographies records him bowling for Dartford/Kent when they beat England twice in 1759. [11]

Surrey v Hampshire

28 July

Scorecard : Surrey v Hampshire.

Hampshire played two matches against Surrey. A scorecard has survived from the first on 28 July at Guildford Bason. Hampshire won by 7 wickets. [12]

There was an outstanding fast bowling performance in this match by Hampshire's Thomas Brett, who took at least nine wickets (i.e., nine were bowled out). Surrey were dismissed for 61 and 77, Brett bowling five in the first innings and four in the second. His 5wI is the second on record after Bullen's haul three weeks previously. Brett's match haul of nine was the highest on record at this time. Will Palmer batted well in Surrey's first innings, and made 26*. Hampshire scored 91 and 48/3. [12]

27 September

The second match was on 27 September at Laleham Burway. The result is unknown. It was advertised on Saturday, 24 September in the St James Chronicle. The stakes were £100 a side, and Surrey were to have Samuel Colchin as a given man. [13]

Hampshire v Kent

13 and 14 July

Hampshire played Kent three times. There is no scorecard for the first match, played 13/14 July on Broadhalfpenny Down. Hampshire won by 10 wickets. The stake was £525. Kent had Lumpy, Thomas White, and Samuel Colchin as given men, though Colchin seems to have been a Kent man. Kent issued a challenge to play two further matches (see below). [14]

8 to 10 August

Scorecard : Kent v Hampshire.

The second match was played 8 to 10 August on Sevenoaks Vine. Kent won by innings and 35 runs. [15]

Lumpy had played as a given man for Hampshire in earlier matches, but this time he was given to Kent. He took four bowled wickets in Hampshire's first innings of 46. Kent then made a total of 240, which included a known record score of 95 by Joseph Miller, beating the previous known record of 88 by Richard Newland in 1745, and by William Yalden in 1773. The Duke of Dorset, who was not only a patron but also a good player, supported Miller with 77 runs. In their second innings, Hampshire did better and scored 159, Small making 55*. [15]

This was the final match in the "first phase" of Richard Purchase's career. The Hampshire bowler did not appear again until the 1781 season, but then continued to play regularly until he finally retired after the 1803 season. William Brazier, who became a prominent player for many years, made his first recorded senior appearance in the match for Kent. [15]

15 to 18 August

Scorecard : Hampshire v Kent.

The final match, a few days later, was on Broadhalfpenny Down. Kent won by 4 wickets. [16]

Hampshire scored 174 (Small 45, Nyren 35, Aylward 30; Lumpy 3 wickets) and 129 (Edward Aburrow Jr 33, Richard Francis 22). Kent scored 168 (Miller 40) and 136/6 (White 50, Miller 45). William Hogsflesh played as a substitute fielder in Kent's second innings because he did not bat for Hampshire. It is not known if he fielded in the Kent first innings. Even so, he was allowed to bowl, as he took the wicket of Richard Simmons.

Other events

The ACS list includes an Essex v Kent match at Ingatestone on 8 August but that was the same day as the Kent v Hampshire match at Sevenoaks, so it was probably a minor match between two parish sides using the names of their counties. [17]

Maidstone v Sussex
10 August in Maidstone.
Sussex won by 1 wicket. Sussex had two given men, both from Kent. The Maidstone team may have been the Duke of Dorset's XI. Sussex still needed three to win when their last man went in. [18]
London v Chertsey
22–23 August on the Artillery Ground.
London won by 5 wickets. Chertsey scored 146 and 97; London scored 158 and 86/5. [19]
Sussex v Maidstone
24 August in Peasmarsh.
Result unknown. This was due to be played by the same teams as on 10 August. No report was found. [20]
Hambledon Parish v Hampshire
14 September on Broadhalfpenny Down.
Result unknown. This has historical interest but, as with a similar fixture in an earlier season, it was probably a minor match. [21]

The Laws of Cricket 1774

The Laws of Cricket , first drafted ahead of the 1744 season, were extensively revised on 25 February 1774 by a committee representing several clubs and counties. They met at the Star and Garter in Pall Mall, London. The chairman was Sir William Draper and other members were the Duke of Dorset, the Earl of Tankerville, Sir Horatio Mann, Philip Dehany, John Brewer Davis, Harry Peckham, Charles Powlett, Francis Vincent, John Cooke, Charles Coles and Richard James. [22]

As reprinted in Scores & Biographies, the revised Laws stated: [22]

Notes

  1. Some eleven-a-side matches played from 1772 to 1863 have been rated "first-class" by certain sources. [1] However, the term only came into common use around 1864, when overarm bowling was legalised. It was formally defined as a standard by a meeting at Lord's, in May 1894, 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, but pre-1895 matches of the same standard have no official definition of status because the ruling is not retrospective. [2] Matches of a similar standard since the beginning of the 1864 season are generally considered to have an unofficial first-class status. [3] Pre-1864 matches which are included in the ACS' "Important Match Guide" may generally be regarded as important or, at least, historically significant. [4] For further information, see First-class cricket.
  2. Scorers in the 18th century would only credit the bowler with a wicket if the batter was bowled or lbw. Catches and stumpings were credited to the fielder or wicket-keeper only.

References

  1. "FC Matches in England in 1772" . CricketArchive. Retrieved 29 November 2025.
  2. Wisden (1948). Preston, Hubert (ed.). Wisden Cricketers' Almanack (85th ed.). London: Sporting Handbooks Ltd. p. 813. OCLC   851705816.
  3. ACS 1982, pp. 4–5.
  4. ACS 1981, pp. 1–40.
  5. Waghorn 2005, p. 38.
  6. Buckley 1935, p. 64.
  7. Buckley 1935, p. 65.
  8. 1 2 3 4 ACS 1981, p. 24.
  9. 1 2 3 Haygarth 1996, p. 21.
  10. 1 2 Haygarth 1996, p. 17.
  11. Haygarth 1996, p. 2.
  12. 1 2 Haygarth 1996, p. 18.
  13. Buckley 1935, p. 69.
  14. Ashley-Cooper 1929, p. 22.
  15. 1 2 3 Haygarth 1996, p. 19.
  16. Haygarth 1996, p. 20.
  17. Buckley 1935, p. 66.
  18. McCann 2004, pp. 96–97.
  19. Buckley 1935, p. 67.
  20. McCann 2004, p. 97.
  21. Buckley 1935, p. 68.
  22. 1 2 Haygarth 1996, pp. 16–17.

Bibliography

Further reading