Slindon—the great little cricket club is an old article that I've been amending for addition to this blog. I began work on it a week ago. In the meantime, I've learned that I have terminal pancreatic cancer, and so I've published the Slindon piece before it's actually ready (for example, it has no images).
I'm closing this blog now, with regret, so that I can focus on my family.
Goodbye.
|
top of page Slindon—the great little cricket club |
|
foot of page Introduction 1741 season | 1742 season | 1743 season | 1744 season | 1745 to 1749 Death of the Duke of Richmond "Poor little Slyndon" |
Cricket in the 18th century was funded by gambling interests and some of the wealthier gamblers, acting as patrons, formed whole teams that were representative of several parishes and even of counties. Such a team was "poor little Slyndon (sic) against almost your whole county of Surrey". That quote is taken from a letter written by Slindon's patron, Charles Lennox, 2nd Duke of Richmond (1701 – 1750) in the 1741 English cricket season. Playing at Merrow Down near Guildford on 1 September, Slindon had just beaten Surrey "almost in one innings".
The Duke of Richmond was certainly the greatest of the sport's early patrons and he did an enormous service to the development of the sport in his native Sussex. He had been active as a player and patron since the 1720s and it seems that he lent his benevolence to the little woodland club near Arundel in the late 1730s when he became aware that its residents included three talented brothers, one of whom was showing signs of greatness, and a number of other decent players.
The brothers were the Newlands, among whom Richard Newland (1718 – 29 May 1791), an all-rounder who batted left-handed, was one of the greatest early cricketers and was famous throughout the 1740s. His brothers, about whom little is known, were Adam (born 1714) and John (born 1717). Another good player in the village, although he was an unsavoury one, was the notorious smuggler "Cuddy" whose real name was Edward Aburrow senior. Senior because his son became a regular in the famous Hambledon team of the 1770s.
It is almost certain that Slindon was not just a village team and that it was in fact a Sussex county team, just as Dartford Cricket Club had always formed the nucleus of the Kent team. There can be little doubt that Richmond cast his net wide and that players from elsewhere in Sussex played for Slindon. But Richard Newland was the star and he was definitely local. It seems that Richmond built the team around Newland and so it was perhaps natural that the name of the team, even if it was a Sussex county XI, should be that of Newland's village.
The first written record of the Slindon team is on 15 June 1741 when they played against Portsmouth at Stansted Park, Rowlands Castle, near Havant in Hampshire. Slindon won this match by 9 wickets. It is the earliest report of a match involving Slindon, though the club must have been playing for some time beforehand. The Duke of Richmond in a letter said that "above 5000 people" were present. In a second letter, he gives the result.
On Thursday 9 July 1741, in a letter to her husband, the Duchess of Richmond (1706 – 1751) mentioned a conversation with John Newland re a Slindon v East Dean match at Long Down, near Eartham, a week earlier. This seems to be the first recorded mention of any of the Newland family.
In two subsequent letters to his friend the Duke of Newcastle, a future Prime Minister, Richmond spoke about a game on Tuesday 28 July which resulted in a brawl with "hearty blows and broken heads"! The game was at Portslade between Slindon and unnamed opponents. Apparently, Slindon won the battle but the result of the match is unknown! Richmond had been involved in ruckuses of this sort before and it must not be forgotten that Georgian England was an essentially violent society. As we have seen in Richmond's tolerance of Aburrow, it was quite normal in cricket for the rough to rub shoulders with the smooth.
The "poor little Slyndon" phrase followed the game against Surrey at Merrow Down on 7 September 1741. Richmond in a letter to Newcastle before the game spoke of "poor little Slyndon against almost your whole county of Surrey". Next day he wrote again, saying that "wee (sic) have beat Surrey almost in one innings".
Soon afterwards, Richmond's wife Sarah, a feisty character in her own right, wrote to him and said she "wish'd..... that the Sussex mobb (sic) had thrash'd the Surrey mob". She had "a grudge to those fellows ever since they mob'd you" (apparently a reference to the Richmond Green fiasco in August of the 1731 season). She then said she wished the Duke "had won more of their moneys". So she could hardly be described as an admirer of Surrey....
The fame of Slindon and the Newlands was established after this beating of Surrey. In August 1742, the report of a London v Croydon game at the Artillery Ground says that "the noted bowler from Slendon (sic) assisted Croydon". This was probably Richard Newland although he was a genuine all-rounder, not just a bowler.
In September, the Slindon team came to the Artillery Ground for probably the first time. London Cricket Club was pre-eminent in the game at that time and had dominated the 1730s. In the two matches on 6 and 10 September, London prevailed. They won the first game "with great difficulty" and then, apparently having been assisted by the weather which made the pitch unplayable, they won the second by 184 runs.
The enthusiasm generated by these matches cannot be overstated. Massive crowds attended and fortunes were gambled on the results and on individual performances. A report states that Slindon came to the Artillery Ground "having played 43 games and lost but one". Richard Newland was heavily backed to score 40 runs off his own bat: a feat he failed to accomplish. It should be noted that pitch conditions in those days heavily favoured the bowlers and to score 40 then would be like making a century on a modern "flat track".
A report states: "At the conclusion of the above (i.e., second) match Slindon offered to play another match against London either at Guildford or on the South Downs for £100, but the challenge was not accepted".
All quiet on the Slindon front in 1743 which saw the rise of Addington Cricket Club. Unlike Slindon, Addington beat London by an innings. Slindon, it seems, went away to lick its wounds. The only notable mentions of Slindon in 1743 are of Richard Newland personally for he consolidated his reputation as an outstanding single wicket performer.
The year of the famous Slindon Challenge.
Monday 23 April marked the death of Sir William Gage (1695 – 1744) who was one of the greatest of cricket's early patrons, especially in his native Sussex, though we do not actually know if he was involved with Slindon. He always enjoyed a friendly rivalry with Richmond and it is possible he did share in Slindon's fortunes.
The London "Daily Advertiser" carried various notices from Thursday 31 May until Sunday 3 June which announced that two untitled sides would play in the Artillery Ground on Saturday 2 June. On 31 May, the paper said that the teams would consist of "four gentlemen from Slindon, one from Eastbourne, two from Hamilton (sic) in Sussex, one from Addington and three from Lingfield in Surrey" against "four gentlemen of London, one from Richmond, one from Reigate, three from Addington in Surrey, one from Bray Wick in Berkshire and one from Arundel in Sussex". This was followed by the usual reminder about no dogs and the need to obtain a pass ticket if leaving the ground during play.
The "Daily Advertiser" changed its notice on Friday 1 June through 2 and 3 June by confusingly announcing the names of the players on each side. However, the names in the paper are not the same as those on the earliest known cricket scorecard kept by the Duke of Richmond. The same (i.e., incorrect) names were also reported on 3 June, the day after the match. The paper announced that the two teams would consist of: Cuddy (i.e., Edward Aburrow senior), Richard Newland, Adam Newland, John Newland, Ridgeway, Green (all of Sussex); William Sawyer, Stevens, Stevens, Collins (all of Surrey); and Norris of London versus Stephen Dingate, John Harris, Joseph Harris, Tom Faulkner, George Jackson, Maynard (all of Surrey); ? Bryant (Bromley), George Smith, ? Bennett, Howlett (all of London); and the famous all-rounder Thomas Waymark, now of Berkshire. No titles were given to the teams.
According to the Duke of Richmond's papers, which are now in the possession of the West Sussex Records Office, including the recorded scores of this match, the teams were somewhat different from those advertised. The scorecard is currently the earliest known in which individual and team scores are recorded but it lacks details of dismissal.
Slindon: Edward Aburrow (aka Cuddy), ? Bryant, Richard Newland, Adam Newland, – Ridgeway, Joseph Harris, George Jackson, John Harris, – Norris, – Andrews, George Smith.
London: – Howlett, Stephen Dingate, W Sawyer, – Maynard, ? Bennett, Tom Faulkner, Thomas Waymark, – Butler, – Green, – Hodder, – Collins.
We do not know which of the two Bryants or which of the two Bennetts took part. Both the Harris brothers, John and Joseph, were involved; and of the three Newland brothers it was John who did not play. Thomas Waymark was formerly employed by the Duke of Richmond but he is here given as a Berkshire resident and playing for the London XI.
The match included a declaration by the Slindon team in their second innings at 102-6. They made 102 & 102-6d against London's scores of 79 & 70. Slindon won by 55 runs.
In September, Slindon again played London at the Artillery Ground and won, but details including the margin of victory have not survived. Having now defeated London twice, Slindon felt emboldened enough to issue a challenge whereby it would play any parish in England. London did not accept. Only Addington Cricket Club and Bromley Cricket Club were able to accept.
Matches against both these clubs were arranged at the Artillery Ground: against Addington on 12 and 13 September; and against Bromley on 14 September. We know that rain intervened and no result or match report has survived of either game, even though they are known to have created huge interest. We can only conclude that they were rained off.
The single wicket form of the game became increasingly popular in the latter half of the 1740s and we read much about Richard Newland but little of Slindon after its heroics in 1744.
On 5 July 1745, there was a match at the Artillery Ground between two "best elevens", apparently organised by Robert Colchin and Richard Newland which was advertised rather wordily as Sevenoaks, Bromley & Addington versus Slindon, Horsmonden, Chislehurst & London!
In the 1747 season, Slindon issued challenges in the highly popular (and lucrative) "fives" version of the game. On Monday 6 July 1747, Five of Slindon played Five of Dartford at the Artillery Ground. This was the result of a challenge by Slindon, published in the "Daily Advertiser" on Mon 29 June, to play "five of any parish in England, for their own Sum". The announcement advised interested parties: "If it is accepted of by any, they are desir'd to go to Mr Smith, who has Orders to make Stakes for them". The three Newland brothers all played. "Mr Smith" was George Smith, keeper of the Artillery Ground. On Saturday 4 July, George Smith announced in the same paper that "five of Dartford in Kent, have made Stakes with him, and will play with the above Gentlemen at the Time and Place above mentioned for twenty Pounds". Subsequently more five-a-side challenges took place on Wednesday 8 July against Bromley and then two matches on 10 July and 15 July against the strong Hadlow team from Kent.
The Duke of Richmond died on Wednesday 8 August 1750 and it could be said that Slindon died with him, especially as the Newlands were by now veteran players with their best years behind them. Richmond's death, following that of his friend Sir William Gage in 1744, had a massive impact on the game in Sussex and the game as a whole was affected only a few months later when the Prince of Wales, another key patron, also died. An immediate slump ensued from this loss of patronage and then cricket was badly impacted by the Seven Years War from 1756 to 1763.
The last we read of Slindon, now in reality "poor little Slyndon", is in a match on 21 and 22 June 1754 against Midhurst & Petworth on Bowling Green, Lavington Common. This was clearly a village match only. Slindon apparently lost by eight wickets and the match seems to mark the great little club's swansong for it is not mentioned in the sources thereafter. Sussex cricket as a whole went into decline and, although a number of inter-parish games are reported over the next decade or so, it is not until 1766 that we again find a Sussex team in a major match.
References to the Hambledon Club, particularly those in the works of G. B. Buckley, strongly suggest that Hambledon was the organiser of matches played not just by a Hampshire county team but by a combined Hampshire-Sussex team. A number of Sussex cricketers are known to have played for Hambledon during its glory days: one of them being Edward "Curry" Aburrow, son of the notorious Slindon smuggler; and another being none other than the club captain Richard Nyren, who was born in Sussex and was the nephew of the three Newland brothers.
|
top of page The Pioneering Era | Last Edition |
|
foot of page Wagon trains? | The Artillery Ground |
|
|
Robert Horton and Ward Bond in Wagon Train |
Well, we really don't know how cricket was played before Charles Lennox, the Duke of Richmond, decided some rules must be written down. He may well have thought "enough is enough", because you can imagine all manner of local variations being imposed upon visitors, and semblance of order was desperately needed. We've seen how Lennox and Alan Brodrick achieved this for their matches in 1727 and we know Articles of Agreement were in use at many more matches after that. A concerted effort was made by the Star and Garter bods in 1744 when they coded the first Laws of Cricket. That document, however, wasn't published until 1755 and, eventually, its stipulations became moreorless universal, or so we believe.
The point is that the game was not in any sort of recognisable "era" until there was an element of stable uniformity, albeit subject to a few local exceptions. This, as much as anything, is Lennox's legacy and why he deserved to have a biography called The Duke Who Was Cricket. Before Lennox, cricket was a chaotic hodgepodge. For starters, look at all the legal and gambling issues mentioned last time. Stability enabled the sport to move forward and flourish. Lennox's wagon trains began rolling westwards to Gloucester and north to Sheffield and beyond.
The Pioneering Era had two defining factors and two key features. The first factor, as I've said, was the spread of cricket nationwide. The second is what was happening on the field, and the key element there was the underarm delivery that was bowled all along the ground, as in bowls, to a batter holding a hockey stick implement like the one below, which was owned by John Chitty in 1729.
|
|
The oldest surviving bat from 1729. It is on display in the Member's Pavilion at The Oval. |
The first key feature was single wicket, which reached its zenith in 1748 and has never been as popular than it was in this era. The second, starting in 1730, was the Artillery Ground. No venue, not even Lord's or the MCG, has ever held such an important status as this place did from 1730 till the 1760s.
We know that William Bedle, Thomas Waymark, William Sawyer, Richard Newland, Robert Colchin, and other pioneers were great players, but what set them apart from the greats of the pre-roundarm years—John Small, Lumpy Stevens, Richard Nyren, David Harris, Billy Beldham, the horrendous Beauclerk, and others—was the 1760s evolution from bowled to pitched, and from curved to straight. I think it's entirely possible the evolution began at Hambledon. The famous Hampshire village is known erroneously as the "Cradle of Cricket", but perhaps it was the cradle of a new kind of cricket?
I would date the Pioneering Era from about 1726, when cricket largely escaped all those legal controversies and began introducing Laws of its own, until about 1763, when the Seven Years War ended and the Hambledon Era began. I'll have much more to say about all of this in future instalments but, for now, the wagon wheels are turning.
The first port of call for cricket as it began its journey of expansion, from a regional sport to a national one, was Finsbury. Recorded as far back as the 13th century, Finsbury is immediately north of the City of London. It used to be a Metropolitan Borough in its own right till it merged with Islington in 1965 to form the London Borough of Islington. Finsbury today is the southern part of Islington, and has a long-held military tradition. This began in 1641, when the Honourable Artillery Company (HAC) became resident just off the City Road, at a site called the Artillery Ground between Chiswell Street and the Bunhill Fields Burial Ground.
The HAC has always used the Artillery Ground for its own displays, parades, training, and so on, but was often willing to allow outside parties to stage other events. From the time of its earliest known major cricket match in 1730, the ground was for over thirty years the main centre of cricket in London. Having been an almost rural location for much of its history, it is nowadays surrounded by the Company's headquarters and numerous office buildings.
|
|
A Game of Cricket as played in the Artillery Ground. This engraving by Antoine Benoist replicates a lost 1743 oil painting by Francis Hayman. The title can be misleading because the venue is not the Artillery Ground itself—emphasis is on the words "as played". |
The Artillery Ground is best known as a historic cricket venue and especially as the home of the original London Cricket Club, which was probably formed in the 1720s. For many years before the creation of the Hambledon Club in the 1760s, it was the feature venue for not only London but all English cricket. It eventually fell into disrepute because of uncontrolled gambling and crowd disturbances. Its use declined in the aftermath of the Seven Years War, and the last known matches of any significance were played in 1778, some years after the London Club had already disbanded.
In the 18th century, the venue was referred to in contemporary reports as the old Artillery Ground, but this may be because it was used frequently for other forms of sport or entertainment. Its earliest definite use for a cricket match was on Monday, 10 August 1730 when Middlesex played Surrey. Middlesex won but no other details are known. Three weeks later, London hosted two matches there against Surrey, and the ground quickly became London's first choice home venue with five matches recorded in 1731: three against Dartford and two against Croydon. By the 1740s, the Artillery Ground had become the sport's feature venue and, for the next twenty or so years, it had a social status that only Lord's has subsequently challenged. Single wicket was especially popular in the 1740s and huge crowds gambling huge sums of money were attracted to the ground whenever these contests took place.
The history of the ground is coloured by references to its keepers, or lessees. The first known reference is in The Craftsman dated Saturday, 26 February 1732 re Mr Christopher Jones, Master of the Artillery Ground, at the Pyed Horse public house in Chiswell Street. The keepers were responsible for maintaining order at the ground. For example, Jones posted a notice in the newspapers that advertised a London v Kent match on 5 July 1733 as "for one guinea each man with wickets to be pitched at one o'clock and the spectators to keep outside the line round the ground. If any persons get on the Walls (sic), they will be prosecuted as the Law directs; and the Company are desired to come through the Py'd Horse Yard, Chiswell Street". Obviously, by coming through the pub, many customers might well stop to buy a drink and Jones, as the landlord, would have no objection to that!
The most charismatic keeper was George Smith who had frequent disputes with the HAC during his tenure in the 1740s. He also had money problems and there are surviving reports of his attempts to pay off his debts by raising the ground admission and then being forced to reduce it again.
On 15 September 1784, Vincent Lunardi flew a balloon from the Artillery Ground, the first such flight in England.
|
|
top of page Articles of Agreement | Slindon—the great little cricket club |
|
foot of page Rules are rules | The Articles | Alan Brodrick | Things to come |
|
|
Charles Lennox, 2nd Duke of Richmond |
Then, in 1727, we encounter the Law of Contract. Don't worry, though, because this legal nicety was a positive which boded well for cricket's future.
The contract in question was the Articles of Agreement drawn up between Charles Lennox, the 2nd Duke of Richmond, and his opponent Alan Brodrick, another nobleman who would shortly become the 2nd Viscount Midleton. The purpose of the Articles was to formalise the rules applicable to matches which they promoted, and their teams met twice that season.
It may be the first time that rules (or some part of the rules as in this case) were formally agreed, although rules as such definitely existed. In early times, they would have been agreed orally and subject to local variations. This syndrome was also evident in football—especially the thorny question of handling the ball—until the FA was founded in 1863.
Okay, and bearing in mind the current Laws of Cricket, let's have a look at these Articles, shall we? The agreement was finalised as follows on 11 July 1727 and, as written at the time, outlined sixteen points:
|
|
Alan Brodrick, 2nd Viscount Midleton |
In any sport, the decision of an umpire or referee must be final, and must be accepted. If they make a mistake, so what? Didn't Gob Open make a mistake when one of his balls was hit for six, or when he dropped an easy catch, or when he was clean bowled first ball? And as for VAR, words fail me, especially after seeing incompetence like the fiasco at Tottenham a few seasons ago when the "adjudicator" agreed that Luis DÃaz was onside, and then told the referee that he wasn't!
Looking at the Articles as a whole, it is interesting to compare them with the Laws of 1744, which were widely adopted after their eventual publication in 1755. Worryingly, perhaps, there is no mention in the Articles of batters not being allowed to hit the ball more than once. In the 1744 code, various means of "it is out" are specified, and they include hitting the ball twice and obstructing the field.
Twelve-a-side is intriguing, but the twelves may have included each team's umpire. The stated pitch length of 23 yards may be an error in the original document because the chain (22 yards) was an active measure by 1727. No run outs were allowed unless the fielder had the ball in hand when breaking the wicket, so you had to throw to the bowler or keeper, and not directly at the stumps. Runs were only completed if the batsman touched the umpire's "stick" (which was probably a bat).
Lady Day was 25 March and, in the Julian Calendar, it marked the beginning of the New Year in England and Wales. Pepperharowe (now Peper Harow) is about four miles from Godalming and about five from Guildford. It was the home of the Brodrick family. There is a point-to-point racecourse there now.
Like the ACS and other sources, I assume the two Gage/Lennox matches were played earlier in the 1727 season, but the Articles don't actually say that, and condition #6 might have been referencing matches in a prior season.
Alan Brodrick, 2nd Viscount Midleton (born 31 January 1702; died 8 June 1747) was a Commissioner of Customs, and subsequently Joint Comptroller of Army Accounts. He succeeded his father, also called Alan Brodrick, as Viscount Midleton on 29 August 1728, only a year after his matches with Lennox. He in turn was succeeded by his son George Brodrick. The title relates to Midleton in County Cork and is in the Peerage of Ireland. It was created in 1717 for Brodrick's father, who was the Lord Chancellor of Ireland and a former Speaker of the Irish House of Commons. The title is extant and is today held by Alan Henry Brodrick (born 1949) as 12th Viscount.
A recommended source for Brodrick is John Marshall's The Duke Who Was Cricket, published by Frederick Miller Ltd in 1961.
There was a total of eighteen known matches from 1727 to 1729, and then came the milestone 1730 season when cricket took up residence in the Artillery Ground. Through the following thirty years, the sport reached the zenith of its Pioneering Era before, in the 1760s, undergoing the first of several major evolutions. The Pioneering Era ended with the introduction of the pitched delivery, itself the catalyst for the invention of the straight bat—both might have originated at a place called Hambledon.
I'll be looking at the Pioneering Era in the next edition.
|
top of page Poor Fred | The Pioneering Era |
|
foot of page The epigram | The royal patron |
When Queen Elizabeth II died in September 2002, her son Charles III had been Prince of Wales for 70 years, ever since he was a nipper. At the beginning of the 20th Century, Edward VII succeeded his mother Queen Victoria having been Prince of Wales for 59 years—his entire life thus far. So, you may think, these crown princes always succeed in the end? Well, most of them do, but not all.
|
| Frederick Louis, Prince of Wales |
I don't think we know who originally composed the "Poor Fred" epigram, but it has been widely quoted, by Thackeray among others. It goes:
Here lies poor Fred who was alive and is dead,
Had it been his father I had much rather,
Had it been his sister nobody would have missed her,
Had it been his brother, still better than another,
Had it been the whole generation, so much better for the nation,
But since it is Fred who was alive and is dead,
There is no more to be said!
Fred had five sisters, and maybe none of them would have been missed. He had two brothers, but one died as a baby so "still better than another" was the vile Duke of Cumberland, who was responsible for the massacre at Culloden.
"Had it been the whole generation, so much better for the nation". Indeed.
|
|
There's only one King Fred |
If Fred had survived his father, he might have become King Fred I, and so t'fastest bloody bowler that ever drew breath would have been King Fred II.
Anyway, by the time Frederick Louis arrived in England, cricket had developed into arguably the country's most popular team sport—in the southeast certainly—and it thrived on gambling. Perhaps because he wished to "anglicise" and so fit in with his new society, Fred developed an academic interest in cricket that soon became a genuine enthusiasm. He began to make wagers and then to patronise and play the sport, even forming his own team on several occasions.
The earliest mention of him in cricket annals is a contemporary notice about the "great cricket match" at Richmond Green on 9 August 1731. The St James's Evening Post on 27–29 July announced it would be played for 100 guineas "by several persons of Distinction", and the Prince of Wales was expected to be present. He was also expected to attend the Surrey/London match played 28 September that year on Kennington Common. This was promoted as "likely to be the best performance of this kind that has been seen for some time". Interestingly, the notice added that "for the convenience of the gamesters, the ground is to be staked and roped out". Enclosure was a new practice in 1731 and it could have been done partly for the benefit of a royal visitor.
In August 1732, the Whitehall Evening Post reported Fred attending "a great cricket match" at Kew on Thursday, 27 July.
|
| Der Kaiser |
In the years following 1733, there are frequent references to Fred as a patron of cricket and as an occasional player. It's doubtful if he was actually any good as a player, but you never know. Germans tend to be pretty good at sport. Kaiser Franz, anyone?
When Fred died on 31 March 1751, cricket suffered a double blow because his death closely followed that of Charles Lennox, the 2nd Duke of Richmond, who was surely the greatest of the old-time patrons. His pal William Gage had died in 1744. The loss of these patrons impacted the game's finances, and it's a fact that the number of top-class matches reduced for some years to come, although economic difficulties arising from the wars of the period certainly inhibited many potential investors.
It's often been said that Fred died as a result of being struck by a cricket ball. He may well have been hit by one, but it didn't kill him. The cause of his death was either a burst abscess in a lung, or a pulmonary embolism. Cricket has had more than its share of fatalities, but Prince Frederick Louis wasn't one of them.
|
top of page A Wolf on the Fold | Articles of Agreement |
|
foot of page The greatest match ever? An international sport | The 1878 season | Monday, 27 May 1878 – MCC v Australians at Lord's"> |
|
|
I'll huff, and I'll puff, and I'll blow your wickets down. |
That was the day the Australians "came down like a wolf on the fold", and "marked the commencement of the modern era of cricket".
The match was between MCC and the first Australian team to tour this country. It was scheduled for three days, but completed in one. 128 overs were bowled, and all four innings were completed. The bare statistics tell you that MCC scored 33 and 19; in reply, the Australians scored 41 and 12 for one to win by nine wickets. So, only 105 runs were scored, which remains the world record for the lowest match aggregate in first-class cricket, a key proviso in that being the completion without forfeit of all four innings. The second-lowest aggregate is 134, which has happened twice: Kent v Sussex in 1826, and England v The Bs in 1831.
But, statistics are only numbers, and they don't tell you the story.
As I said, the 1878 Australian team was the first to tour the British Isles. Now, how did that come about?
|
| George Parr |
Despite the lack of competition encountered in North America, the tour was a big success, and it gave English players the taste for more. Cricket was also making strides in Australia and New Zealand, so it wasn't long before English teams went there too. First came H. H. Stephenson's XI, which visited Australia only from January to March in 1862; and then another team led by Parr in the early months of 1864, which also went to New Zealand. Again, the tourists had to play odds matches, but they faced stiffer opposition than in North America, and some matches were drawn.
Ten years passed before the next tour, the one led by WG on his extended honeymoon. Fred was also involved, and there were a few useful pros like Harry Jupp, James Lillywhite, and James Southerton. This tour was a public relations disaster, for which WG himself was responsible, and it could easily have ended the Anglo-Aussie cricketing relationship. Fortunately, it didn't, and Lillywhite led an all-pro England team down under in 1876–77.
That tour, minus WG and jolly good chappery, was a huge success. The Aussies and Kiwis probably warmed to the English professionals as solid, down-to-earth blokes who treated them as equals, and could enjoy a laugh and a joke over a beer or three. It was during this tour that Test cricket began, albeit in retrospect. Lillywhite's XI played two matches against an Australia XI which included the best players from New South Wales and Victoria. To all extents and purposes, the teams were Australia and England, and their two matches were recognised as the first-ever Tests when the concept became a reality in the 1890s (more about all that another time).
Moving on now to the "chilly and wet summer" of 1878, in which bad wickets reduced "all (batters) to comparative impotence". So, 1878 was a typical English summer, then?
|
|
The 1878 Australians. Back row (standing): F. R. Spofforth, J. Conway (manager), F. E. Allan. Middle row: G. H. Bailey, T. P. Horan (leaning), T. W. Garrett, D. W. Gregory (captain), A. C. Bannerman, H. F. Boyle. Front row: C. Bannerman, W. L. Murdoch, J. McC. Blackham. Missing: W. E. Midwinter. |
Lillywhite's tour having been a huge success, it was inevitable that arrangements would be made for a reciprocal. 1877 was too soon, and it was 1878 when England welcomed a team of "the best cricketers in the colonies", which became known as the "First Australians", the first official Australian team to tour England. Its members were John Conway (manager), W. C. V. Gibbes (assistant-manager), Dave Gregory (captain), Frank Allan, George Bailey, Alick Bannerman, Charles Bannerman, Jack Blackham (wicket-keeper), Harry Boyle, Tom Garrett, Tom Horan, Billy Midwinter, Billy Murdoch, and Fred Spofforth.
Apart from Midwinter, who was already in England, the team left Sydney on 29 March 1878 and sailed via Auckland and Honolulu to San Francisco. From there, they travelled across America by train to New York. Yes, in the days of the Old West when the likes of the James/Younger Gang were still around! Anyway, they avoided gunfights and train robberies to reach New York safely. After crossing the Atlantic, they arrived in Liverpool on 13 May, and then went by train to Nottingham where they played their first match, starting on Monday, 20 May. This was a three-day fixture against Nottinghamshire at Trent Bridge, and the Australians were well beaten by an innings and 14 runs, an inauspicious start which dampened much of the public enthusiasm that their visit had generated.
|
| Billy Midwinter |
On Sunday, 26 May, the USEE team caught the ferry back to England, and WG continued by train to London, probably in the company of Bannerman and Midwinter, as all three were due to take part in the match at Lord's the following day. They could not have guessed that the game would be remembered as "arguably the most momentous six hours in cricket history".
The MCC team, captained by WG, was relatively strong with eight players who represented England during their careers. These were WG himself, A. N. Hornby (Lancashire), A. J. Webbe (Middlesex), Wilfred Flowers (Nottinghamshire), George Hearne (Kent), George Vernon (Middlesex), Alfred Shaw (Nottinghamshire), and Fred Morley (Nottinghamshire). The other three, all recognised first-class players, were Nottinghamshire wicket-keeper Frederick Wyld and two amateur batsmen Clement Booth and Arthur Ridley (both Hampshire).
|
|
"The Demon Bowler". The Spy caricature of Fred Spofforth. Vanity Fair, July 1878. |
Play started at three minutes past twelve on a "sticky wicket", a wet pitch drying out as the sun began to shine. Only a small crowd was present and it all began well enough for WG as he hit the opening ball of the match from Allan for four. But another firm shot off his legs sent the second ball straight to Midwinter, and WG was "easily caught at square leg". Another wicket fell to Boyle in the next over and MCC were 5 for two but, with Hornby and Ridley seemingly settling in, they pushed the total on to 27. Then there was a change of bowling and Spofforth came on instead of Allan. Spofforth's first spell at Lord's was "truly demonic". Within another 11 overs, MCC were all out, Spofforth taking 6 for four in just 5.3 overs including a hat-trick with the wickets of Hearne, Shaw and Vernon. Shaw and Morley took five wickets apiece as they dismissed the Australians for 41, the last wicket falling just before the lunch interval.
In the afternoon session, Gregory decided to open his second innings attack with Spofforth and Boyle. The decisive moment was Spofforth's second ball to WG, which clean bowled him for 0. The MCC innings lasted just 50 minutes, Boyle taking 6 for three and Spofforth 4 for sixteen. Spofforth's match analysis was 14.3 overs, five maidens, 20 runs, 11 wickets. The Australians needed only 12 to win but, given the conditions, were by no means sure of getting them. They succeeded, losing only one wicket, and won a sensational match by 9 wickets.
The match aggregate of 105 runs remains the lowest-ever in first-class cricket. In his ghost-written Reminiscences (1899), WG recalled that there had been "only four and a half hours of actual cricket" net of the lunch interval and breaks between innings.
As news of the match spread, the crowd had grown in the afternoon sunshine and, at the end, they "mobbed the Australians as they left the field in a spirit of non-partisan enthusiasm". Around 500 had been present at the start but the number grew to 4,742 by the end; the receipts of £119 7s were given to the Australians and MCC paid the expenses. So ended a "memorable day of cold and puddles and calamity".
|
| Byron |
The Australians came down like a wolf on the fold,
The Mary'bone Cracks for a trifle were bowled;
Our Grace before dinner was very soon done,
And Grace after dinner did not get a run.
No one in England had taken the Australians very seriously at first, even though they had beaten James Lillywhite's England team in what was retrospectively classified as the inaugural Test match. No one was too surprised when they lost their tour opener by an innings to the strong Nottinghamshire attack of Shaw and Morley on a rain-affected wicket. This perception of Australian cricketers was immediately, and permanently, revised such that "henceforth a match between Australia and any representative English team would overshadow any of the great matches". Although the match did not mark the birth of international cricket, it was the point in time at which the English sporting public wholeheartedly embraced the concept. As Lord Hawke put it:
(27 May 1878) this marked the commencement of the modern era of cricket.
As for WG, his whole approach to cricket was about what was needed to win the game in hand, and he never took kindly to defeat. Two decades later, in his Reminiscences, he gave the Australians due credit for their "glorious victory".
|
top of page Regaled with a good dinner | Poor Fred |
|
foot of page Croydon v London | The challenge | Later matches |
Teams called Croydon and London are first known to have met in 1707, when they played each other twice in three days, first at Duppas Hill in Croydon, and then at Lamb's Conduit Field in Holborn. The results are unknown, and there is no certainty that either team represented a club of any kind. Croydon are then absent from the sources until re-emerging in 1731.
|
| Ready to eat? |
Obviously, though, we have to call each team something. On balance, it does seem that Croydon is the best choice for matches against London, and Surrey for matches against other counties, but who knows and who really cares?
That said, "Croydon" in 1731 played four matches, all against London, and won all four. They also won a match on Walworth Common in May 1732. The teams met twice in September 1733, first at Duppas Hill, and a return on the Artillery Ground. Both matches were drawn, the second one because of rain.
In 1734, Croydon won a match in late July at Duppas Hill. A return took place on the Artillery Ground on 1 August, and was won by London.
As best as I can understand it, the Croydon team were London's dinner guests after the second match. During the meal, arrangements were apparently made for a third match, presumably sometime in August. It is not known when or where this match was to take place, but Croydon did a "no show".
|
| Regaled? |
That was London's response to the non-appearance of Croydon for the match that had been arranged while Croydon were being "regaled with a good dinner"! There is no evidence that the challenge match was ever played.
The challenge was to "any eleven men in England" (excluding anyone from Croydon). Therefore, London wanted to play against a team representing the rest of England, although the limitations of both travel and the spread of top-class cricket at the time meant that "the rest of England" was effectively the Home Counties only.
So, if the challenge match did take place, it was possibly the earliest "All England" match. Personally, however, I would tentatively grant that accolade to Sir William Gage's Hampshire, Surrey & Sussex teams in 1729.
There seems to have been a reconciliation during the close season, because the opening match of the 1735 season was between Croydon and London at Duppas Hill. It was played on Whit Tuesday (27 May), and The Weekly Register reported on the 31st that "London beat Croydon with very great ease".
The reconciliation may have been temporary, because it was not until July 1742 that the teams are known to have met again. Croydon had apparently faded from the scene, and are found in sources only occasionally after 1736, when they played three matches against Chertsey.|
top of page Leviathan | A Wolf on the Fold |
