1799 English cricket season

Surrey defeated England three times in the 1799 English cricket season. As in the previous year, the number of matches may have declined due to the impact of the Napoleonic War. Fewer were reported, but there was loose censorship in place. Details of ten matches are known, but few were historically important.[note 1]

1799 English cricket season
1798
1800

The earliest known mention of cricket in Devon has been found. A cricket club was formed at Seringapatam in south India after the successful British siege.

England v Surrey

edit

England played against Surrey three times in 1799, and all three games ended in convincing wins by Surrey. All the matches were played on Lord's Old Ground between 30 July and 17 August. Surrey's margins of victory were 8 wickets, 143 runs, and an innings & 117 runs. These were the season's only important matches.[2]

Other events

edit

Cricket in the county of Devon was first referenced in 1799.[3]

Following the siege of Seringapatam in south India, a cricket club was established there.[3]

There were two matches in June between Montpelier and a combined Brentford/Richmond team. Montpelier won both games, by 91 runs at home, and by 148 runs away.[4]

MCC played two matches in June against its own Thursday Club, many of whose members were Middlesex players. The Thursday Club won the first by 54 runs,[5] and MCC the second by 41 runs.[6]

Middlesex played Waltham & Hertfordshire twice in September. The first match at Waltham Abbey was drawn.[7] Middlesex won the second on Lord's Old Ground by 3 runs.[8]

Notes

edit
  1. Any match listed in the ACS' Important Match Guide (1981) is historically important, and therefore of the highest standard, whether or not a scorecard might exist. The same applies to numerous matches discovered by researchers since 1981.[1]
    For further information, see First-class cricket.

References

edit
  1. ACS 1981, pp. 1–40.
  2. Haygarth 1996, pp. 259, 262–263.
  3. 1 2 Bowen 1970, p. 268.
  4. Haygarth 1996, pp. 253–254.
  5. Haygarth 1996, p. 252.
  6. Haygarth 1996, p. 254.
  7. Waghorn 2005.
  8. Buckley 1935.

Bibliography

edit

Further reading

edit