In the 1796 English cricket season, the Montpelier town club became prominent and played a number of matches over the next few seasons against MCC. The club’s venue was George Aram’s New Ground in Montpelier Gardens, Walworth, Surrey.
Generally speaking, it was at this time that matches involving town clubs like Montpelier, Kennington, Highgate, Rochester, Woolwich, Homerton, Richmond, Storrington and Thames Ditton began to achieve prominence in the old books. Although some good players were undoubtedly involved, the teams tended to lack overall strength and capability. Montpelier tended to be the exception as it had quite a strong side around 1796-1800.
Contents |
| Date | Match Title | Venue | Source | Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 9–11 May (M-Tu) | MCC v Middlesex | Lord's (Dorset Square) | SB196 | Middlesex won by 3 wkts |
| 16–17 May (M-Tu) | Middlesex v Kent | Lord's (Dorset Square) | SB197 | Kent won by 51 runs |
| 27–28 May (F-S) | Earl of Winchilsea v Bligh (10 a side) # | Lord's (Dorset Square) | SB197 | Winchilsea's XI won by 65 runs |
| 30–31 May (M-Tu) | MCC v Middlesex | Lord's (Dorset Square) | SB198 | MCC won by 141 runs |
| 6–7 June (M-Tu) | MCC v Middlesex | Lord's (Dorset Square) | SB199 | Middlesex won by 8 runs |
| 13–15 June (M-W) | MCC v Kent | Lord's (Dorset Square) | SB199 | Kent won by 4 runs |
| 20–22 June (M-W) | Middlesex v Kent | Lord's (Dorset Square) | SB200 | Middlesex won by 3 wkts |
| 24–25 June (F-S) | Thursday/Montpelier v MCC | Montpelier Gardens | SB201 | MCC won by 63 runs |
|
Montpelier Gardens was in Walworth, London. The actual venue is George Aram’s New Ground in Montpelier Gardens. NB: Walworth is in Surrey, not Middlesex. |
||||
| 28–30 June (Tu-Th) | All-England v Surrey | Stoke Down | SB201 | All-England won by 3 wkts |
| 4–5 July (M-Tu) | Bullingdon v MCC # | Bullingdon | SB202 | MCC won by 199 runs |
| 6 July (W) | Thursday Club v Montpelier ^ | Lord’s (Dorset Square) | WDC | Thursday Club won by 8 wkts |
|
It seems this match was not completed until Friday 12 August and so its conclusion must have preceded the game in SB206. |
||||
| 11–12 July (M-Tu) | MCC v Bullingdon # | Lord's (Dorset Square) | SB203 | MCC won by innings & 137 runs |
| 13–15 July (W-F) | MCC v Thursday/Montpelier | Lord's (Dorset Square) | SB204 | MCC won by 6 wkts |
| 19–22 July (Tu-F) | Earl of Winchilsea v A Smith | Perriam Down | SB204 | Winchilsea's XI won by 10 runs |
| 25 July (M) | Montpelier v Thursday Club # | Montpelier Gardens | WDC | Thursday Club won by innings & 19 runs |
| 10 August (W) | Middlesex v Kennington # | Lord's (Dorset Square) | WDC | Middlesex won by 2 wkts |
| 12-13 Aug (F-S) | Middlesex v Mont & Kenn Clubs ^ | Lord's (Dorset Square) | SB206 | Middlesex won by 3 wkts |
|
Mont & Kenn = the combined Montpelier and Kennington Clubs. It seems this match started after the one postponed from Wed 6 July was completed. |
||||
| 15 Aug (M) | Montpelier v Highgate # | Montpelier Gardens | brit | Montpelier won by 6 runs |
|
WDC also records this match but has it dated 1 August. Britcher’s date is accepted as the closer source. # These games in the main sources and in the ACS list are not major matches, including Earl of Winchilsea v Bligh on 27 May (SB197) which was ten-a side with weak teams. |
||||
| 15-16 Aug (M-Tu) | Middlesex v Surrey | Lord's (Dorset Square) | SB208 | Surrey won by 8 wkts |
|
WDC has this game dated 1–2 August and the ACS Guide includes both entries. The above is believed correct. |
||||
| 22-23 Aug (M-Tu) | All-England v Surrey | Dandelion Paddock | SB208 | Surrey won by innings & 6 runs |
| 24-26 Aug (W-F) | All-England v Surrey | Dandelion Paddock | SB209 | All-England won by 5 wkts |
| 26-27 Aug (F-S) | Mont & Kenn v Middlesex ^ | Montpelier Gardens | SB210 | drawn |
|
^ It was at this time that matches involving local clubs like Montpelier, Kennington, Highgate, Rochester, Woolwich, Homerton, Richmond, Storrington and Thames Ditton begin to achieve prominence in the old books. Although some good players were undoubtedly involved, the teams did not often have the overall strength or capability necessary for major status unless they had given men playing. Montpelier tended to be the exception as it had quite a strong side around 1797-1798. Each game involving these clubs needs to be evaluated individually. The match given in WDC as J Small v T Walker at the Dandelion Paddock on 7 - 10 Sept is in fact a wrongly dated duplicate of the Mann v Leigh game in S&B on the same days in 1795 (see above). |
||||
Note that many scorecards in the 18th century are unknown or have missing details and so it is impossible to provide a complete analysis of batting performances: e.g., the missing not outs prevent computation of batting averages. The "runs scored" are in fact the runs known.
John Tufton was the leading runscorer with 306 and another amateur, Edward Bligh, came second with 270
Then came the professionals led by Robert Robinson with 250 and Thomas Ray with 248. Other leading batsmen were John Hammond 228; Lord Frederick Beauclerk 208; Andrew Freemantle 206; Earl of Winchilsea 197; George Louch 177
Note that the wickets credited to an 18th century bowler were only those where he bowled the batsman out. The bowler was not credited with the wickets of batsmen who were caught out, even if it was "caught and bowled". In addition, the runs conceded by each bowler were not recorded so no analyses or averages can be computed.
Lord Frederick Beauclerk led the bowlers in 1796 with 42 wickets. Thomas Boxall was the second-highest wicket-taker with 38
Other leading bowlers were Thomas Lord 30 wickets; John Wells 21; Tom Walker 18; William Bullen 15; Sylvester 10
Note that many scorecards in the 18th century are unknown or have missing details and so the totals are of the known catches and stumpings only. Stumpings were not always recorded as such and sometimes the name of the wicket-keeper was not given. Generally, a catch was given the same status as "bowled" with credit being awarded to the fielder only and not the bowler. There is never a record of "caught and bowled": the bowler would be credited with the catch, not with the wicket.
Henry Tufton with 13 ct and 13 st was the outstanding performer in the field, beating John Hammond who had 8 ct, 9 st. Another good keeper was Charles Warren with 2 ct, 10 st.
Thomas Ray and Lord Frederick Beauclerk took the most catches with 16 apiece. Tom Walker took 10 ct, 1 st; Thomas Boxall 9 ct; William Beldham 8 ct, 1 st; John Pilcher 8 ct
|
||||||||