List of English cricket matches to 1725

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.

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.

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 major cricket 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 top-class (or "first-class") cricket in the more important historical record.

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.

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.

"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 major cricket 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.

The earliest known major 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. Mitcham Cricket Club, which is extant, was founded in 1685.

The earliest known major 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.

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.

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)".

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.

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.

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).

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.

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).

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.

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".

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".^[13]

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".

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.

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".

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

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

Recorded in a diary entry by one John Dawson, who may have attended, and described as "a great match".

It is not certain that Chingford was the venue but, if so, 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 ordered them to play it out on Dartford Brent. The game was completed in September 1726. The final result is not on record, though it may be assumed that Stead's team held their advantage and won.

The 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.

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.