.svg)
0
edits
First-class cricket: Difference between revisions
→See also: Link added to the next tier down (in England and Wales)
m (robot: Creating/updating articles.) |
EmanuelH79 (talk | contribs) (→See also: Link added to the next tier down (in England and Wales)) |
||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
==Initial usage under MCC ruling, May 1894== | ==Initial usage under MCC ruling, May 1894== | ||
Before 1894 "first-class" was a common adjective applied to cricket matches in England, used loosely to suggest that a match had a high standard; adjectives like "great", "important" and "major" were also loosely applied to such matches, but there tended to be differences of opinion. In the inaugural issue of ''[[Cricket: A Weekly Record of the Game]]'' on 10 May 1882, the term is used twice on page 2 in reference to the recently completed [[English cricket team in Australia and New Zealand in 1881–82|tour of Australia and New Zealand]] by [[Alfred Shaw|Alfred Shaw's XI]]. The report says it is "taking" the first-class matches to be one against [[New South Wales cricket team|Sydney]] (''sic''), two each against [[Victoria cricket team|Victoria]], the Combined team and the Australian Eleven, and another against [[South Australia cricket team|South Australia]].<ref name="C11">[https://archive.acscricket.com/cricket/1882/10 "English & Australian Cricket"] ''Cricket'', issue 1, 10 May 1882, p. 2.</ref> In the fourth issue on 1 June 1882, [[James Lillywhite]] refers to first-class matches on the tour but gives a different list.<ref name="C446">[https://archive.acscricket.com/cricket/1882/10 "The Cricket Scandal"] ''Cricket'', issue 4, 1 June 1882, p. 46.</ref> | Before 1894 "first-class" was a common adjective applied to cricket matches in England, used loosely to suggest that a match had a high standard; adjectives like "great", "important" and "major" were also loosely applied to such matches, but there tended to be differences of opinion. In the inaugural issue of ''[[Cricket: A Weekly Record of the Game]]'' on 10 May 1882, the term is used twice on page 2 in reference to the recently completed [[English cricket team in Australia and New Zealand in 1881–82|tour of Australia and New Zealand]] by [[Alfred Shaw|Alfred Shaw's XI]]. The report says it is "taking" the first-class matches to be one against [[New South Wales cricket team|Sydney]] (''sic''), two each against [[Victoria cricket team|Victoria]], the Combined team and the Australian Eleven, and another against [[South Australia cricket team|South Australia]].<ref name="C11">[https://archive.acscricket.com/cricket/1882/10 "English & Australian Cricket"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220921211016/https://archive.acscricket.com/cricket/1882/10/ |date=21 September 2022 }} ''Cricket'', issue 1, 10 May 1882, p. 2.</ref> In the fourth issue on 1 June 1882, [[James Lillywhite]] refers to first-class matches on the tour but gives a different list.<ref name="C446">[https://archive.acscricket.com/cricket/1882/10 "The Cricket Scandal"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220921211016/https://archive.acscricket.com/cricket/1882/10/ |date=21 September 2022 }} ''Cricket'', issue 4, 1 June 1882, p. 46.</ref> | ||
The earliest known [[cricket scorecard|match scorecard]]s date from 1744 but few have been found before 1772.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.espncricinfo.com/wisdenalmanack/content/story/152818.html |last=Bowen |first=Rowland |author-link=Rowland Bowen |title=Cricket in the 17th and 18th centuries |work=Wisden Cricketers' Almanack |year=1965 |publisher=John Wisden & Co. Ltd |location=London |access-date=12 March 2021}}</ref>{{sfn|Bowen|1970|pp=263–264}} The cards for three 1772 matches have survived and scorecards became increasingly common thereafter.{{sfn|ACS|1981|pp=21–24, 31}} At the beginning of the 1860s, there were only four formally constituted county clubs. [[Sussex County Cricket Club|Sussex]] was the oldest, formed in 1839, and it had been followed by [[Kent County Cricket Club|Kent]], [[Nottinghamshire County Cricket Club|Nottinghamshire]] and [[Surrey County Cricket Club|Surrey]]. In the early 1860s, several more county clubs were founded, and questions began to be raised in the sporting press about which should be categorised as first-class, but there was considerable disagreement in the answers. In 1880, the [[Cricket Reporting Agency]] was founded. It acquired influence through the decade especially by association with ''[[Wisden Cricketers' Almanack]]'' (''Wisden'') and the press came to generally rely on its information and opinions.{{sfn|ACS|1982|pp=4}} | The earliest known [[cricket scorecard|match scorecard]]s date from 1744 but few have been found before 1772.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.espncricinfo.com/wisdenalmanack/content/story/152818.html |last=Bowen |first=Rowland |author-link=Rowland Bowen |title=Cricket in the 17th and 18th centuries |work=Wisden Cricketers' Almanack |year=1965 |publisher=John Wisden & Co. Ltd |location=London |access-date=12 March 2021 |archive-date=22 November 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201122064232/https://www.espncricinfo.com/wisdenalmanack/content/story/152818.html |url-status=live }}</ref>{{sfn|Bowen|1970|pp=263–264}} The cards for three 1772 matches have survived and scorecards became increasingly common thereafter.{{sfn|ACS|1981|pp=21–24, 31}} At the beginning of the 1860s, there were only four formally constituted county clubs. [[Sussex County Cricket Club|Sussex]] was the oldest, formed in 1839, and it had been followed by [[Kent County Cricket Club|Kent]], [[Nottinghamshire County Cricket Club|Nottinghamshire]] and [[Surrey County Cricket Club|Surrey]]. In the early 1860s, several more county clubs were founded, and questions began to be raised in the sporting press about which should be categorised as first-class, but there was considerable disagreement in the answers. In 1880, the [[Cricket Reporting Agency]] was founded. It acquired influence through the decade especially by association with ''[[Wisden Cricketers' Almanack]]'' (''Wisden'') and the press came to generally rely on its information and opinions.{{sfn|ACS|1982|pp=4}} | ||
The term acquired official status, though limited to matches in Great Britain, following a meeting at [[Lord's]] in May 1894 between the [[Marylebone Cricket Club]] (MCC) committee and the secretaries of the clubs involved in the official [[County Championship]], which had begun in 1890. As a result, those clubs became first-class from 1895 along with MCC, [[Cambridge University Cricket Club|Cambridge University]], [[Oxford University Cricket Club|Oxford University]], senior cricket touring teams (i.e., [[Australia national cricket team|Australia]] and [[South Africa national cricket team|South Africa]] at that time) and other teams designated as such by MCC (e.g., [[North v South]], [[Gentlemen v Players]] and occasional "elevens" which consisted of recognised first-class players).{{sfn|ACS|1982|pp=4–5}} Officially, therefore, the inaugural first-class match was the opening game of the 1895 season between MCC and [[Nottinghamshire County Cricket Club|Nottinghamshire]] at Lord's on 1 and 2 May, MCC winning by 37 runs.<ref name="CA4287">{{cite web |url=https://cricketarchive.com/Archive/Scorecards/4/4287.html |title=Marylebone Cricket Club v Nottinghamshire, 1–2 May 1895 |work=CricketArchive |access-date=16 September 2022 |url-access=subscription}}</ref> | The term acquired official status, though limited to matches in Great Britain, following a meeting at [[Lord's]] in May 1894 between the [[Marylebone Cricket Club]] (MCC) committee and the secretaries of the clubs involved in the official [[County Championship]], which had begun in 1890. As a result, those clubs became first-class from 1895 along with MCC, [[Cambridge University Cricket Club|Cambridge University]], [[Oxford University Cricket Club|Oxford University]], senior cricket touring teams (i.e., [[Australia national cricket team|Australia]] and [[South Africa national cricket team|South Africa]] at that time) and other teams designated as such by MCC (e.g., [[North v South]], [[Gentlemen v Players]] and occasional "elevens" which consisted of recognised first-class players).{{sfn|ACS|1982|pp=4–5}} Officially, therefore, the inaugural first-class match was the opening game of the 1895 season between MCC and [[Nottinghamshire County Cricket Club|Nottinghamshire]] at Lord's on 1 and 2 May, MCC winning by 37 runs.<ref name="CA4287">{{cite web |url=https://cricketarchive.com/Archive/Scorecards/4/4287.html |title=Marylebone Cricket Club v Nottinghamshire, 1–2 May 1895 |work=CricketArchive |access-date=16 September 2022 |url-access=subscription |archive-date=17 September 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220917175418/https://cricketarchive.com/Archive/Scorecards/4/4287.html |url-status=live }}</ref> | ||
"[[Test cricket|Test match]]" was another loosely applied term at the time but the first list of matches considered to be "Tests" was conceived and published by South Australian journalist Clarence P. Moody in his 1894 book, ''Australian Cricket and Cricketers, 1856 to 1893–94''. His proposal was widely accepted after a list of 39 matches was reproduced in the 28 December 1894 issue of ''Cricket'' magazine. The list began with the [[Melbourne Cricket Ground]] match played 15–17 March 1877 and ended with a recent match at the [[Sydney Cricket Ground|Association Ground, Sydney]] played 14–20 December 1894.<ref name="C379463">[https://archive.acscricket.com/cricket/1894/487/ "The First Test Match"] ''Cricket'', issue 379, 28 December 1894, pp. 463–464.</ref> All of Moody's matches, plus four additional ones, were retrospectively recognised as Test matches and also, thereby, as first-class matches.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://cricketarchive.com/Archive/Records/England/Test/Team/List_of_Matches.html |title=List of Test Matches |work=CricketArchive |access-date=9 September 2022 |url-access=subscription}}</ref> | "[[Test cricket|Test match]]" was another loosely applied term at the time but the first list of matches considered to be "Tests" was conceived and published by South Australian journalist Clarence P. Moody in his 1894 book, ''Australian Cricket and Cricketers, 1856 to 1893–94''. His proposal was widely accepted after a list of 39 matches was reproduced in the 28 December 1894 issue of ''Cricket'' magazine. The list began with the [[Melbourne Cricket Ground]] match played 15–17 March 1877 and ended with a recent match at the [[Sydney Cricket Ground|Association Ground, Sydney]] played 14–20 December 1894.<ref name="C379463">[https://archive.acscricket.com/cricket/1894/487/ "The First Test Match"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220908225143/https://archive.acscricket.com/cricket/1894/487/ |date=8 September 2022 }} ''Cricket'', issue 379, 28 December 1894, pp. 463–464.</ref> All of Moody's matches, plus four additional ones, were retrospectively recognised as Test matches and also, thereby, as first-class matches.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://cricketarchive.com/Archive/Records/England/Test/Team/List_of_Matches.html |title=List of Test Matches |work=CricketArchive |access-date=9 September 2022 |url-access=subscription |archive-date=9 September 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220909044131/https://cricketarchive.com/Archive/Records/England/Test/Team/List_of_Matches.html |url-status=live }}</ref> | ||
==Formal definition under ICC ruling, May 1947== | ==Formal definition under ICC ruling, May 1947== | ||
| Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
For example, MCC was authorised to determine the status of matches played in Great Britain. To all intents and purposes, the 1947 ICC definition confirmed the 1894 MCC definition, and gave it international recognition and usage. | For example, MCC was authorised to determine the status of matches played in Great Britain. To all intents and purposes, the 1947 ICC definition confirmed the 1894 MCC definition, and gave it international recognition and usage. | ||
Hence, official judgment of status is the responsibility of the governing body in each country that is a ''full member'' of the [[International Cricket Council]] (ICC). The governing body grants first-class status to international teams and to domestic teams that are representative of the country's highest playing standard. Later ICC rulings make it possible for international teams from ''associate members'' of the ICC to achieve first-class status but it is dependent on the status of their opponents in a given match.<ref name="ICCCOC">{{cite journal |url=https://pulse-static-files.s3.amazonaws.com/ICC/document/2017/09/24/4510678a-e031-4a9b-a402-397d4868adb6/ICC-Classification-of-Official-Cricket-Effective-1st-October-2017.pdf |title=ICC Classification of Official Cricket |journal=ICC Classifications |page=[https://pulse-static-files.s3.amazonaws.com/ICC/document/2017/09/24/4510678a-e031-4a9b-a402-397d4868adb6/ICC-Classification-of-Official-Cricket-Effective-1st-October-2017.pdf#page=3 3] |publisher=International Cricket Council |date=1 October 2017 |access-date=15 October 2017}}</ref> | Hence, official judgment of status is the responsibility of the governing body in each country that is a ''full member'' of the [[International Cricket Council]] (ICC). The governing body grants first-class status to international teams and to domestic teams that are representative of the country's highest playing standard. Later ICC rulings make it possible for international teams from ''associate members'' of the ICC to achieve first-class status but it is dependent on the status of their opponents in a given match.<ref name="ICCCOC">{{cite journal |url=https://pulse-static-files.s3.amazonaws.com/ICC/document/2017/09/24/4510678a-e031-4a9b-a402-397d4868adb6/ICC-Classification-of-Official-Cricket-Effective-1st-October-2017.pdf |title=ICC Classification of Official Cricket |journal=ICC Classifications |page=[https://pulse-static-files.s3.amazonaws.com/ICC/document/2017/09/24/4510678a-e031-4a9b-a402-397d4868adb6/ICC-Classification-of-Official-Cricket-Effective-1st-October-2017.pdf#page=3 3] |publisher=International Cricket Council |date=1 October 2017 |access-date=15 October 2017 |archive-date=10 April 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210410224534/https://pulse-static-files.s3.amazonaws.com/ICC/document/2017/09/24/4510678a-e031-4a9b-a402-397d4868adb6/ICC-Classification-of-Official-Cricket-Effective-1st-October-2017.pdf |url-status=live }}</ref> | ||
===Definition=== | ===Definition=== | ||
| Line 84: | Line 84: | ||
==Retrospective classification of matches played before the definitions== | ==Retrospective classification of matches played before the definitions== | ||
The absence of any ICC ruling about matches played before 1947 (or before 1895 in Great Britain) is problematic for those cricket statisticians who wish to categorise earlier matches in the same way. They have responded by compiling their own match lists and allocating a strictly ''unofficial'' first-class status to the matches they consider to have been of a high standard. It is therefore a matter of opinion only with no official support. Inevitable differences have arisen and there are [[variations in published cricket statistics]]. In November 2021, the ICC retrospectively applied first-class status to [[women's cricket]], aligning it with the men's game.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.icc-cricket.com/media-releases/2355517 |title=ICC Board appoints Afghanistan Working Group |work=International Cricket Council |access-date=17 November 2021}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.womenscriczone.com/icc-appoints-working-group-to-review-afghanistan-cricket |title=ICC appoints Working Group to review status of Afghanistan cricket; women's First Class, List A classification to align with men's game |work=Women's CricZone |access-date=17 November 2021}}</ref> | The absence of any ICC ruling about matches played before 1947 (or before 1895 in Great Britain) is problematic for those cricket statisticians who wish to categorise earlier matches in the same way. They have responded by compiling their own match lists and allocating a strictly ''unofficial'' first-class status to the matches they consider to have been of a high standard. It is therefore a matter of opinion only with no official support. Inevitable differences have arisen and there are [[variations in published cricket statistics]]. In November 2021, the ICC retrospectively applied first-class status to [[women's cricket]], aligning it with the men's game.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.icc-cricket.com/media-releases/2355517 |title=ICC Board appoints Afghanistan Working Group |work=International Cricket Council |access-date=17 November 2021 |archive-date=17 November 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211117061128/https://www.icc-cricket.com/media-releases/2355517 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.womenscriczone.com/icc-appoints-working-group-to-review-afghanistan-cricket |title=ICC appoints Working Group to review status of Afghanistan cricket; women's First Class, List A classification to align with men's game |work=Women's CricZone |access-date=17 November 2021 |archive-date=17 November 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211117092611/https://www.womenscriczone.com/icc-appoints-working-group-to-review-afghanistan-cricket |url-status=live }}</ref> | ||
===Issue for statisticians=== | ===Issue for statisticians=== | ||
A key issue for the statisticians is when first-class cricket for their purpose is deemed to have begun. Writing in 1951, [[Roy Webber]] argued that the majority of matches prior to 1864 (i.e., the year in which [[overarm bowling]] was legalised) "cannot be regarded as first-class" and their records are used "for their historical associations".{{sfn|Webber|1951|pp=9–10}} This drew a line between what was important historically and what should form part of the statistical record. Hence, for pre-1895 (i.e., in Great Britain) cricket matches, "first-class" is essentially a statistical concept while the historical concept is broader and takes account of historical significance. Webber's rationale was that cricket was "generally weak before 1864" (there was a greater and increasingly more organised effort to promote county cricket from about that time) and match details were largely incomplete, especially [[bowling (cricket)|bowling]] analyses, which hindered compilation of records.{{sfn|Webber|1951|pp=9–10}} According to Webber's view, the inaugural first-class match was the opening game of the 1864 season between [[Cambridge University Cricket Club|Cambridge University]] and MCC at [[Fenner's]] on 12 and 13 May, Cambridge winning by 6 wickets.<ref name="CA1313">{{cite web |url=https://cricketarchive.com/Archive/Scorecards/1/1313.html |title=Cambridge University v Marylebone Cricket Club, 12–13 May 1864 |work=CricketArchive |access-date=17 September 2022 |url-access=subscription}}</ref> | A key issue for the statisticians is when first-class cricket for their purpose is deemed to have begun. Writing in 1951, [[Roy Webber]] argued that the majority of matches prior to 1864 (i.e., the year in which [[overarm bowling]] was legalised) "cannot be regarded as first-class" and their records are used "for their historical associations".{{sfn|Webber|1951|pp=9–10}} This drew a line between what was important historically and what should form part of the statistical record. Hence, for pre-1895 (i.e., in Great Britain) cricket matches, "first-class" is essentially a statistical concept while the historical concept is broader and takes account of historical significance. Webber's rationale was that cricket was "generally weak before 1864" (there was a greater and increasingly more organised effort to promote county cricket from about that time) and match details were largely incomplete, especially [[bowling (cricket)|bowling]] analyses, which hindered compilation of records.{{sfn|Webber|1951|pp=9–10}} According to Webber's view, the inaugural first-class match was the opening game of the 1864 season between [[Cambridge University Cricket Club|Cambridge University]] and MCC at [[Fenner's]] on 12 and 13 May, Cambridge winning by 6 wickets.<ref name="CA1313">{{cite web |url=https://cricketarchive.com/Archive/Scorecards/1/1313.html |title=Cambridge University v Marylebone Cricket Club, 12–13 May 1864 |work=CricketArchive |access-date=17 September 2022 |url-access=subscription |archive-date=20 September 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220920170944/https://cricketarchive.com/Archive/Scorecards/1/1313.html |url-status=live }}</ref> | ||
===Important matches list=== | ===Important matches list=== | ||
| Line 93: | Line 93: | ||
===Earlier startpoints suggested=== | ===Earlier startpoints suggested=== | ||
Subsequently, Webber's view was challenged by [[Bill Frindall]] who believed that 1815 should be the startpoint to encompass the entire [[roundarm bowling]] phase of cricket's history,{{sfn|Frindall|1998|p=1}} although roundarm did not begin in earnest until 1827.{{sfn|Altham|1962|pp=61–62}} In Frindall's view, the inaugural first-class match should have been the opening game of the 1815 season between MCC and [[Middlesex county cricket teams|Middlesex]] at Lord's on 31 May and 1 June, Middlesex winning by 16 runs.<ref name="CA356">{{cite web |url=https://cricketarchive.com/Archive/Scorecards/0/356.html |title=Marylebone Cricket Club v Middlesex, 31 May – 1 June 1815 |work=CricketArchive |access-date=17 September 2022 |url-access=subscription}}</ref> Notwithstanding Frindall's reputation, Webber's view has been revived and reinforced in recent times. For example, the ACS researchers Derek Carlaw and John Winnifrith begin their 2020 study of Kent cricketers since 1806 by stating: "Part One is confined to players who appeared for Kent in important matches from 1806 to 1863 and first-class matches from 1864 to 1914".{{sfn|Carlaw|Winnifrith|2020|p=2}} | Subsequently, Webber's view was challenged by [[Bill Frindall]] who believed that 1815 should be the startpoint to encompass the entire [[roundarm bowling]] phase of cricket's history,{{sfn|Frindall|1998|p=1}} although roundarm did not begin in earnest until 1827.{{sfn|Altham|1962|pp=61–62}} In Frindall's view, the inaugural first-class match should have been the opening game of the 1815 season between MCC and [[Middlesex county cricket teams|Middlesex]] at Lord's on 31 May and 1 June, Middlesex winning by 16 runs.<ref name="CA356">{{cite web |url=https://cricketarchive.com/Archive/Scorecards/0/356.html |title=Marylebone Cricket Club v Middlesex, 31 May – 1 June 1815 |work=CricketArchive |access-date=17 September 2022 |url-access=subscription |archive-date=5 July 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220705130500/https://cricketarchive.com/Archive/Scorecards/0/356.html |url-status=live }}</ref> Notwithstanding Frindall's reputation, Webber's view has been revived and reinforced in recent times. For example, the ACS researchers Derek Carlaw and John Winnifrith begin their 2020 study of Kent cricketers since 1806 by stating: "Part One is confined to players who appeared for Kent in important matches from 1806 to 1863 and first-class matches from 1864 to 1914".{{sfn|Carlaw|Winnifrith|2020|p=2}} | ||
On the internet, the ''CricketArchive'' (CA) and ''[[ESPN Cricinfo]]'' (CI) databases both say the earliest first-class match was [[Hampshire county cricket teams|Hampshire]] v [[Non-international England cricket teams|England]] at [[Broadhalfpenny Down]] on 24 and 25 June 1772.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://cricketarchive.com/Archive/Scorecards/0/4.html |title=Hampshire v England, 24–25 June 1772 |work=CricketArchive |access-date=17 September 2022 |url-access=subscription}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=http://static.espncricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/1770S/1772/ENG_LOCAL/HANTS-XI_ENG_24-25JUN1772.html |work=ESPNcricinfo |title=Hampshire v England, 24–25 June 1772 |access-date=9 February 2015}}</ref> At that time, cricket matches were played with a two-stump [[wicket]] and exclusively [[underarm bowling]], although other features of the modern game had been introduced.{{sfn|Haygarth|1996|p=99}} The opinion of these databases has been repudiated by both ''Wisden'' and ''[[Playfair Cricket Annual]]''. ''Wisden'' agrees with Frindall by commencing its first-class records in 1815.{{sfn|Wisden|2019|pp=1215–1242}} ''Playfair'' supports Webber and begins its records in 1864.{{sfn|Playfair|2018|pp=159, 173, 180}} | On the internet, the ''CricketArchive'' (CA) and ''[[ESPN Cricinfo]]'' (CI) databases both say the earliest first-class match was [[Hampshire county cricket teams|Hampshire]] v [[Non-international England cricket teams|England]] at [[Broadhalfpenny Down]] on 24 and 25 June 1772.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://cricketarchive.com/Archive/Scorecards/0/4.html |title=Hampshire v England, 24–25 June 1772 |work=CricketArchive |access-date=17 September 2022 |url-access=subscription |archive-date=26 September 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220926192653/https://cricketarchive.com/Archive/Scorecards/0/4.html |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=http://static.espncricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/1770S/1772/ENG_LOCAL/HANTS-XI_ENG_24-25JUN1772.html |work=ESPNcricinfo |title=Hampshire v England, 24–25 June 1772 |access-date=9 February 2015 |archive-date=9 February 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150209125355/http://static.espncricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/1770S/1772/ENG_LOCAL/HANTS-XI_ENG_24-25JUN1772.html |url-status=live }}</ref> At that time, cricket matches were played with a two-stump [[wicket]] and exclusively [[underarm bowling]], although other features of the modern game had been introduced.{{sfn|Haygarth|1996|p=99}} The opinion of these databases has been repudiated by both ''Wisden'' and ''[[Playfair Cricket Annual]]''. ''Wisden'' agrees with Frindall by commencing its first-class records in 1815.{{sfn|Wisden|2019|pp=1215–1242}} ''Playfair'' supports Webber and begins its records in 1864.{{sfn|Playfair|2018|pp=159, 173, 180}} | ||
The status of earlier matches, including many in the ACS' ''Important Matches'' guide, which have left no scorecard and for which only a brief announcement or report exists, must be based on other factors. Contemporary importance was often measured by the amount of money at stake and the fact that a match was deemed notable enough to be reported in the press. The 18th century matches in the ACS list were primarily compiled to assist historians.{{sfn|ACS|1981|p=4}} The earliest match known to have been accorded superior status in a contemporary report (i.e., termed "a great match" in this case) and to have been played for a large sum of money was one in [[Sussex]] between two unnamed eleven-a-side teams contesting "fifty [[guinea (British coin)|guineas]] apiece" in June 1697, a match of enormous historical significance but with no statistical data recorded.{{sfn|McCann|2004|p=xli}} | The status of earlier matches, including many in the ACS' ''Important Matches'' guide, which have left no scorecard and for which only a brief announcement or report exists, must be based on other factors. Contemporary importance was often measured by the amount of money at stake and the fact that a match was deemed notable enough to be reported in the press. The 18th century matches in the ACS list were primarily compiled to assist historians.{{sfn|ACS|1981|p=4}} The earliest match known to have been accorded superior status in a contemporary report (i.e., termed "a great match" in this case) and to have been played for a large sum of money was one in [[Sussex]] between two unnamed eleven-a-side teams contesting "fifty [[guinea (British coin)|guineas]] apiece" in June 1697, a match of enormous historical significance but with no statistical data recorded.{{sfn|McCann|2004|p=xli}} | ||
| Line 102: | Line 102: | ||
* [[List of first-class cricket records]] | * [[List of first-class cricket records]] | ||
* [[Lists of cricket records]] | * [[Lists of cricket records]] | ||
* [[National Counties of English and Welsh cricket|Minor Counties Cricket]] | |||
==References== | ==References== | ||
| Line 122: | Line 123: | ||
{{Forms of cricket}} | {{Forms of cricket}} | ||
[[Category:First-class cricket| ]] | [[Category:First-class cricket| ]] | ||
[[Category:Cricket terminology]] | [[Category:Cricket terminology]] | ||