England Domestic Season, England v Surrey and Sussex at Lord's (Old), Jun 12-14, 1793
Surrey and Sussex won by an innings and 299 runs
12,13,14 June 1793 (3-day match)
  England 1st innings R
C Cumberland b Hammond 0
T Scott c Hammond 3
R Purchase c Wells 24
W Fennex c Beldham 8
A Freemantle b T Walker 8
J Ring b Wells 1
G Louch c Beldham 0
R Fielder c Wells 8
T Taylor c Hammond 6
R Welch c H Walker 4
T Boxall not out 1
Extras (b 3) 3
  Total (all out) 66

Fall of wickets Unknown

  Bowling W
  J Hammond 1
  T Walker 1
  J Wells 1
  Surrey and Sussex 1st innings R
T Walker b Boxall 138
Earl of Winchilsea b Fennex 56
J Wells b Purchase 51
G Dehany b Boxall 1
HJ Tufton c Fennex 0
TVR Nicoll b Boxall 2
J Walker b Purchase 24
J Crawte b Purchase 11
W Beldham hit wicket b Purchase 77
H Walker b Cumberland 51
J Hammond not out 37
Extras (b 5) 5
  Total (all out) 453

Fall of wickets Unknown

  Bowling W
  W Fennex 1
  T Boxall 3
  R Purchase 4
  C Cumberland 1
  England 2nd innings R
C Cumberland c Tufton 1
T Scott run out 35
R Purchase c Hammond 19
W Fennex b Beldham 12
A Freemantle not out 13
J Ring c Hammond 0
G Louch b Beldham 1
R Fielder b T Walker 3
T Taylor b Beldham 2
R Welch b Hammond 1
T Boxall c H Walker 1
Extras 0
  Total (all out) 88

Fall of wickets Unknown

  Bowling W
  J Hammond 1
  T Walker 1
  W Beldham 3

Match details


Balls per over 4
Toss - Unknown
First-class debut - HJ Tufton (Surrey and Sussex)
Umpires - Unknown
Close of play
  • Wed, 12 Jun - day 1 - unknown
  • Thu, 13 Jun - day 2 - unknown
  • Fri, 14 Jun - day 3 - England 2nd innings 88 - end of match

Match Notes


General
    • England Captain not named
    • England Wicket-keeper not named
    • Surrey and Sussex Captain not named
    • Surrey and Sussex Wicket-keeper not named
    • England 1st innings: bowlers' runs conceded do not balance
    • Surrey and Sussex 1st innings: bowlers' runs conceded do not balance
    • England 2nd innings: bowlers' runs conceded do not balance
    • Surrey and Sussex 2nd innings: bowlers' runs conceded do not balance
    • The batting order for the England team is from Sporting Magazine as this seems likely to represent the first-innings batting order. Sporting Magazine lists the Surrey and Sussex team as follows: Winchilsea, Wells, Dehaney, T Walker, Tufton, Nicoll, Crawte, J Walker, H Walker, Hammond, Beldham. With such prominent professionals listed last, this appears at first sight to make little sense either as a batting order or as the order of dismissal. The likely explanation is that the scoring at the top of the order was so heavy that the remaining professionals were held back to allow the amateurs more opportunity to bat. In 2010 an original Britcher was offered for sale which included a handwritten annotation to this game: 'An astonishing Match. I saw T Walker and Lord Winchilsea went in first and J Wells went in when Lord Winchilsea was bowled out.' This eyewitness account provides the first three to go in for Surrey and Sussex (and incidentally implies very large stands for the first two wickets). It also tends to confirm that the order in Bentley (Winchilsea, Tufton, Dehaney, Nicoll, T Walker, Wells, J Walker, Crawte, Beldham, H Walker, Hammond) is that of going in but with amateurs listed first. Although it involves combining sources, this allows a recontruction of this unusually high-scoring innings that is consistent with the apparent dismissal order in Sporting Magazine and this is the order that has been used. If correct, this suggests that Beldham may have hit his wicket deliberately to give his side time to bowl England out again without extending the match into a fourth day.
    • SB gives the date as 1792 but advance notice of the match was given in the World on 10 June 1793, thus conclusively establishing the year as above.
 
Print this page
x
   

MATCH CENTRE

4s

6s

dots

  • RHB

    LHB

  • RHB

    LHB

Partnerships