Proof of Innocence?

[Caroline Brown]

Another possible factor is the bad weather that summer. Forecasting was not exactly sophisticated, so it might have been preferable to 'make hay while the sun shines' and begin matches early enough that season to allow for the weather to change as the day progressed. Unless the skies were clear first thing, a 4pm start might have been seen as tempting fate?

Mister Brown says if anyone is interested, there is a copy of Wisden's Cricketers' Almanack for 1889 going on ebay for £450!

On Amazon, 'currently unavailable', I found this description:

John Wisden's Cricketers' Almanack for 1889: Full Scores, Bowling Analyses & Descriptions of the Australian and all Other Important Matches Played in 1888. Special Photographs of Turner and Ferris, Woods, Peel, Briggs, and Lohmann. Twenty Sixth Edition.

I have no idea if Blandford matches would even get a mention, or if there is anything useful about the etiquette at the time which could apply equally to the less important matches, but if anyone has some serious spending money to find out...

I've just splashed out nearly two grand on having two dental crowns replaced, or I might have been tempted.

Love,

Caz
X

[Chris Phillips]

But the game is described as a ‘decisive victory for the visitors,’ Chris. This indicates a complete one innings game.

This is the crucial point to my mind.

You're arguing that if it had been intended to be a two-innings match (which having looked at all those statistics I think all the Blandford matches were) but had to be decided on a single innings because of a lack of time, then the victory wouldn't have been described as decisive for that reason, no matter how great the disparity between the scores?

I think that needs to be backed up by some evidence or some argument rather than just an assertion. Maybe you can convince me, but at the moment I don't see it at all.

On your other comments, I do think it's clear that few or none of the players would have been working in shops, so it wouldn't have to be a 4 o'clock start for that reason. If the start time was influenced by early closing, I think it's more likely that it would have been mid-afternoon, so that the game would continue after the shops had shut, rather than 4 o'clock so that it would start after the shops had shut. We know that some games did start at 3pm in those days. But as I said, I really think it's the end time we need to concentrate on, not the start time.

[Michael Banks]

In your post 463 you showed what appears to have been the first fixture which has 2 completed innings but the game was not completed and so this was obviously intended as a 2 innings match as you pointed out. If these were league fixtures then the return would presumably also have been 2 innings but it is strange that the game was called a ‘decisive’ victory after one innings per side with no mention of the game being cut short. Even if they were only friendly (and not league) games it seems a little strange that they were of different durations. So it might be suggested that the second game was of shorter duration so as to accommodate a later start? I don’t know. It’s too vague to draw a definite conclusion.

In Roger’s post 187 he shows a two innings game between Durweston Boys and Shillingstone Second XI. This is game included a luncheon which would have meant a start no later than 12.00 (possibly earlier) as luncheon would have been taken during the game. Do we have any records of 2 innings games that began later in the afternoon Chris?

It’s worth pointing out that the early closing mentioned in the piece that you quoted in post 430 specifically concerned the closing of shops. There’s doesn’t appear to be any mention of other businesses?

[Chris Phillips]

In your post 463 you showed what appears to have been the first fixture which has 2 completed innings but the game was not completed and so this was obviously intended as a 2 innings match as you pointed out. If these were league fixtures then the return would presumably also have been 2 innings but it is strange that the game was called a ‘decisive’ victory after one innings per side with no mention of the game being cut short. Even if they were only friendly (and not league) games it seems a little strange that they were of different durations. So it might be suggested that the second game was of shorter duration so as to accommodate a later start? I don’t know. It’s too vague to draw a definite conclusion.

In Roger’s post 187 he shows a two innings game between Durweston Boys and Shillingstone Second XI. This is game included a luncheon which would have meant a start no later than 12.00 (possibly earlier) as luncheon would have been taken during the game. Do we have any records of 2 innings games that began later in the afternoon Chris?

It’s worth pointing out that the early closing mentioned in the piece that you quoted in post 430 specifically concerned the closing of shops. There’s doesn’t appear to be any mention of other businesses?

Of the reports I looked at (1887-1889), there are not many that contain any indication of time (in all but one of them a second innings was at least begun), and unfortunately none of them was on a Thursday. I've copied the notes for these below.

One on a Saturday started at 1.30pm and for two on Tuesdays tea is referred to. For all three of those a second innings was started but not completed, so they were decided on the first innings. And all three at Blandford Recreation Ground. Another, on a Monday, was at Sir William Smith-Marriott's ground, at the Down House, about two miles from Blandford. Apparently that was preceded by luncheon at 2pm. The report says "Sir William suggested playing out the match", which I think probably means they agreed to go past the prescribed time limit to finish the second innings.

On early closing, in the references I've seen only shops are mentioned, not other businesses. I have seen a reference to the whole town being extremely quiet later in the day as a lot of people went elsewhere.
.................................................. .................................................. .................

*Monday 15 August 1887 at Sir William's ground [The Down House, Blandford]. Blandford v. Sir William Smith Marriott's Team.
Special match at Sir William's ground. Fine weather, large and fashionable company. 2 o'clock luncheon in the dining room for both teams and the resident ladies. In the afternoon many from Blandford witnessed the game. Play was very interesting and as Sir William suggested playing out the match the final half hour was quite exciting, there being 4 wickets to fall and 26 runs needed by his team.
Blandford: 1: 134; 2: 55; Sir W. S. Marriott's Team: 1: 114; 2: 72
[20 August 1887, p. 5]

Wednesday 17 August 1887 at Blandford. Blandford v. Shaftesbury.
Return match. Blandford batted first, the first batsman going in at a few minutes to 12. score raised to 159 at luncheon time. Blandford's innings ended at 4.45, and the fear was that the opponents might not have time to complete an innings. [Further details of play given.]
Blandford: 315; Shaftesbury: 59
[20 August 1887, p. 5]

Tuesday 11 September 1888 at Ringwood. Blandford v. Ringwood.
Return match. Splendid weather. After the first innings Ringwood were confident of winning and intended to have a "scratch match" afterwards (this was forgotten, or anyhow not started when our team left by the 6.30 train). [Details of play given.]
Blandford: 1: 54; 2: 41; Ringwood: 1: 68; 2: 13 [complete]
[15 September 1888, p. 5]

*Saturday 15 September 1888 at Blandford. Mr Douglas Smith's XI and Mr. E. B. Smith's XI.
Was scheduled to start at 1.30. Interesting match attracted a large number of spectators. Delightfully fine weather. Time did not allow completion, and it was decided on first innings.
Mr Douglas Smith's XI: 93; Mr. E. B. Smith's XI: 1: 146; 2: 51 [9 scores, 2 not out, last 2 "did not bat"]
[15, 22 September 1888, p. 5]

*Tuesday 14 May 1889 at Blandford. Mr. E. B. Smith's XI v. Mr. Douglas Smith's XI.
Delightful weather. Single innings victory. Douglas Smith's team batted first. In the course of the afternoon tea was provided, full justice being done to the event by players and visitors.
Mr. Douglas Smith's XI: 1: 61; 2: 33; Mr. E. B. Smith's XI: 142 [complete]
[18 May 1889, p. 2]

Tuesday 20 August 1889 at Blandford. Blandford v. Isle of Purbeck.
Win for the visitors on the first innings. Islanders batted first. Home team reached 40 for 3 wickets by the luncheon interval. After resumption the remaining 7 batsmen added only 9 runs. After the visitors' second innings the game terminated. [Details of play given.]
Isle of Purbeck: 1: 57; 2: 89 [complete]; Blandford: 51
[24 August 1889, p. 2]

*Tuesday 10 September 1889 at Blandford. Mr. E. B. Smith's XI v. Mr. Douglas Smith's XI.
Return match. Win for former on first innings. Players and a numerous company entertained at tea in the pavilion.
Mr E. B. Smith's XI: 1: 66; 2: 86 for four wickets [6 scores, 1 not out]; Mr D. Smith's XI: 51
[14 September 1889, p. 2]

[Michael Banks]

Of the reports I looked at (1887-1889), there are not many that contain any indication of time (in all but one of them a second innings was at least begun), and unfortunately none of them was on a Thursday. I've copied the notes for these below.

One on a Saturday started at 1.30pm and for two on Tuesdays tea is referred to. For all three of those a second innings was started but not completed, so they were decided on the first innings. And all three at Blandford Recreation Ground. Another, on a Monday, was at Sir William Smith-Marriott's ground, at the Down House, about two miles from Blandford. Apparently that was preceded by luncheon at 2pm. The report says "Sir William suggested playing out the match", which I think probably means they agreed to go past the prescribed time limit to finish the second innings.

On early closing, in the references I've seen only shops are mentioned, not other businesses. I have seen a reference to the whole town being extremely quiet later in the day as a lot of people went elsewhere.
.................................................. .................................................. .................

*Monday 15 August 1887 at Sir William's ground [The Down House, Blandford]. Blandford v. Sir William Smith Marriott's Team.
Special match at Sir William's ground. Fine weather, large and fashionable company. 2 o'clock luncheon in the dining room for both teams and the resident ladies. In the afternoon many from Blandford witnessed the game. Play was very interesting and as Sir William suggested playing out the match the final half hour was quite exciting, there being 4 wickets to fall and 26 runs needed by his team.
Blandford: 1: 134; 2: 55; Sir W. S. Marriott's Team: 1: 114; 2: 72
[20 August 1887, p. 5]

Wednesday 17 August 1887 at Blandford. Blandford v. Shaftesbury.
Return match. Blandford batted first, the first batsman going in at a few minutes to 12. score raised to 159 at luncheon time. Blandford's innings ended at 4.45, and the fear was that the opponents might not have time to complete an innings. [Further details of play given.]
Blandford: 315; Shaftesbury: 59
[20 August 1887, p. 5]

Tuesday 11 September 1888 at Ringwood. Blandford v. Ringwood.
Return match. Splendid weather. After the first innings Ringwood were confident of winning and intended to have a "scratch match" afterwards (this was forgotten, or anyhow not started when our team left by the 6.30 train). [Details of play given.]
Blandford: 1: 54; 2: 41; Ringwood: 1: 68; 2: 13 [complete]
[15 September 1888, p. 5]

*Saturday 15 September 1888 at Blandford. Mr Douglas Smith's XI and Mr. E. B. Smith's XI.
Was scheduled to start at 1.30. Interesting match attracted a large number of spectators. Delightfully fine weather. Time did not allow completion, and it was decided on first innings.
Mr Douglas Smith's XI: 93; Mr. E. B. Smith's XI: 1: 146; 2: 51 [9 scores, 2 not out, last 2 "did not bat"]
[15, 22 September 1888, p. 5]

*Tuesday 14 May 1889 at Blandford. Mr. E. B. Smith's XI v. Mr. Douglas Smith's XI.
Delightful weather. Single innings victory. Douglas Smith's team batted first. In the course of the afternoon tea was provided, full justice being done to the event by players and visitors.
Mr. Douglas Smith's XI: 1: 61; 2: 33; Mr. E. B. Smith's XI: 142 [complete]
[18 May 1889, p. 2]

Tuesday 20 August 1889 at Blandford. Blandford v. Isle of Purbeck.
Win for the visitors on the first innings. Islanders batted first. Home team reached 40 for 3 wickets by the luncheon interval. After resumption the remaining 7 batsmen added only 9 runs. After the visitors' second innings the game terminated. [Details of play given.]
Isle of Purbeck: 1: 57; 2: 89 [complete]; Blandford: 51
[24 August 1889, p. 2]

*Tuesday 10 September 1889 at Blandford. Mr. E. B. Smith's XI v. Mr. Douglas Smith's XI.
Return match. Win for former on first innings. Players and a numerous company entertained at tea in the pavilion.
Mr E. B. Smith's XI: 1: 66; 2: 86 for four wickets [6 scores, 1 not out]; Mr D. Smith's XI: 51
[14 September 1889, p. 2]

Thanks Chris,

So…

Game One likely began 12.00/12.30 allowing for a period of play before luncheon.

Game Two began a few minutes before 12.00.

Game Three there is no mention of a start time.

Game Four began at 1.30 but they couldn’t even complete the 3rd of 4 innings. The weather was good so this was due to the time that just 3 innings took to complete.

Game Five has no time mentioned again. But does say that tea was provided ‘in the course of the afternoon’ and so not at the end of play. We can’t be certain but if tea was at the traditional time of around 4.00 then all that we can say is that there was a period of play before 4.00.

Game Six is another game with a luncheon break indicating a period of pre-midday play.

Game Seven was the return game of game five. No time mentioned but the game ended early.

[Chris Phillips]

Continuing from that summary, I think the only indications we have of the times fixed for finishing matches are:
(1) On Wednesday 17 August 1887 at Blandford, after the end of the first innings of the home team at 4.45, it was feared that there wouldn't be time for the visiting team to complete its first innings.
(2) One Tuesday 11 September 1888 at Ringwood, after a match in which two innings were completed, the Blandford team went home on the 6.30 train.

There is a reference in one report to "stumps being drawn" when time ran out. This sounded like a nice cricket-specific phrase, so I searched on Google Books for examples of the phrase "stumps were drawn at". I took the first ten results mentioning a time from the period 1878-1898, for matches in England only, and excluding fictional works. These covered the whole range of matches, from those between student teams with whimsical names to internationals. The results are copied below.

The range of times - 5.30-7pm - is consistent with the meagre indications we have from the reports of Blandford matches for 1887-1889.

.................................................. .................................................. .............

(1) Baily's Magazine of Sports & Pastimes - Volume 62 - Page 99 (1894)
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=...AAIAAJ&pg=PA99
Match between Surrey and Yorkshire, June 1894. "By special agreement between the captains prior to the match, stumps were drawn at 6.30 p.m., instead of the customary hour of seven."

(2) Baily's Magazine of Sports and Pastimes - Volume 41 - Page 119 (1884)
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=...AQAAJ&pg=PA119
Match between Huntsmen and Jockets, July 1883. Stumps were drawn at 6.30.

(3) The Boy's Own Annual - Volume 3 - Page 791 (1881)
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=...AMAAJ&pg=PA791
Two-day match between Caius Long Vacation Club and Emmanuel Long Vacation Club, July 1881. Stumps were drawn at 6.30 on both days.

(4) The Telegraphist. Ed. by W. Lynd - Volume 1 - Page 116 (1884)
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=...AQAAJ&pg=PA116
Match between a team from this office and the "S X team", July 1884. Stumps were drawn at 7.

(5) The Tercentenary Number of the School Magazine (Uppingham) - Page 185 (1884)
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=...AYAAJ&pg=PA185
Two-day Old Boys' Match, June. Stumps were drawn at 6.15 on the first day.

(6) The Journal of the Household Brigade, p. 106 (1879)
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=...AIAAJ&pg=PA106
Match between the Band of the First Life Guards and the Band of the Second Life Guards, August 1879. Stumps were drawn at 5.30.

(7) The Cliftonian (Clifton College), vol. 6 - Page 55 (1879-1881)
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=...AAQAAJ&pg=PA55
Two-day match between the College and Somersetshire, July 1879. Stumps were drawn at 6.30 on the first day.

(8) Cricket, a Weekly Record of the Game, vol. 15 - Page 413 (1896)
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=...AYAAJ&pg=PA413
Three-day match - The Australians, South of England Match, September 1896. Stumps were drawn at 5.30 on the first day.

(9) The Oxford Magazine - Volume 1 - Page 261 (1883)
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=...AQAAJ&pg=PA261
Match between the Perambulators and the Etceteras [sic], May 1883. Stumps were drawn at 6.15 on the first day and 6.30 on the second.

(10) The Strangers who Came Home: The First Australian Cricket Tour of England, by John Lazenby, p. 153 (2015)
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=...AQBAJ&pg=PA153
Match at Oldham, July 1878. Stumps were drawn at 6.30.

[Gary Barnett]

Where the match is between two local teams and the away team intends to return home by train, it would make sense that the finish time is coordinated with the railway timetable.

[Chris Phillips]

Where the match is between two local teams and the away team intends to return home by train, it would make sense that the finish time is coordinated with the railway timetable.

Yes, though unfortunately that is one of the small proportion of matches in which two innings were completed (with 10 wickets taken in each), so conceivably the scheduled finishing time could have been later.

[R. J. Palmer]

Wednesday 17 August 1887 at Blandford. Blandford v. Shaftesbury.
Return match. Blandford batted first, the first batsman going in at a few minutes to 12. score raised to 159 at luncheon time. Blandford's innings ended at 4.45, and the fear was that the opponents might not have time to complete an innings. [Further details of play given.]
Blandford: 315; Shaftesbury: 59
[20 August 1887, p. 5]

This could conceivably tell us something, but I'm not immediately seeing what it is. If the innings ended at 4.45, the next departing train is at 4.55 which would make the statement ridiculous. Further, Shaftesbury doesn't have a train station - the team would somehow have to get on the L & S W R and make their way to Semley or Gillingham. There is no easy way to get there by train that I can see.

[Chris Phillips]

This could conceivably tell us something, but I'm not immediately seeing what it is. If the innings ended at 4.45, the next departing train is at 4.55 which would make the statement ridiculous. Further, Shaftesbury doesn't have a train station - the team would somehow have to get on the L & S W R and make their way to Semley or Gillingham. There is no easy way to get there by train that I can see.

I read it as simply saying that whatever had been fixed as the finishing time for the game, there might be insufficient time for an innings by the opponents between 4.45 and then.

In other words it would tell us that the interval between 4.45 and the finishing time was similar to the expected time that a single innings by one side would take.

[Gary Barnett]

This could conceivably tell us something, but I'm not immediately seeing what it is. If the innings ended at 4.45, the next departing train is at 4.55 which would make the statement ridiculous. Further, Shaftesbury doesn't have a train station - the team would somehow have to get on the L & S W R and make their way to Semley or Gillingham. There is no easy way to get there by train that I can see.

There were buses connecting Blandford, Shaftesbury and Semley station in 1859.

[Chris Phillips]

I am assuming that normally a time would be fixed in advance for the game to end, as we discussed before. That does seem to be consistent with everything I've read.

I can see that in practical terms the time might be chosen with reference to trains or buses or whatever, but I don't think it would necessarily be. I certainly don't think we can assume it was chosen with reference to the last train.

[R. J. Palmer]

There were buses connecting Blandford, Shaftesbury and Semley station in 1859.

Okay, that might explain it. That's what I'm after.

As far as I can tell, suspending the game at 4:45 pm makes no sense in reference to departing trains. The only two choices were 4.55 and 7.30 pm.

At 4:45 that second train was still 2 hours and 45 minutes from departing and it doesn't even lead to Shaftesbury.

[R. J. Palmer]

Sundown in Dorset on August 17 is given as 7.25 p.m.

The Rise and Demise of the Blandford Railway Station. Nice pictures.


rise-demise-panel-lo-res-9th-july.pdf (blandfordforum-tc.gov.uk)

[Chris Phillips]

Okay, that might explain it. That's what I'm after.

As far as I can tell, suspending the game at 4:45 pm makes no sense in reference to departing trains. The only two choices were 4.55 and 7.30 pm.

At 4:45 that second train was still 2 hours and 45 minutes from departing and it doesn't even lead to Shaftesbury.

I think you are misunderstanding my notes. The match didn't end at 4.45. The first innings of Blandford ended at 4.45, and the fear was that their opponents (Shaftesbury) might not have time to complete their first innings after that. That is, there might not be time for Shaftesbury's first innings between 4.45 and the finishing time of the game (whenever that was).