This article is part of WikiProject Cricket which aims to expand and organise information better in articles related to the sport of cricket. Please participate by visiting the project and talk pages for more details.CricketWikipedia:WikiProject CricketTemplate:WikiProject Cricketcricket
There is a toolserver based WikiProject Cricket cleanup list that automatically updates weekly to show all articles covered by this project which are marked with cleanup tags. (also available in one big list and in CSV format)
This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
The article has been created in response to a merger proposal which resulted in agreement to merge all English cricket season reviews, for 1726 to 1863, into relevant histories. There are already articles covering the periods 1726–1771 and 1816–1863, but none for any part of 1772–1815.
The article as it stands is a quick summary of key points evident in the 1772 to 1815 reviews and I admit that it is nothing like perfect and may not all be correct. It is just a collection of facts that I've welded together. Much more research is needed. Only one of the statements carries a citation at present because the information in the reviews is mostly uncited. I have borrowed the bibliography items from other articles. Some of those books probably won't be relevant here and there will undoubtedly be others that do belong here. The players I've named are the ones who seem to stand out in the reviews but there were countless other good players around whose names might be added later. Hampshire was evidently the outstanding county team and MCC the most eminent club after its foundation, especially after it claimed ownership of the rules.
The priority for development of the article is to complete the merger into it of the most significant and useful content in the 1772 to 1815 season reviews, but there is no rush to complete this as mergers can take years (see WP:MERGE). If anyone else has useful sources and can help to expand the article, it will be much appreciated. I will work on it occasionally. Thanks. No Great Shaker (talk) 07:42, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Following recent discussion of this period with the third parties who assisted me at 1744 English cricket season, I think it was a mistake to merge 1772 English cricket season. That was a significant year in the sport's history because match scorecards became the rule rather than the exception; and the season is widely considered to mark the beginning (albeit unofficially) of first-class cricket. I'm therefore undoing the merger to retain the article as an independent review of 1772, as for 1744. The summary in this article is useful, however, and I'll leave that be. No Great Shaker (talk) 14:13, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The bit in the "Roundarm bowling" section about overarm bowling doesn't seem to belong, as it deals with something that happened well after 1825. JH (talk page) 09:50, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, JH. Thanks for that. I copied the paragraph from one of the older articles and should have edited that bit out. If you can cast an eye over the articles in this series (say, 1801–1863), I'd appreciate it because at present I'm trying to forge a non-chronological structure and there will be some crossovers and omissions. The big job will be to determine the actual sources and page numbers. Thanks again and all the best. BoJó | talk UTC 12:04, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'll have a look if I can find the time.. I'm off on a cruise on the 11th, so I won't be around for a few weeks after that. JH (talk page) 16:28, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, JH, and that's marvellous news. Hope you have a holiday to remember. Great time of year to be getting out of this country, too (especially this year). All the best. BoJó | talk UTC 18:30, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
