Cricket balls by era

[eempyrean]

Does anyone know the history of cricket balls in test cricket. What make/brand was used in each era?

What make/brand of ball was used in the first test match ever played? What was the quality of the balls used then compared to now? To the balls react better or worse off the bat and so on?

Would be interesting to here from anyone that is an expert in this. Thanks

 

[fredfertang]

There is a book about the history of bat and ball manufacture called 'Quilt Winders and Pod Shavers' by a bloke called Hugh Barty-King, published by MacDonald and Janes in 1979, but sadly I don't think it answers your questions

 

[Red]

I dont think this answers your questions, but it is good to watch:

 

[AndrewB]

Dukes have apparently been making cricket balls since 1760, and Kookaburra since 1890.

 

[Midwinter]

The MCC museum at the MCG have on display some of the balls used in 1880's test matches.

Looked the same as some used at training some nights.

 

[eempyrean]

The MCC museum at the MCG have on display some of the balls used in 1880's test matches.

Looked the same as some used at training some nights.

So we can say that the ball swung and seamed less then?

I wondered as it's difficult to compare eras due to different rules, conditions etc. I wondered about the ball too

Good replies, maybe someone knows more

 

[Daemon]

I saw a few in the lords museum iirc, but they were used so it's a bit hard to compare. Can't recall any major differences besides the seam being a bit wonky. Can't recall the era either, so I suppose this post is a bit useless.

they all are tbf

 

[Burgey]

Didn’t they use a bigger ball in some places before about 1920 or so?

 

[jimmy101]

You could be right. I know that they adjusted the size of the stumps circa 1928/29 (made them fractionally shorter & wider). Might very well have coincided with a change in ball size.

 

[fredfertang]

Didn’t they use a bigger ball in some places before about 1920 or so?

That one I do know the answer to - in 1927 the circumference was reduced - from between 9 inches and 9 1/4 inches to between 8 13/16 inches and 9 inches

 

[AndrewB]

I thought that was because when they checked they found that all the balls that were in use at the time (and presumably had been for a while) were slightly too small, and decided it was simpler to modify the rules than to replace all cricket balls. But I could be misremembering (or the story could be apocryphal).

 

[NotMcKenzie]

I believe from what I have read that the reduction in size was introduced as a measure to favour bowlers, presumably by making the ball easier to grip.

I wouldn't read too much into the quality of balls used in the past from example kept around, because these will have been... used.

I also remember that Don Bradman in The Art of Cricket criticised ball manufacturers for lacquering cricket balls rather than polishing them. I believe he said something along the lines that lacquered balls wore worse for being able to make the ball swing. Seems that 59 years later, Kookaburra still hasn't taken heed.
It also make me suspect that the claim that balls need to be lacquered to stand up to Australian conditions are BS, or at the least that it wouldn't matter.

 

[fredfertang]

I thought that was because when they checked they found that all the balls that were in use at the time (and presumably had been for a while) were slightly too small, and decided it was simpler to modify the rules than to replace all cricket balls. But I could be misremembering (or the story could be apocryphal).

I got it from Brodribb's book which does indeed say that, although I assume it can't have been all balls that were too small because I think he also said some bowlers didn't like the smaller balls - if I get really bored I'll see if I can find anything in The Cricketer about it at the time

 

[Midwinter]

The change to reduce the size of the ball and to increase the size of the stumps happened at the same time, to assist the bowlers. There was a change to the LBW law as well.

It happened in the late 20's as mentioned above.

 

[AndrewB]

Late 20s through to the late 30s; the stumps were increased in 1931 and the lbw law changed experimentally in 1935, fully in 1937.

 

[vitalogy83]

From my Bradman museum visit a while back. I've got one of the stumps evolution from there too if anyone is keen for a look.

 

[NotMcKenzie]

Does anyone else reckon that the stumps usually looked thinner in older matches than they tend to now?