ACS Overseas First-Class Annual 2018

batsman farming the strike from a lower-order colleague is not evident until you put the two together. The trend to ignore ‘minutes batted’ in recent times is a regrettable development in my view, and deprives the reader of a scorecard of much information about the match.” At any rate, the overriding point is that there is no necessity to choose. In countries other than Sri Lanka, it is the normal practice of scorers to supply both particulars, and they are duly recorded by Cricket Archive and published in this Annual . It is of even greater concern that details of fall of wickets in Pakistan do not identify the batsman dismissed. I acknowledge that this is a detail that, like ‘balls faced’, was not traditionally noted by scorers in former times, and I note too that even Wisden did not routinely include it until as recently as 2003. Nevertheless I feel it is basic to a modern scorecard to be able to identify the batsmen involved in any given partnership, and it is deeply regrettable that a country with the cricketing pedigree of Pakistan does not see fit to record this information. As in previous editions, the policy of this Annual , when a detail of a score is missing, is simply to leave a space. On a positive note before leaving this subject, it is notable that, despite the absence of any clear protocol from the authorities, scorers are becoming more consistent in supplying details of the fielders involved when a batsman is run out. As usual, the Annual contains its share of statistical highlights. In these pages will be found the oldest first-class triple centurion since Patsy Hendren; a total of first-class runs in a month overseas second only to Bill Ponsford; and new records, by balls faced, for the fastest ever double-hundred and triple-hundred. In October 2017 a record that had stood for 191 years, namely the highest partnership between two players both on first-class debut, was beaten twice in a matter of weeks. And for collectors of statistical oddities, we can offer an all-out first-class innings, without extras, in which every run was taken from the same bowler. Against these highlights, let me add that the undoubted lowlight, the notorious ‘sandpaper Test’, also features in these pages. In conclusion, I offer a word of sincere apology to purchasers who may very reasonably feel that they have been waiting an inordinate time to receive this book. It has always been a struggle to get the Annual out on schedule. It is advertised in November each year but we advise purchasers that we may not be in a position to supply it immediately and in practice we strive to achieve a more realistic target of having it in buyers’ hands before Christmas. Last year we failed virtually at the last hurdle, as the bindery became contaminated by asbestos and ultimately the whole book had to be reprinted. As a result it was well into January 2018 before we were able to despatch copies to purchasers. The delay this year has been even more severe. It arose because, for reasons wholly beyond the control of the ACS, Cricket Archive, or anyone connected with the production of the book, the basic scorecard data could not be supplied until the end of September, a time by which work on the Annual is usually far advanced. This initial delay put back the entire process, with the result that only now – and I am writing these words on 11 January 2019 – is publication finally in sight. I hope the final product is worth the wait. John Bryant Editor 20 Wilton Square London N1 3DL overseasannual@acscricket.com January 2019 5