Without Robert Brooke, there would be no ACS. Every one of the Association’s thousands of members over the past 52 years owes him an enormous debt of gratitude for turning their private fascination with the figures of cricket into a thriving organisation with a worldwide reputation in the fields of both cricket’s statistics and its history.
Robert was born in Solihull in 1940. His father was at various times a boxer, butcher, credit-round collector, farm worker, chauffeur, journeyman builder and proprietor of a transport café; his mother was a former domestic worker, and Robert lived with her until shortly before her death in 2008. Both his grandfathers were coal miners: one was a founder member of the Independent Labour Party; the other, an organist and choirmaster, died aged 36. Robert had no sympathy with those who find romance in coal mining. A life-long stammerer and depressive, he spent five years in the Civil Service, then (in his own words) ‘for the remainder of his working life flitted from job to job and did a fair bit of cricket writing and research’.
It was late in 1972 when he and his co-founder Dennis Lambert placed advertisements in the English cricket magazines, seeking to attract those interested in forming what they then called a ‘Cricket Statistics Association’. In March 1973, at a gathering of those responding to the adverts, the ACS was founded (by a majority of 13–12); and the acorn was planted that was to grow into the oak that we know today.
Robert was immediately elected Chairman of the new organisation, a role he was to hold for six years, briefly combining it with the role of Secretary for a few months in 1974, between the initial tenure of Dennis Lambert and Peter Wynne-Thomas’ 32 years in the post. He remained an ever-influential member of the ACS committee until 1986. But Robert’s heart was not so much in the administration of the ACS as in helping to see it flourish, while at the same time undertaking his own research into the facts and figures of the game – and sharing the results with the wider world.
He did this as the first editor of our journal The Cricket Statistician (which he initially typed out himself, before a car accident which damaged his right hand and forced him to write with his left), and was responsible for 52 issues up to the end of 1985; he remained the journal’s chief book reviewer until he stood down in 2004.
From 1979, he also provided a regular, and unendingly fascinating, ‘Milestones’ column to The Cricketer magazine, placing recent occurrences in the worldwide game in context through lists of comparable performances in the past. How he was able to undertake the necessary research so comprehensively and accurately in pre-internet days remains a mystery.
These were, of course, not Robert’s only ventures into print. During the Association’s first few months he produced its first publication – the volume on Warwickshire Cricketers in our Cricketers series which eventually expanded to 38 volumes (now accessible on the ACS’s website). Robert was a Warwickshire man by birth, and seemingly a Warwickshire supporter from birth too, and it is not surprising that his other volumes for the ACS all had Warwickshire connections. First among equals was his only contribution to our Lives in Cricket series, a study of the life of FR Foster. This remains the only ACS publication to reach the shortlist for the MCC/Cricket Society Book of the Year prize (and there are many who still think it deserved to win).
It was for that book that Robert was awarded the ACS’s title of Statistician and Historian of the Year for 2011, becoming the first – and still the only – individual to win this award in his own right twice: he had earlier won it in 1989 ‘for his work for the Association and in other fields’. It was later renamed the Brooke-Lambert Trophy, in honour of Robert and ACS co-founder Dennis Lambert.
The ACS’s 1993 booklet 21 Years of the ACS, as well as heaping deserved praise on Robert’s efforts for the Association in its formative years, also refers to him as ‘a strong minded individualist’, who possessed ‘a complex blend of mettlesome character and artistic temperament, with a strong feeling for justice and… a loyal friend… an inexhaustible perfectionist and rightly intolerant of shortcomings’. That intolerance was shown in some of the famously trenchant book reviews that he wrote for The Cricket Statistician: if he didn’t like a book, he wasn’t shy to let you know it – and why. His ‘inexhaustible perfectionism’ was highlighted by Christopher Martin-Jenkins, then editor of The Cricketer, who in 1987 began his Foreword to Cricket Milestones, a book bringing together updated versions of many of Robert’s articles more the magazine, with these words:
Robert Brooke has not yet been elected Pope and he is not infallible: but with the possible exceptions of Irving Rosenwater and Bill Frindall he is the least fallible, most painstaking and assiduous cricket researcher in the world.
Yet perhaps our abiding memory of Robert should be of the loyal and dependable friend that many of our members remember in the tributes below, supportive of those joining the Association for the first time, or those submitting their first article for possible publication in the Journal, or all who approached him with a statistical query or conundrum.
We should not, and will not, forget the debt that we all owe to Robert. The ACS is fortunate indeed to have been blessed with such a man as our co-founder and, to many, our father figure in the world of cricket statistics over the ACS’s first half-century.
Keith Walmsley
An audience with our founder
In 2023, Rodney Ulyate interviewed Robert Brooke for the ACS YouTube channel. You can watch the video here, and read a transcript of his opening remarks below.
‘I’ll start at the start, shall I? You might have met Dennis Lambert? He’s long dead, but he and I lived not far from each other. We had meetings at my local pub, talking cricket, of course, which was the whole idea. And it was I – I’m going to claim it was I – who had the idea of trying to form an organisation. He said, ‘Yes, what a good idea!’ And so we arranged a meeting at Edgbaston, and I got in touch with a few people I knew already, Peter Wynne-Thomas and one or two others. They were all for it, and so we arranged this first meeting.
‘At the first meeting, Dennis Lambert was scared to death, so I stood up and started talking. And I surprised myself, how much I could talk, you know. One of the people there was a chap called Irving Rosenwater. He was against it right at the start. He said it wasn’t necessary. He said the Cricket Society did everything with cricket statistics that anybody could wish for. And he had a vote on whether we should form ourselves into a new organisation or apply to the Cricket Society for affiliation. I was all against it, and fortunately we won by one vote. Had we not won, I’m not sure what would have happened. I don’t think I would have accepted it.
‘So it started there. We selected a committee. Peter Wynne-Thomas was the first treasurer. There was Philip Thorne, who didn’t say much, but he was a good worker, and a chap called David Gallagher. I don’t know what’s happened to him. And me and Lambert, of course. It was a lot of talk, but we decided, every so often, to do books about each county – a list of all the first-class players for each county. We found out full names, births and deaths and records and everything like that. And the first county we did was Warwickshire – mainly because I said, ‘Oh yeah, I can do that!’ God, it was hard, hard work, but it appeared. Years afterwards I used to occasionally look at it and feel rather ashamed. But we had to do something, because it had all been talk up to them.
‘So yeah, we had Warwickshire, and then we decided to do Worcestershire. And the only person that I could find to do Worcestershire was a fourteen-year-old schoolboy called Tim Neilson. And he said, ‘Oh yeah, I can do it.’ Nobody else wanted to do it. And he did a darn good job. But several years later, I met his mother, and she said, ‘You know, I did most of that book, because Tim was always doing homework!’ But anyway, a darn good job. In the end he formed some sort of a religious organisation. I don’t know what it was, and I don’t know what happened to him after that. But earlier, especially with the Worcestershire booklet, he was absolutely invaluable. And as I say, the fact that he was only about fourteen or fifteen – it was quite amazing.
‘And then we did other counties. I can’t remember which came next – possibly Leicestershire, because Dennis Lambert was a member of Leicestershire. And then Nottinghamshire probably, because Peter Wynne-Thomas was the librarian at Trent Bridge. And then Derbyshire, because we had an old chap called Frank Peach, who wanted to do Derbyshire. So we let him do it, and he did a decent job. And so it went on and on and on.
‘But some people decided we wanted to do a bit more than this. So I – again, simply because no other member of the committee wanted to put his head above the parapet – said, ‘Oh, I’ll edit a quarterly journal called The Cricket Statistician.’ And oh God! I loved that! How I enjoyed it…’
Brookeisms
Herewith a few extracts, chosen more or less at random, from Robert’s famously forthright reviews in The Cricket Statistician.
He didn’t like books that had clear, avoidable errors:
‘One’s eyes popped at the sight of entry 3611-1. ‘Ceased publication 1981,’ one reads. Therefore one presumes the post-1981 issues in one’s possession are fakes; otherwise how could so nonsensical a statement about one of the world’s best-known cricket annuals be made, and get through the proof checking?’ Review of the second edition of the Padwick Bibliography, in Journal 49 on page 40. The annual referred to is the Protea Annual of South Africa.
Or to have criticism unrewarded:
‘It is ludicrous for different figures [for the same statistic] to appear in different parts of the annual, year after year after year. As usual the absence of full first-class averages must be deplored, but one tires of repeating the same complaints without response.’ Review of Indian Cricket 1984, in Journal 50 page 35.
Nor did he like books that were less than well-written, especially if the author was a bit of a boor:
‘Marsh comes over as an ignorant moronic loudmouth… Is it worth striving for an acceptable standard of English in the written word when this sort of thing is published?… As for Marsh, the sooner he and his sort crawl back under their stones, the better for cricket.’ Review of The Gloves of Irony by Rod Marsh, in Journal 40 page 26.
He particularly had it in for Frank Tyson:
‘If he is so lacking in knowledge that the England player Emmett [in the first-ever Test match] was really Tom and not George, he is manifestly not qualified to write anything appertaining to cricket history…. It is not possible to be tolerant of this appalling effort.’ Review of Tyson’s The Centenary Test in Journal 20 pp 35-36.
And again:
‘Tyson is to cricket history what Florence Foster-Jenkins is to Grand Opera.’ Review of Tyson’s The Century Makers, in Journal 31 page 24.
Yet even when his criticisms were sweeping, he could sometimes show a softer side:
‘All this should put the book quite beyond redemption. Yet there is a strange fascination about the crackpot ideas, the ludicrous theories, the sycophantic colloquialisms… One found oneself loving this book, wishing for more, sorry it had finished. If this is taken as a recommendation, as a favourable review, so be it.’ Review of A cricket hotch-potch by Tom Naylor, in Journal 50 page 31.
Members’ tributes
Denis Moore:
We have lost our co-founder and an inspiration for the modern development of cricket statistics.
I joined the ACS in 1977, and as part of his welcome, he proactively photocopied all the previous editions of the journal for me. Just one example of his generosity and care towards new members at the time. He made me feel like he was a mentor, and encouraged me to write my first article for the journal.
I looked for all his work, including his column in The Cricketer and a subsequent book Cricket Milestones.
His recent interview with Rodney Ulyate revealed to me the deterioration in his eyesight which probably explains the reduction in his output in recent years. However, he leaves the legacy of the ACS which it is our responsibility to take forward.
Peter Corbett:
Very sorry to hear about Robert. He was from the midlands like me, and introduced me to the Association in 1974. He drove me to some early meetings, and was a genial and amusing companion, and just meeting him I felt sure I would enjoy the ACS and the tremendous work it has done over fifty years.
I enjoyed Robert’s straightforward observations in his book reviews, the great strength of which was his awareness that members pockets were not bottomless so he always said unequivocally whether or not the book under review was worth buying.
I can remember him saying that a complete set of Wisdens was essential for thorough statistical research. I did not possess one but he offered to help with anything I needed. It is amazing to think that within thirty years everything would be accessible via the internet.
Thanks for everything, Robert. Your warmth, kindness and friendship will not be forgotten.
Jeremy Bourke:
Robert’s book reviews in the journal were some of the most forthright pieces of criticism I’ve read. You were never left in doubt about what he thought, especially if he spotted an error.
John Ward:
As a man I never found him anything but pleasant, friendly, tremendously helpful and encouraging. Those times I spent with him at Edgbaston in the 1980s – we met some weird, eccentric and sometimes far-from-sober characters, but he bore them all with remarkable patience and good humour.
Mark Spooner:
I was a cricket (and cricket stats) mad kid when I joined the ACS in early 1975. Robert was my contact at the association and I used to correspond with him quite often – in a sign of the times, it was via aerogramme.
It was the early days of the ACS, and I have no doubt he was very busy, both in his working life and with the association. But he always somehow found the time to sit down and write to a kid in Australia, because we had a shared passion.
It’s interesting looking back at that time; even though it was only communication via written correspondence, his personality certainly shone through in his writings to me. And it always brightened my day to get a new aerogramme from him.
He made me feel so welcome to be part of the association, despite living so far away. I am forever grateful to him for that, and for the foresight of he and the others who felt that recording the history of the game (statistical and otherwise) warranted its own organisation. The body of work assembled by that organisation over 50+ years (still going!) has been truly remarkable.
Kevin Jones:
Such awful news. I never met Robert but he was an inspiration to me when I was a callow youth and first joined the ACS.
David Jeater:
I’m very sorry to hear that Rob has died. My direct dealings with him were mostly editing his book in the ‘Lives in Cricket’ series in 2011 on Frank Foster, whom he saw as a fellow-travelling eccentric. The process of getting the book to print was easily the most ‘eventful’ of my editing career. We had set-tos over illustrations and statistics I recall, but then he permitted me to fit in, without comment, a linking half-chapter, written by me in a pastiche of his own style.
The outcome was a book which is still one of the best in the series, with (characteristically) plenty of material which had not previously been published. (Few of our books start with poetry by John Clare!) It also includes a longish ‘About the Author’ piece, written by himself, which I recommend to anyone to whom he is simply the Association founder, or Cricketer columnist. Foster came close to winning Cricket Book of the Year. At the awards ceremony in the Long Room at Lord’s, Rob had a good four pints beforehand, but when I asked him if he had an acceptance speech, he said no. I scribbled him some notes on a napkin, but fortunately we came second – probably!
Sui generis? Very much so: I can’t now recall whether he would have approved of using Latin in remembering him. He would, though, most certainly have had a firm opinion one way or another.
Brent Simmons:
When I was a Junior member of the ACS I wrote an article. Robert was extremely helpful as well as being encouraging. He found some additional information and took the trouble to write to me to ask if it could be included. Many thanks, Robert, and RIP.
Robby Wilton
A remarkable person and an outstanding historian, more in the spirit of Bowen than Altham.
Robert Brooke was devoid of cant. He delivered his opinions in an erudite and forthright manner, never hiding behind the veil of committee expediency. This honesty particularly manifested itself in his book reviews. An informative and perceptive critique, often laced with wry humour, gave the prospective buyer a transparent appraisal, without the need to indulge in the euphemism and ‘double-speak’ sometimes used by others. I think he valued truth and accuracy above all else, and might occasionally upset more sensitive and diplomatic souls – but so be it!
It is unlikely that the ACS would exist, let alone be held in such high regard, if it was not for our RB. The wonder is that one who seemed so disorganised could have formed and built up a cottage-industry association to its present heights. What enthusiasm and skill!
I count myself very fortunate to have sat with him at a cricket dinner in April 1974. At that time I had a ‘crush’ on Salim Durani and he on John Shilton. We discussed our heroes and chatted away throughout – or, rather, I spent most of the evening listening, enthralled by his deep knowledge and unconditional love of the game and John Shilton in particular.
Naturally I joined the ACS immediately. I subsequently enjoyed corresponding with him, and he was always happy to share information from his deep repository of knowledge.
Peter Griffiths:
Robert (not Rob) was a member of the Campaign for Real Ale (as was I) – but he was much better at drinking it than me!!
Jonathan Northall:
I think it is important for us to celebrate the life as well as recognise the sorrow from Robert’s passing. I am also aware of the responsibility of currently holding the office that he held from 1973–1985. It’s great to read how Robert was encouraging at times, critical at others, but always being himself. We are all, as members of the ACS, in debt to you, Robert. RIP.
Francis Payne:
Robert Brooke and Peter Wynne-Thomas produced the weekly Cricket News in the late 1970s. I was the NZ correspondent. Loved Rob’s book reviews!
He also recovered from a serious car accident when he had to learn to write with his left hand. I corresponded with Robert regularly in those days, with the old blue aerogrammes. I wondered why he didn’t reply for a very long time and then finally got a reply in his left-handed writing, explaining what had happened.
Mick Pope:
Like many other ACS members I am so very sad to read the news that Robert Brooke has died. Peter Wynne-Thomas, Yorkshire’s Tony Woodhouse, and Robert were a great encouragement to me back in the early 1980s when my own fledgling attempts at cricket research began. All three ACS stalwarts urged me to join the Association, which of course I did almost immediately, and quickly realised it was exactly the place I’d been looking for. Robert offered recommendations on building a cricket library. ‘You’ll need a full set of Wisden, Scores & Biographies, Lillywhites, Cricket: A Weekly Record, The Cricketer, Playfair…’ he wrote. His own travails and triumphs in the search for John Shilton were also an inspiration when biographical subjects piqued my interest later.
For some time I was involved with the process of typesetting the The Cricket Statistician and greatly looked forward to receiving Robert’s book review copy each quarter, except when one of my books was in the firing line, although I escaped merely wounded thankfully! His comments may have been sharp and firm, but if you got a decent review from RB then you could consider yourself to have done a reasonable job for he could not tolerate sloppy or lazy research.
Robert’s deeds and his body of work for the ACS and as a cricket statistician, writer and researcher (not to mention his character and warmth) place him rightly in the best company. And remember much of his studious output achieved in the pre-Internet and digital era, when research was a greatly more time-consuming and difficult task. To adopt the well-known idiom: ‘Standing on the shoulders of giants’ – Robert Brooke was one of those giants.