Twenty-One Years of the ACS

embroiled in a controversy that must be touched on for the sake of the record. Brooke was theauthor of Who's Who ofEnglish First-class Cricket 1945-1984.Brooke,in his introduction,John Woodcock,the editor of Wisden, in the foreword and the publishers in their advertising matter, all referred to Brooke as the founder of the ACS without any mention of Dennis Lambert as co-founder.It was doubtless an unintentional oversighton everyone's part,with an original mistake perpetuated down the line. Lambert quite rightly was offended and several acrimonious letters passed between the parties. Not much could be done but Collins gave an assurance that the offending references would be revised if the book was re-printed. Less serious, though it jarred on some,was Brooke's decision to ignore ACS research in this book and to leave traditional career figures unamended,though in fact not many were involved in the years the book covered.Brooke admitted in his introduction that his attitude had changed over the years and that he did not feel he had' the authority or the moraljustification to change old accepted cricket records.' Brooke, of course, had every right to use whatever figures he wished but his decision, inevitably, brought renewed debate and confusion to this issue and tended to leave him further isolated from long standing ACS colleagues. Fortunately any rifts in personal relationships caused by this episode receded as time passed and Brooke certainly has never been absent for long from the list of active ACS workers. He and Lambert became the first honorary life members to be elected when this category was introduced in 1987 and Brooke, incidentally, remains the only ACS member never to have missed an AGM.Two other life members have been elected since: Peter Wynne-Thomas in 1990 and Ken Trushell in 1993. Brooke proposed that his successor as editor of the Journal should be John Stockwell, an astute thinker and assiduous ACS worker, and he was to prove an excellent choice. The Spring edition for 1986 was the first under Stockwell's direction and the editorial board's influence,coupled with a fresh hand on the helm,soon became apparent in a number of changes in style and content. There was no loss of originality in the articles and leaders but more telling use was made of pictures; members'letters were published regularly for the first time; and increased space was given to one-day cricket. A subtle change ofemphasis also brought on occasion, more articles on both historical and topical subjects, with fewer statistical lists evident. Overall the pages were more tightly sub-edited and the writing more disciplined. Members'letters still appear and give the writers the chance to be more involved.They have yielded a lot of useful information and also the odd nugget of oblique humour, something the very nature of a statistician's Journal usually precludes. Two examples from the Autumn, 1991, issue can be cited and always make the author smile. Steven Draper, a Leeds member, wrote that he was puzzled by another correspondent's claim that'We all remember the summer of 1953.' Draper wenton:'Try as I might I cannot bring it to mind.Does anyone else have 28