 No, this is enormous pleasure and honestly a great compliment to me to be allowed to give this lecture. First of all, the two people who have to be thanked seriously is Neil Robinson, I'm glad to see you here from the MCC, and David Studham from Melbourne Credit Club, who unfortunately is not well and couldn't come today. Without the resources of their libraries, this would be absolutely totally impossible. And not only did they allow me to look at the resources, but they had actually volunteered information. So thank you very much Neil, and thank David please. I'd also like to thank my niece, Lynne, who couldn't come today, because she's got work to do, and your family always, people have a bit let me down I imagine. But she did quite a lot of work with the photography and stuff, and it's a great shame she's not here. Right, let me make a start please. Simon Vices, I hope this works, I'm a Mac man. The Pavilion of course is the Lord's Pavilion, which must be known clearly, all of you, but not necessary as well to some of the others. That's the famous Pavilion of Lords, and just for the background. If you're not familiar with this, the Ward Wars is not related to the Purige. Quite the contrary, Thomas Lord was an ordinary bloke. He was a very enterprising man, and he was pallied with the first members of what we now call the MCC. Literally friends, and they trusted, and they asked him to build a ground, or grounds in which to play. And the Lords we now know, and this is John's Wood, was open for play in 1814, and I should say that they're celebrating the bison tentative of this event. The interest of the society here is a great two heritage building, it's brick and terracotta, and it was opened in 1890. And that total cost of £21,000 is a possible minus a bit, but that's kind of absurd to build this. And the architect was a firm run by Thomas Berryty, and the firm still exists, but he was a very famous man at the time. He designed not only Lords, but he designed a couple of Western theatres, and had to do a lot of the structures that you take totally for granted now. You have something to do, I think, with the Victorian Albert Museum, and the Albert Paul, and other stuff. So this is nontrivial of this building, it's not just a brick and terracotta building, it's a serious building. Now I'm going to make the statement, I hope no one here argues with me. This is the most famous single structure in all sports, and when I say all sports, I mean all sports with the qualification maybe of team sports. I read somewhere that if someone who played in 1890 was played today at Lords, they'd recognised where they went. And you can't say there that we knew on the ground. And I think it's also symbolic, not just of the cricket connection. This is the beginning of what we might call the modern age of sport, 1890 or plus or minus a bit. This is when sport became popular, big crowds, media coverage. Car to the personality, bribes, good things, bad things, tabloids. And if I had television, it would be right there. This is the beginning, and Lords' Pavilion is the symbol of the beginning of this era. And I also think there's a big social history context to this. If you do nothing about the social history of, let's say England and let's say the empire in the time, and you looked at the records of the MCC, I think you'd get a pretty good idea of what was going on in the social life of England. Because the MCC had a, the people, the members of the MCC had a considerable influence in the country they still do, especially in those days. So how the MCC reacted to games and what they did with the professionals, how they handled people, et cetera, et cetera, would make a nicer to essay on the history of the traditional English cricket. So I'm saying that. If I didn't start this way, I'd start talking about cricket signatures, and I bore you all to death. I notice there's no portraits of Donald Radden and more. Which is an oversight. So may I start a lecture prior, say to speak? This is one of the trials of the pavilion. And this is what I'm talking about. This is a balcony. It's a bar behind the balcony. And you see here the people doing what you have to do. They may have a drink and watch the cricket. And that's just the beginning of my story. I've had the privilege of being a member of going to that bar fairly often. And surprisingly, I looked down about four years ago. I was out on the balcony there with my beer in one hand, and I looked down and I saw this written, scrolled on the balustrade of the balcony. Now I know my cricket. That's immediately W Armstrong, Warwick Armstrong, the signature thereof. And underneath that's a little one, Lightning, 1899. Lightning's another signature, a chap named Charlie McLeod. He was called Lightning because he was always late for meetings. That raises an eyebrow. You see this right in front of you. Now you knew, well I knew, that he played for Australia in between 1992 and 1921. Clearly he was at Lord's otherwise. Now I've got me thinking. And to cut a huge long story short, this is a photograph of the 1902 Australian team in England. Every one of those members, can I move this? Here's Warwick Armstrong, with exceptions captain. I think he might be there. Every one of this team has a signature or initial scroll on that balcony. Even more, the voices are these people. Not only is it 1902, which I'll just show you in the picture. The Australians toured England in those years, 1902. There were about 50 odd players who toured during that time. About 40 would have been different, because they had become more than once. Of that 40 odd, I could easily recognise 20 of the signatures. Not necessarily from 1902. I'll show you a few from 1819. Clearly, this was a fashion, a thing to do. That's the voices, and they were really in, of course, the Lord's career. Now, this is where belonging to society really helps. It's frankly not very difficult to record the signatures and write a brief article with lots of pickies, because they're right there in front of you. But when you delve into this kind of thing, you get obsessed frankly, I'm afraid. And you begin to live these times, what they're doing. Stephen mentioned briefly, Richard III, that there was a lecture here on the discovery of his remains. Well, I hope that the people who discovered that, not only were unbelievably proud of the enormous significance historically, but they must have felt they were living in that time. So they didn't just look at the bones, they looked at how he died. I mean, they must have been there. Now, I don't think that Richard III is quite as important as the signatures at Lord's, but the context is the same. So that's what really is going on from here on now. So let's go back to the days when these signatures were written. 1890-1992, I should say before anyone asks, in 1902 the dressing rooms were changed to what you know now. They were not dressing rooms then, so after 1902 they're none of these signatures. Right, we go back, this is actually 1896. Here's a pavilion, here's the balcony, a couple of bloats there, watching. Now, this is just a parathentical remark, but I'm not going to flash that image I showed before. This is a pavilion today, if you compare the two. I mean, the MCC should take enormous pride in restoring or keeping this building in such an historically faithful manner. Now, I was reading one or two of the old tour books written by the Australians who toured in the 1980s, 1990s and 1900s. One of the comments they made was they weren't enough lavatories or showers, and I think that's been improved now. It is still a bit of a problem. Anyway, so there's a pavilion, and it looks, I would say, the same then, now, isn't it then? Right, now this is behind the pavilion. If this works, cross fingers, this is behind the pavilion in 1898. Now, if you don't recognise one of these gentlemen who shouldn't be here, here comes W.G. Grace. You can see his character in a second. See? This is the bullshit, even in those days. Right? Now, that was taken in 1898, and I'm pretty certain it must be one of the oldest. This was actually gentlemen players, and we weren't talking about them, because they're not Australians, but Grace, of course, you can't be one. This, I think, must be the oldest critic photo. Is it any one critic photo? Did anyone see anything older than that? I am. Never mind. Move on. Okay, now this to me was a gem. I can read it if you can't see it at the back. Darling acknowledges the cheers of the crowd. Joe Darling was one of the players of the 1902, he was a captain, I'm sorry, in 1899 and 1902 and other teams. He was one of the, I couldn't find his signature, but I'm sure it's there. Anyway, England lost to Australia in 1899, and I've lost Lords, and he's acknowledging the cheers of the crowd and good heavens. I'm sorry, this was by a chap named Frank Gillett in the Daily newspaper called The Daily Graphic. So there's totally contemporary. No cheating. And there is the balustrade, absolutely. So that's where the signatures are. I was very nice to give you great pleasure to find them, and thank you very much. Okay, now here's another thing, what did he look out, and what did he see, Mr Darling and the rest of them? That's where, that's the Lords' Ground, and I'll read the button. This is from the Australian newspaper, 1899, obviously written just about after the test started in 1899. It says, Warol Batting, darling with him, that's the guy in the balcony here. Lily, when you keep a random city in the slips, the test is in England versus Australia's second test match of Lords. That was taken without any shadow of doubt by Frank Lever, who was a member of the team and a keen photographer. So now you get some idea of standing in their footsteps. I mean, you stand there and you're looking out at that view. Admittedly, it's slightly different than it is today. This was taken from the roof a little bit higher. Now, there's a dominant thing here you might see, namely the media centre. But come on, use your imagination, get rid of that. It's not so much, it's not the same. But the layout of the ground and so on and so forth is very much the same. So now you understand, I hope, where all this is coming from. But you came here to see something, the signatures. And I can't show them all because they're about 20 or so. And they're not rather obvious. But let's have one or two. The first one. JJL is Joe Lyons. 1890, clear as anything. Now, he was a flash opening batsman. Very fast scorer, personality. He's here because he was probably the first man to put his signature on the Pavilion. The Pavilion was opened in late May 1890. I should say, it's not particularly difficult to make a pretty good guess exactly when they did these signatures. Because first of all, if you're going to score a signature, you've got to have time to do it. So if you're in the field, you don't have time. If you're batting extremely well, you don't have time. If it rains, you have lots of time. My best is, this was June the 2nd in the afternoon. And if anyone cares to bet, I will take it. Right? You've got to remember, we're all sobs now, but we're talking about guys. 2021, nowadays they would have the iPhone and two of them away when they had nothing to do. Here, why not do a signature? Anyway, he has pride at place. I changed the colour here because I hope you see it. That reads, I just changed a colour. E. Jones, 1899 in June, that would be about June 12. Ernie Jones was the first true Australian fast bowler. And he is a legend of cricket history. Because he bowled, he was bowling to the great W.G. Grace, the chap I showed with the big beard. A boulder ball which went through his beard. No doubt, there was a frank stage of views. But Jones said, according to legend, sorry doctor, she slipped. Now, whether Mitchell Johnson would do the same nowadays, or broad or someone, I'm not sure. But there you go, you see. This is a group, this is typical of a group of three. This was done in the Lord's test in 1992. This was done after lunch on the first day that it rained and the rain thing was rained out. There are three names. They may not mean much to modern people. That's S.E. Gregory R.A. Duff, and A.J. Hopkins, who I doubt that many people have heard. He played for Australia without real distinction. But in this game, he had a bowl. England lost two wickets, both to him, and there were two most prolific batsman of the day, maybe Ranjan Synsian Friar. He got out from Dutch. Then it rained. Right. This burly, rather aggressive looking bloke, is Mr Warwick Armstrong later life. Later for him, I would say 1929. At the chap who did the signature when I first showed it to you. Now, I may be reading a bit too much into this, but you can do this if you've got nothing else to do. You notice this guy obviously took some time and care to write his full name. But he completely overwrote some poor chap we did in 1890. Now, this was done in 1992. It's a mild indication of a fair amount of, I would say, selfishness, maybe. But Armstrong is famous for one of the most absolutely unbelievable incidents in test cricket. He bowled two overs in succession. Now, if you don't know the cricket laws, it may not mean much, but that is so staggering. It's like playing the British opening golf and taking missing two or three times until you get the ball on the green. I mean, it's just not done. And he got away with stuff, but unfortunately, of course, he's long dead now. He turned out to be a rather aggressive sportswriter. Here's another one, M.A. Noble, 1899. M.A. Noble was a very nice man, a very good captain of Australia, much respected. But again, he's rather famous for a reason he probably would like to forget. He bowled, this was the MCC versus Australian game, August 1st, 1899. He bowled a ball that was hit over the Pavilion of Lords. And I've got an image here, not of him being hit over the Pavilion of Lords. But I think this is staggering. The pitch is not very good, but I hope it's clear enough. Here's a good old Pavilion, of course. He's bowling from this end. Sorry, the bowler is bowling from this end. Yeah, sorry. Noble is bowling from this end. The batsman, who was a trot, was at this end. And whoa! Now, come on, guys. Nowadays we have 20-20 games, and everyone gets hysterical and lands there for six rounds. Now, I've been reminded in those days, let's face it, men were not as strong. The bats were thinner, the ball was larger. That was an incredible feat. Never been done again. There you go. Now I come to the, might say, the key piece. I think I'll ask the audience, what's the key stand for? Thank you. Victor Trumper, 1899. Clear as a bug. Right? Victor Trumper was one of the very few iconic sports players, little cricketers, who was clearly, I have to use the word adored, by the public. He played, this is his first series, cricket series in England. He played seriously from 1898, and he died, unfortunately, I'll come to this later, in 1915. During this time, he established a reputation of being not only a wonderful batsman, but fluidity, grace, charm, et cetera, et cetera. And even after 100 years, there's still debates in Australia how good he was compared with Don Bradman, which of course the combination is nonsense. So those don't know as it's unbelievably the most prolific batsman ever. Anyway, this is his photo. Now, this is worthy of a lecture in itself. This was taken in 1902, actually at the Oven, not at Lord's, by a man, George Belden, who was a good bowler for Middlesex. Now, just have a little think on this. This was done, obviously, at right angles to the action, and it was staged in the sense that he was definitely going to hit the ball, but it was not part of a match. It was before the match, because there were no telephoto lens and shutter speeds were less in those days. But I can't help thinking about this picture a lot. First of all, look at this. Look at the movement in this picture. That foot's coming down to the shadow. Look at the symmetry of the X here. It's a prolific picture, but what is so good about it? You see a combination. This young man, he's a handsome fellow. You see a fluidity to him. But look, I wouldn't get in front of him when he's driving the ball at me. I mean, he's a serious man. So this is probably, no, I'm like, damn it, I'm not going to say it probably. It is the most famous picture in cricket. You'll see it, universally, even every day, any Australian cricket book, I'm guaranteed to have it somewhere. Now, if I die, I would like this testament. I don't think I'll die. I'm more likely to die than get this testament this day. This is a cartoon by Frank Reynolds. 1909. Lord England in 1909. I've written out that on the top is what's written on the bottom. Tell you what, you be England and I'll be Victor Trumpet. Now, notice it's not Victor Trumpet. It's Victor Trumpet. So isn't that a compliment? Now, he died at the age of 37 in 1915. And I now have a movie of his funeral in Sydney. This to me is staggering. 1915. This was August. Was the ending of the disastrous Darwin El's politically campaign. Which is huge in Australia. It's called Anzac Day. And a lot of people say it defines Australia. It's a mature nation. Australia loss of life. Of course English is elsewhere was too. But people were unbelievably sad at this time. In 1915. 20,000 people turned up for his entourage and his funeral. That's his entourage. In the middle of the war for a guy who's just a sportsman. Pretty good. Now I'm going to change mood a little bit. What I've been talking about is called the Golden Age of Cricut. Which indeed was in many respects. But there was a downside. To all this. This was the time of the late beginning of the industrial revolution where England was becoming unbelievably prosperous. Everyone knows countless books will be written on this about the social problems in England and elsewhere due to this. And frankly until fairly recently most books about the Golden Age glossed over it. Recently that has changed. Not all the people on that who scroll their signature were heroes, young men, wonderful guys. Here's another one and this is how a tabloid described him in Sydney. OK. Now I think even in this day and age that these people might hesitate to write that. This was Arthur Cunningham. That's a connynei. I have to change the colour a little bit. Now he only played once for Australia but he had the enormous distinction. This is 1893 when he played this. I'm sorry, scroll this. But he played in Australia in 1904 for Australia. He has a distinction. His first ball in the test cricket got a wicket and that was not only his first ball as the first ball in the test match. Not a bad starter. He also was a hero because when he was touring in 1993 he rescued a boy from drowning in the tennis. That's the good side. I'll read this. At the end of the tour in 1993 he was in Blackpool and he was fed up and he started a little fire on the outfields. He was tired on the grass and fed up. The next line he's soon a Catholic priest. You can read that at the back again. Now this is totally non-proving. Absolutely. This is 1900 of rocks. In 1900 the Catholic Protestant issue was very much a sticking point in Australia. He was promised that the Catholic priest obviously was Catholic. Now the Catholic said that he didn't want to sue him. He didn't want to go over the balls trial. He just wanted a blackmail of a Catholic priest. He was hoping to get money. His wife agreed that she hadn't misbehaved and in fact kind of himself said at the time of conception of the alleged child he was not capable of sorrow due to a cricket injury. I'll let you all shudder. That industry might have been. Anyway he had one trial which was a missed trial and the second one he went into court with a revolver and he lost. Anyway that was really serious. He was sent to jail for fraud later on. He was divorced by his wife for committing adultery. I like the little phrase in the beach house so that's a bit of colour to it. And you poor chap he did die in a mental hospital. Now we're making this we're making a little bit of a joke of this but I'm going to show you something where all this stuff is not a joke. I'm going back to a remark I made about the downside of the late Victorian era and the Victorian era. There was a great deal of discontent in the cricket world which was glossed over. Particularly the English professionals had a very rough life. Even if you played for England it didn't guarantee you anything much. There was a strike in 1896 against the professional strike against the selection committee it was available. They actually backed down they wanted more than ten pounds again for playing for England. Sham amateurism you know that phrase was very popular. W.G. Grace made a fortune he was an amateur he made a total fortune out of the game which I guess he deserves I'm laughing at him. Anyway there's a great deal of discontent don't let me down spoil everything. This is the Melbourne cricket club sorry the Melbourne cricket ground scoreboard right in the middle of the era I'm talking about and many of the players of course not the English but the Australian players who played in this game did put their signatures on the Lord's Pavilion balcony when they came to England. I'm just going to make this comment of the people you see here two committed suicide Trot and Stollard two ended their life in Ilooni Bin Trot and Brockwell one of the 22 players who played in that game four committed suicide is an abnormal percentage I'm bringing that up because frankly I find it fascinating and I don't think Mr Frith is in the audience but he wrote a book David Frith on I won't say abnormal but certainly way above average committed suicide range and there's a lovely article by Peter Roebuck who himself committed suicide Peter Roebuck was a journalist and a big argument is what does cricket do to you or have you got the temperament that makes you like cricket but also has these bad things now that's awfully gloomy let's end on a more cheerful note Name those two people please and chat with the Mr Shweezy correct Arthur Conan Dorrell Name the chat Younger man on the other side I know someone who knows the answer with us correct PG Woodhouse okay both these guys played on the same team several times around this time 1900, 95, 95 they played for teams like authors versus artists or someone versus publishers and that sort of thing they played at Lord's this is documented they played at Lord's and I know that they were in that dressing room where the so-called famous players were I've looked hard to see at least like I see at PGW but I haven't but I'd like to end on rather a nice note I think Woodhouse well first of all before we get to that people shouldn't know if you don't know already that Conan Dorrell was a complete cricket nut cricket tragic he's called in Australia Sherlock Holmes is named after Shylock Chatlock a knotting a knotting player and Woodhouse the famous teams is named after Cricketer versus Dean that's done Woodhouse has written that down Conan Dorrell got one weekend in first class cricket he's W.G. Grace but they were playing together and Woodhouse made his name as an author sort of a semi-author biographical around 1900 plus or minus a little later he had stories about a chap named Mike Mike's story started out with him as being a senior schoolboy but then he went into the city because his parents couldn't afford him to take time off to play cricket and he hated it and he ducked out to play cricket Now Woodhouse did that himself but the stories are about Mike doing exactly the same thing and one of the short stories called Mike at Wards Mike gets a phone call from his brother who play for Sussex who's playing little sex at Wards the brother says please come right now to Wards we need you to play I mean he was good enough to play Mike so Mike dashes over to Wards and he's worried about losing his job blah blah blah because he's missing the bank but in the book I now quote this is what Mike does after getting there he changed and went out and a little pavilion was barking at the top of the pavilion I think that means that Woodhouse was there without any shadow of death so one day maybe I'll find his signatures and I think at that point thank you, I will end thank you