William Lambert Beats Lord Frederick Beauclerk by Bowling Wides — Single-Wicket, 1810

Lord Frederick Beauclerk, fourth son of the fifth Duke of St Albans and a clergyman of the Church of England, was the dominant amateur cricketer of the Napoleonic period. He was also notorious for his betting — an estimated 600 guineas a year, or roughly £50,000 in modern money. William Lambert of Surrey was the leading professional batsman of the day and Osbaldeston's regular single-wicket partner. The fixture was one of the highest-stakes cricket matches of the season.

Stakes of fifty guineas a side had been advertised in the sporting press. Osbaldeston was the recognised co-equal of Beauclerk in single-wicket; without him Lambert was widely expected to be hopelessly outgunned. Beauclerk's refusal to allow any delay — even though Osbaldeston's illness was visible to the small crowd — was treated as a piece of aristocratic high-handedness even by friendly observers.

Single-wicket cricket — one or two players a side, with strict bounds for scoring and running — was the great gambling cricket of the Regency. Stakes of fifty or a hundred guineas a side were common and the matches were often advertised in the sporting press. The 1810 Beauclerk-Howard versus Osbaldeston-Lambert challenge at Lord's was promoted as a contest between the leading amateurs of the day and was expected to draw a large betting audience. On the morning of play George Osbaldeston, the Yorkshire squire, was confined to his bed with a feverish illness — accounts differ as to whether it was influenza or a hangover. Lambert, his nominally subordinate professional partner, asked Beauclerk for a delay. Beauclerk, who held the side bets and stood to lose money on a postponement, refused. The phrase he used — 'Play or Pay!' — passed into Regency cricket folklore. Lambert took the field on his own. Beauclerk and Howard would bat first, then bowl at a single wicket against Lambert alone. According to William Denison's account, Lambert decided that his only hope was to disrupt Beauclerk's concentration. He sent down a series of deliveries deliberately wide of the wicket. Wides at this date counted only as no-balls without the run penalty introduced the following year, but their psychological effect on Beauclerk — a cricketer notorious for his short temper — was decisive. Beauclerk swore openly, lost his composure, and was bowled cheaply. Howard fell shortly after. Lambert, batting alone, made enough runs to take the prize. The reported margin was fifteen runs.

“Play or Pay!”

“Lambert determined to win the match by bowling Beauclerk wides till he lost his temper, which he very speedily did.”

Beauclerk paid the stake but never forgave the public humiliation. Within a year the MCC, with Beauclerk on the committee, had codified a wide-ball law to prevent the trick from being used again. The episode is the seed of the personal vendetta that ended Lambert's senior career in 1817 when Beauclerk, by then effective ruler of MCC, banned him on a match-fixing charge that may have been only partially true.