"To be sure he does not; and for the simple reason that these claims on the side of the public are growing year by year. Already no one can say how much they cover, and assuredly no one can say where they are likely to stop. You observe that our author includes even University matches under the head of exhibition cricket, in which obligations towards the spectators have to be taken into account. You remember the scene at Lord's in 1893 when Wells purposely bowled no-balls; and again in 1896 when Shine bowled two no-balls to the boundary and then a ball which went for four byes, the object in each case being to deprive Oxford of the follow-on. This policy was hotly discussed; and luckily the discussion spent itself on the question whether play could be at the same time within the laws and clean contrary to the ethics of cricket. But there was also a deal of talk about what was 'due to the public'; talk which would have been altogether wide of the mark in the old days, when Oxford and Cambridge met to play a mere friendly match and the result concerned them alone." "And is this," I asked, "the sum of your indictment?" "Yes, I think that is all. And surely it is enough." "Then, as I make out, your chief objections to spectacular cricket are two. You hold that it gives vast numbers of people a false idea that they are joining in a sport when in truth they are doing no more than look on. And you contend that as the whole institution resolves itself more and more into a paid exhibition, the spectators will tend more and more to direct the development of the game; whereas cricket in your opinion should be uninfluenced by those who are outside the ropes?" "That is my case." "And I think, my dear Verinder, it is a strong one. But there is just one little point which you do not appear to have considered. And I was coming to it just now--or rather Prince Ranjitsinhji was coming to it--when you interrupted us. 'From a purely cricket point of view,' he was saying, 'not much can be said against exhibition cricket.' And in the next sentence he goes on: 'At any rate it promotes skill in the game and keeps up the standard of excellence.'" "To be sure it does that." "And cricket is played by the best players to-day with more skill than it was by the best players of twenty or forty years ago?" "Yes, I believe that; in spite of all we hear about the great Alfred Mynn and other bygone heroes." "Come then," said I, "tell me, Is Cricket an art?" "Decidedly it is." "Then Cricket, like other arts, should aim at perfection?" "I suppose so." "And that will be the highest aim of Cricket--its own perfection? And its true lovers should welcome whatever helps to make it perfect?"