"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?"