Page:Cricket (Steel, Lyttelton).djvu/347

It may be of interest here to give a short extract from this book:—

It may be urged, with some show of reason, that it is not fair to draw a comparison between the English and Australian averages because the Australians have played so many more innings than the English. It might be replied that most of the leading Englishmen have played quite sufficiently often to have their capabilities fairly tested; but in order to put the Englishmen through as severe a test as the Australians, the pages of 'Lillywhite' have been consulted, and accepting the accuracy of the figures there given, a calculation has been made of the averages obtained by the eleven leading English batsmen on page 280 in all the first class matches played in England, since the advent of the first Australian team. The result arrived at is as follows:—

	In the Australian matches		In the English first- class matches
	Completed innings	Average	Completed innings	Average
W. G. Grace	54	36·20	315	34·70
A. G. Steel	49	33·40	167	29·43
A. Shrewsbury	72	30·80	224	29·45
W. W. Read	44	30·40	254	35·60
W. Barnes	71	25·80	318	25·03
C. T. Studd	26	25·50	132	31·08
R. G. Barlow	80	24·80	302	20·70
Lord Harris	29	23·70	190	30·20
E. F. S. Tylecote	22	23·45	77	22·20
J. M. Read	57	23·00	238	25·10
G. Ulyett	91	22·20	408	27·20

Although in these two tables there is such a great disparity in the number of innings played, the general standard of averages remains much the same. In some individual cases it is lower, in others higher, and on the whole there is a slight increase. The general accuracy of the averages obtained by the English batsmen against Australians is thus fully confirmed, and to any unprejudiced person the superiority of the Englishmen is apparent.

With regard to the merits of the English and Australian bowlers, we think there are few English cricketers who would