:I have posted this on your talk page, but also put it here so it is in one place. 

 :Sorry in any case for slow response: I am in a particularly difficult work period at present and have little time for WP. 

 :I don't think your reservations on the source should be dismissed out of hand, but I do think that they have to relate to material that actually appears within the pages of WP. My impression, and please feel free to correct me if I am wrong, is that From Lads to Lord's is cited on WP as support material only for articles of a statistical or factual kind and, as you yourself say, as a statistical record of early cricket it is not in (much) dispute. The more contentious commentary material within From Lads to Lord's does not seem to me to be anywhere cited in support of a WP article that makes similar tendentious statements, and if it were I'm sure that far more people than just the WP cricket community would be weighing in to offer their views. My own knowledge of some of the material you have written on my talk page (a couple of published books on the industrial revolution, in fact, though I try to hide that here, where my interest is primarily cricket) is enough to know that the interpretation offered is, shall we say, individual. If that material was being cited, then I would join you in calling for its removal: but I can't see that it is cited anywhere.  

 :The broader issue, which will hopefully be resolved by disinterested parties at WP:RS, is whether a source cited for one set of data where the reliability is not questioned ought to be discarded because of unreliability in other areas. My view is that we might well discard an awful lot of pretty good source material if we were to interpret this harshly, including virtually everybody's memoirs or autobiographies; but also that we shouldn't allow a fairly liberal regime to enable falsehoods or misleading information to be propagated in WP's pages. Fortunately, the RS folk will decide on this case.  

 :Meanwhile, my invitation remains: put up some material where WP has dubious content because of From Lads to Lord's, or wait for the RS ruling. And if you have material yourself that can help us improve the WP site as a whole, then please join us under a permanent name and make your contributions. You'll I think find that most people here are welcoming to those who want to make a real contribution; but less friendly to those who snipe from the sides without making the commitment to try to help improve matters.