BOWLING.

Auckland Star, Volume LV, Issue 248, 18 October 1924, Page 37 (Supplement)

BOWLING.

LAWS OF THE GAME. INNOVATION XN MEXBOTTRNE.

(By TRUNDLER.)

With rererence lo the numerous sugtions that have been thrown out in this column during the last few months, in regard to the inadequacy of our rules relating to umpires, it is very gratifying to see by the latest issue of "Bowling Life" that the Victorian Bowling Association have just drawn up a set of rules. Aβ we have no special rules for umpires in New Zealand, and most umpires go according to their own sweet will, except on the memorable occasion when they held a meeting, and decided on a plan of action, these rules will be read with interest, for they will no doubt serve as a useful foundation for our code, even though they look far from perfect. 1. Umpires and scorers to make themselves conversant with the latest rules of the V.B.A. 2. Umpires to have charge of play, and arrange the draw for links, etc; give out scoring cards, and see that they are returned immediately games are finished; and further shall appoint scorers for second and succeeding rounds. He shall make up three returns one each for the "Argus," the "Age," and the secretary of the V.8.A.; also see that all scoring cards axe returned to V.8.A., and results dispatched to newspapers. 3. Scorers shall stand at least sis feet behind the jack, and at one side, after straightening same, remaining stationary while the players are delivering their bowls. 4. Give distinct answers to players asking a question, and only answer questions asked. 5. At the completion of an end do not ehift any bowls until the respective players are satisfied. 6. Make themselves conversant with competitors bowls. 7. Be careful when answering who is shot, and give your whole attention to the players you are scoring for. If in any doubt refer to the umpire. 8. When a bowler has played a bowl which is a toucher, do not chalk same until the next bowl is delivered. 0. Umpires shall see that tape ia available in case of a dispute as to length of end. Comments on Victorian Rules. No. 1. This is rather rich. Fancy having to tell an umpire to make himseli conversant with the rules! And yel somehow that is just as important ii New Zealand as in Victoria, for the writer has in two recent tournamenti found umpires who were not only not conversant with the rules, but refueec point blank to abide by them when thej were referred to a particular rule. It will be noticed that in Victoria they propose to use the term "scorer" tc describe the man who stands behind the jack in a singles. We cannot ust that term in New Zealand, as our rules already provide for that term to describe the man who plays second in a rink, although nobody ever uses the term. Probably it would be better to use the English term, "Marker," until soniebodj invents a better one. No. 2. This puts into concrete fornj the conditions usually framed for oui tournaments, and it looks fairly complete except for the vague expression in the first line. It would probably be wise to add, "and shall see that all the rules are observed." No. 3. This looks about right. No. 4. There will be a difference oi opinion over this, as 99 per cent ol players like to know who is shot without having to be always asking. It would meet New Zealand opinion to ade the words, "except that after each shot he shall indicate to the player who has just bowled, in the manner that ia customary among bowlers, how many h< ie up or down." The English rule ii more explicit on one point, for it adds: "The marker may answer queries as t( position of bowls and their distance fron the jack; but shall not give direction! to, consult with, nor assist either playei as to the play." No. 5. This ought not to be necessary but it is i-pparently based on the un fortunate incident in Sydney a fey months ago. No. 6. This also ought not to bi necessary, for a man who cannot dis tinguish the competitor's bowls is no fit to act as marker. And yet we havi all seen a marker turn a bowl over, ii order to find out whose it is, whicL would surely not be necessary if he attended to No. 7, besides being against the rules. No. 7. This is not at all a bad one, and it ia a reminder of tho marker who gave the shot to a player in our champion of champions last March, when the jack was dead. No. 8. This is very questionable. Our rules provide for chalking a toucher "before the second succeeding bowl has been played," and this wider discretion looks better than the new Victorian rule. No. ft. While they are at it, a good plan would be to suggest all the other gear, such as a long measure, as well as an instrument like they have at Carlton for deciding which bowl or jack is alive or dead. Interpreting the Rules. It is a step in the right direction for the Wellington umpires to try and secure uniformity in the interpretation of the rules, for most of them are delightfully vague and elusive. It was suggested the other day'that in view of their distinctly legal flavour, just the opposite to the ungrammatical and incon eistently worded Victorian rules, they were evidently drafted in the Crown Law Office, with the same want of exactness that has made the laws of the countrj the plaything of the courts. It was shown the other day that even the mat rule, after all the tinkering and patching up to which it has been subjected ir recent yeare, is capable of three distinct interpretations. And that is not th< only rule in a similar position. Tak< the rule which, says that "if a jack oi bowl be driven by a bowl in play against any neutral bowl or other object, eithei on the green or above the level of th< bank, it shall be dead, notwithstanding that it comes to rest within, the boun

daries of the rink." This rule comes immediately before the rule which tha Council altered last month, in regard to a bowl being dead which travelled only 20 feet from the mat, which rule was already quite sufficiently explicit and is very rarely required. But the one about the neutral object is alwaye cropping up, and apparently it is capable of two opposite interpretations. The question hinges on the meaning of the parenthesis "either on the green or above the level of the bank." If this limits the "burning" of a jack or bowl to contact with a neutral object in one of those two places, viz., on the green, or above the level of the bank, then contact with a neutral object in the ditch, or leaning against the bank, does not constitute a dead bowl or jack. If it does not so limit the burning, then the parenthesis is useless, and should be struck out, for in its present form the words are even worse than useless—they only invite trouble. In one of our most important tournaments, a year or two ago, a bowl hit the mat, which was in the ditch leaning against the bank, and the umpire gave it dead. Perhaps it was, but the rule does not say so, for the mat was neither on the green nor above the bank. Then there is the whole matter of the jurisdiction of an umpire. Our rule* say nothing about it, but the tournament conditions usually state that the decision of the umpire is final. In New South Wales, however, the rules distinctly provide for an appeal to tho governing body, subject to a deposit of a guinea. This seems a reasonable provision to protect competitors from incorrect ruling, and the substantial deposit would prevent a protest except in the case of some of the glaring mistakes to which competitors have occasionally had to submit. All these important points will have to be considered before we can claim that our rules are perfect.