I EASTER BOWLING.

Auckland Star, Volume LXI, Issue 98, 28 April 1930, Page 11

I EASTER BOWLING.

CARLTON AND EPSOM ON TOP. EFFICIENT UMPIRES WANTED. BUSINESS FOR TO-MOKKOW. (By TKUXDLER.) Warm congratulations are due to the Carlton Club : for winning the Executive Fours and the First-year Fours in the Easter tournament, the' former for the fourth time iu the last five years, and to Epsom for- w'inning the Open Fours for the fourth time in the last six years. However, comment on these'must wait until more urgent and important matters have received consideration. Something of a-sensation was created on Wednesday morning, when a skip objected to an opposing third coming up to have a look a.t the head. However, there was no-occasion to. ma'.<e any fuss about it, for he was well within his rights, in accordance with, rule 34, which aays that ''the first,, second and third players ; . . shall remain at the end from which they played until the third players have delivered" all their bowls." Any criticism of the incident would have been much betfer directed against the centre executive for failing to appoint an umpire to carry out the duties of that office.. While it is optional for a player to insist on the enforcement of a rule, as this one did, an umpire has no option. He must do it, whether he likes it or not, for his first and most important duty is "to see that the rules and laws of the ganie are adhered to." This was specially required on a dayjike Wednesday, when the games were cut down to 15. heads," to give time to finish the uncompleted round of the previous evening.. If there liad been an umpire he would Lave had plenty to ,dq beside stopping the thirds from wandering up to the heads and delaying the, games so much that it was almost dark when the last round finished. Whether he liked it or not, he would have had to deal with about 15 to 20 per ceht of the players, who' did not deliver a single bowl with either foot touching the mat, instead of having "at least one .foot on the mat and wholly within the boundaries of the mat, such foot to be-not less than three inches from the front of the mat." So far from these, players having one foot on the mat, the foot' that was supposed to be there, was well over the front, digging into the tender grass that, "Monty" cultivates with such jealous care. - An umpire would have been forced to disqualify, quite a number of'bowls used, for .on 4 the. numerous occasions when a bowl was turned over, the obvious inference AVae that it had no distinctive mark on the small disc," and he/ would have had to confirm this, whether he liked it or not. • .X..:":• An umpire would have found himself frequently compelled, to make a director get off the head and "retire Rt least 6ft from the jack,-in order that his opponents may witness the play." This fault is getting worse ajid worse every year, and it is quite time that it was, stopped. An umpire would have prevented the grave injustice inflicted on Grey Lynn in the fourth round, when their .opponents were allowed .to play a ! substitute who did "not' "occupy a similar position in one of the. club's defeated rinks. fe 1 There is no written rule requiring this, [ but the custom .has been definitely established, most notably in 1926, when the committee insisted on Onehunga following that course, and again in 1927, when the same obligation Was 'imposed on Epsom. Circumstances should not. alter cases, and after creating such a definite precedent the committee should have given the. team the option of playing any one of the five defeated thirds, or° else drawing lots for them, instead of allowing the choice of the whole club. The fact that the.- substitute allowed enjoys the reputation of being the best third in Auckland is quite immaterial: the material'point is that: he was not a third-in one of the club's defeated rinks, and the general public would always feel more confident in umpires arid committees if they followed the same course with scrupulous regularity, instead of jumping, from. qrie' to Another without giving any warning..

To-morrow Night's Meeting. Delegates- to the centre are reminded of a. most important meeting to-morrow niglit, when' they* will • have the responsibility of selecting' the four men who will virtually control bowling in' the Dominion during the ensuing rear. What" is of 'special importance is to know how. they propose, to make, the next Dominion tournament a brilliant success, in contrast with the pessimistic forecasts of • Christchufch : and .Dunedin last , January. . Will they allow it to remain a close preserve for the idle rich by again running the rinks over two weeks, or facilitate the entry of the busy business man-by reverting to the former method of finishing the rinks in the first week? ■ Now that the Dominion Council have accepted the suggestion to play only four rounds of singles on the first day, will they start the first round at 10.30, so that busy competitors from the Waikato and Wellington ■ can arrive by the Limited that morning in ample time? Will they feature this facility to the bowlers of the South.lsland, as far away as Invercargill and Greymouth, in that", they would not need to leave home till Saturday morning? Will they arrange for a transport committee to convey to their respective greens all who notify that they will arrive that morning ? Will they try to popularise the tournament by facilitating the entry of competitors in the first Rotorua tournament, instead of ' having to make a special journey a; month later? Will they far,our proposing to South Auckland 'that if it would be a convenience for, more to play in the Dominion tournament the annual intercentre visits might be dropped for one year ? ' Will they support the establishment lof a benevolent fund, by allocating to jit the annual surplus, which will also tend to check the growihg extravagance in administration? Will they support the acceptance of the compromise arranged by Mr. Pascoe for each of the Dominions to have two I representatives on the International Bowling Board, on which the council has ! already acted, or will they confirm the recent action of the" council executive in informing. the Australian Bowling Council that they should have them? Will they support the revised rules, as drawn up by Auckland, in all vital points? l Above all, will they carry out the wishes of the Auckland: Centre, »nd fight to the last, ditch, using all the tactics thai are;allowable'in public debate?