AUCKLAND REMIT TURNED DOWN BY N.Z. BOWLERS.

Auckland Star, Volume LXX, Issue 152, 30 June 1939, Page 13

AUCKLAND REMIT TURNED DOWN BY N.Z. BOWLERS.

Scant support was accorded an Auckland remit presented at the annual meeting of the New Zealand Bowling Association, which urged the council to revert to the system of playing the singles championship in sections of six, thus assuring every competitor at least five games before being eliminated. It was decided that the singles should continue to be played on the automatic two-life system. The meeting agreed that the system of play which operated at the last Dominion tournament .at Auckland should,, he used for the Centennial tournament in Wellington next season. Thus the pairs will be played, in sections, each pair playing four games with three bowls on the first day, section winners and ties to go forward to post-section play on the second day on the "sudden-death" principle.. In the fours, the players will have eight games, two games per day of 25 ends each. All winners of six and more gam.es and section ties with less, will go forward to post-section p-lay, which will be played on the automatic two-life system. In sponsoring the Auckland remit relating to the singles', Mr. A. E. Whitten said that in Auckland the majority of bowlers favoured the section system. Personally he was not keen about it. More games would be played under the section system, which would probably take more green accommodation. Mr. S. M. Stone (Wellington) thought that if a man was "blown out" in two games he should not be in championship class. They should adhere to the system adopted previously. Mr. W. Gilbert (Wellington) opposed the remit, and said that the tourney was not a social function. Mr. C. H. Manning (South Canterbury) asked if the council had considered whether the tourney should be played on a system of points—"sudden death." Mr. H. B. Oakey (Christchurch) said that "sudden death" play would be sure to affect the entries. Mr. D. H. Thomson (North Otago) said he was against the remit if it were to lengthen the tourney. The remit was lost, and it was decided th.\t for the singles last year's two-life sj.'cem should b« adhered to. The Pairs and Fours. Mr. Whitten said that Auckland had recommended that for the pairs three-bowl pairs in sections of eight—seven games— should be played. He personally did 'not favour it. His motion lapsed for want of a seconder. Mr. C. A. Nelson (Dunedin) said he would like to see the pairs a four-bowl game. He moved that four bowls be played, and suggested four games for the first day and two time limits for morning and afternoon. Mr. Gilbert said that New Zealand was the only three-bowl country for pairs. Mr. Stone said he did not think it would be possible to play four four-bowl games. The bell would be ringing all the time. The three-bowl game was most desirable. Mr. Thomson moved that last year's system be adhered to, with four games of three bowls on the first day and postsection play on the second day, and this was carried. Mr. Stone moved that the fours be played on the same system as last year. | Mr. Smith suggested "sudden death" in the post-section play. In post-section play all should be on common ground, he said. His motion was lost. It was decided that time limits and entrance fees should be the same as last year, and that an extra fourth prize of . £1 1/ be added to la6t year's prizes of £5 5/, £3 3/ and £2 2/.