CONCERT IN AID OF HEALTH STAMP FUNDS

Press, Volume LXXII, Issue 21961, 9 December 1936, Page 5

CONCERT IN AID OF HEALTH STAMP FUNDS

* Music lovers may anticipate some delightful music at the Orpheus Choir concert in St. James’ Theatre to-night under the baton of Mr F. C. Penfold, Solo items will be given by the following members of the choir; Miss Lillian Hanham, Miss Nellie Lowe. Miss Marjorie Nelson, Mr Robert Allison. Mr j. L. Tennent, and Mr J. H. Cocks. Mr Noel Newson will be at the piano.

for a joke or for a cheap advertisement. I had a very good reason, a solid reason, and a cricket reason for doing so, said Mr Cromb, who criticised the reported action of the committee, subsequently denied, in meeting in the ordinary way but refusing to consider the matter. Mr L. R. Dunster, captain of the Old Collegians team and a delegate from that chib, endorsed Mr Cromb’s remarks. “It was a dangerous , wicket, and asking players to face fast bowling on it was asking them to take a definite risk of injury,” he said. The teams had played for 45 minutes till one batsman had been badly hurt, and it was the unanimous opinion of both sides that the match should be stopped. On Tuesday the teams were informed, much to their surprise, considering the men who were on the committee, that the game was to be continued at Rugby Park. Three days’ hard work had obviously been put into the wicket, but an inspection clearly showed that it was not fit for play. He would like to know why the committee had refused the Boys’ Cricket Association's offer to vacate the Hagley Park wicket and had put the senior teams back on another wicket which they knew was not suitable for senior cricket. Expert Opinion on Wicket Mr C. H. Ayling, who spoke on behalf of the competitions committee, said that the committee inspected the Rugby Park wickets last Friday, and agreed that the one which the match was to be continued on was fit for play. He understood that not a ball had been bowled on the second day and therefore there was no proof that the wicket was not suitable. “The expert opinion we had on the wicket is as good as any opinion in the two teams,” said Mr Ayling. He said it was not customary for committees to report to a general meeting, and a full report would be made to the next meeting of the association's management committee. Mr W. L. King, chairman of the management committee, and an ex officio member of the competitions committee, said that none of the committee expected that wicket to turn out as it did. When he visited the ground on the first Saturday he had to agree that the wicket was not a good one, but he would deny that it was not fit to play cricket on. Another wicket that had had three weeks’ preparation but which had not been in use because of a default, was available for the second Saturday, and the committee obtained expert opinion on it. Mr Hallam. the groundsman at Lancaster Park, Mr Gray, groundsman at Hagley Park, and another expert had declared that the wicket was quite good and safe for senior play. He was at a loss to know why the teams had not given it a try-out. On the first wicket junior teams had played without complaint and made big scores. Mr Cromb claimed that both Mr Gray and Mr Hallam had given him different views on the wicket and that they supported the contention that it was not fit for senior play. Objectionable Remark Mr R. C. Burns, speaking as a former member of the competitions committee. said he knew that that committee had a great deal of work to do He thought the present incident had been magnified out of all proportion to its importance. Evidently a mistake had boon made in putting the teams on the wicket, but it was his honest opinion that the committee believed that it was acting in the best interests of the game. “Nothing will convince me that the teams wont there to give it a sporting go,” ho continued. “Cricket is coming to a pretty low level when men like Mr Ayling. Mr Jackman. Mr King, and Mr Ward, who have done so much work for cricket, are accused of being weak-kneed and of taking a petty attitude. Mr Cromb would ho well advised to consider his remarks more carefully." Mr C. S. Thompson declared that on the morning of the first day of the match ho had been told by two independent parties that there was going to be (rouble at Ruebv Park and that there was a possibility of the teams walking off the field. Mr Cromb; I must object to that most stronglv. The remark is unjust, and if Mr Thompson is a man he will say who were his informants. A delegate: Or else withdraw the remark. Mr Thompson: Most decidedly I will not withdraw the remark and I will not fell who informed me of this. Mr S. J. Yates, a Lancaster Park delegate: Then your remarks arc not worth anything. Teams Criticised Mr S. L. Wright considered the attitude of the two teams most unsportsmanlike. The Old Collegians Club, which paid much less for its ground than did the Hagley Park clubs, had no right to demand a wicket at Hagley Park. Rugby Park was not yet a first-class ground, but it was the Old Collegians Club’s home, and the club must be prepared to p'ay on it. Mr W. H. Winsor dealt with the M.C.C. rules on the subject. Once a game was started, he said, it must continue until rain or other factors intervened to make a reconsideration of the fitness of conditions necessary. He deplored the injury to the player, but surely if the teams had wanted their cricket they could have continued, using bowlers who could have exploited the potentialities of the wicket. The captains were perfectly justified in the course they took on the second day. Mr Chrystall, who replied, endorsed the remarks of Messrs Cromb and Dunster. He thought their action was the only reasonable and logical step to take. The committee had been too reticent about the matter; it should have come to the meeting with a statement about what it intended to do in the future. Risks to players must be minimised, and the Old Collegians team must not be made the wickettesters of the association in the way that the Sultan had a taster to test his food against the possibility of poison. He would like to see the association spend' £3OO or £4OO on the improvement of wickets. Mr Chrystall asked for an assurance that the management committee would take the matter up. Otherwise, he said, he would move a vote of no-confidence in the competition's committee. The assurance was given by Mr Winsor, and the meeting closed.