CRICKET Lancaster Park’s Win Was Deserved

Press, Volume XCIX, Issue 29165, 28 March 1960, Page 17

CRICKET Lancaster Park’s Win Was Deserved

Lancaster Park’s success in the senior cricket championship was thoroughly deserved. The team took the lead in the third round, lost it to East Christchurch in the fourth, but regained it next round and kept it until the end. In a low-scoring season, Lancaster Park had seven batsmen who averaged more than 20 runs an innings, and six regular bowlers whose wickets cost under 19 runs each. The final positions and points of the teams were:

It was Lancaster Park’s even strength which gave it the championship for the third year on end. The side fought hard, and week after week there were batsmen and bowlers able to rise to the occasion. G. Royfee, whose aggregate of 513 was his best for eight years, was outstanding in the second half of the season. D. E. Woods, in his third senior season, improved slightly on last season by scoring 465 runs but his average declined by seven. A. G. Duckmanton, one of the most successful all-rounders in the competition, also had his best batting aggregate for eight years and his bowling remained very useful. B. Irving’s 204 was his best aggregate in his five senior seasons, but his average was eight higher last summer. But his bowling aggregate and average were his best since his startling debut in 1955-56, when he took 51 wickets at 12 runs each. M. E. Chapple had another good season with the bat, and he has now scored almost 4500 runs in senior championship matches, although he has had only 87 appearances. Valuable Bowling If D. J. McKendry had a poor season as a batsman, his bowling in the final stages was most valuable. The young left-hand spinner had only one wicket at Christmas, for 52 runs. But since then he has taken 28 for 293, and his figures are quite his best so far. The hard-hitting J. L. Saunders again bowled economically, but without so much success. R. H. I’routing started exceptionally well, but there were too many slow and easy pitches for his fast-medium bowling. However, his return was still a good one. Lancaster Park had some newcomers, notably P. Andrews and A. Harrison, who showed more than average promise. St. Albans did remarkably well to finish-second equal. The team did not score a point in the first six weeks of the season, but in the last seven rounds totalled 75. compared ith Lancaster Park’s 59. It was expected that P. G. Harris, M. B. Poore and S. C. Guillen would score heavily, but only Harris produced his top form, and the side went through the season without anyone scoring a century. Harris, remarkably consistent, topped the grade batting aggregates. Guillen’s aggregate of 388 was his lowest for a complete season in Christchurch. The bowling depended almost entirely on T. L. Jones, whose aggregate of 70 was 50 per cent, higher than anything he had achieved before. He bowled with wonderful stamina and perseverance in match after match, taking five or more wickets in an innings seven times. A. R. Taylor, whose appearances were much restricted, also did well and Poore was economical, but that was where the bowling ended. Near Top East Christchurch, seventh last summer, was always near the top and finished equal second. The professional M. J. Bear must have had a considerable influence on the team. His brisk batting meant much to the side. J. W. Grocott made a considerable advance, with 433 runs, a personal record. B. A_ Haworth’s figures declined quite sharply but he played many good and useful innings G D. Alabaster’s batting also fell away, but the wicket-keeper L. Glanville exceeded his previous best with 322, and an average second only to Bear's.

The East Christchurch bowlin? was usually tidy, with C. K. Smart not perhaps winning the full rewards for his diligence. R. W. Cole had his best season so far. Alabaster took many wickets in the early rounds and finished with 40. his best performance in Christchurch. In the last few games, the left-hander C. Hazeldine was particularly successful.

Equal fourth last season Old Boys were fourth this time after being in second place after seven rounds. There were some unexpected batting break-downs and only B. A. Bolton averaged more than 30. But with D. Hill. B. M. J. Dineen and B. G. Hadlee in the side, there should be some better performances next summer. The rather soft wickets handicapped some of the bowlers, but C. G. Snook had a wonderful summer. His aggregate of 43 his average of 9.76, were easily his best in 15 senior seasons. The arrival of B. R. Hope will give the bowling some needed variety.

Old Collegians Old Collegians, second after five rounds, looked likely to win the grade at one stage. R. T. Hunt again batted wonderfully well, and both A. R. Mac Gibbon and A. T. Bishop enjoyed many successes. But there was almost no support for these three. MacGibbon, G. L. Perry and B. A. Carpenter all had fine bowling figures. Perry’s success was quite startling. In 10 previous seasons for the club, be had not exceeded 20 wickets in a season; this summer brought him 35 at only 13.3 runs each. Carpenter also improved on his previous best aggregate. Riccarton’s batting was woefully weak, W. Muncaster being the only batsman with an average of 20. But the side had some narrow losses, and won some satisfaction from being the only team to beat Lancaster Park outright. But it was never higher than fifth in the list. R. C. Motz. with 37 wickets, almost doubled his senior aggregate, and J. W. Kiddey had by far his best season as a bowler. He took 53 wickets at only 12 runs each. W. Bell bowled himself sparingly.

j After leading for two rounds, I West Christchurch - University sxcmped badly. The side was hardly ever at full strength, because of student vacations, and 27 players appeared for it during the season. The batting was very weak, but the bowling was usually adequate. Some of those with the best results played few games. In only seven matches, M. Beban took 33 cheap wickets, G. K. Austin with his left-hand spin had his best results so far and J. Cahill, a fast right-hander, should do well next season. Good Young Players It is not easy to understand why Sydenham, with such good young players as I. A. Hartland, A. F. Rapley, D. L. Gallop, K. Thomson and C. R. Nicholson, should be last. Hartland, an opening batsman, was a model of consistency. He reached double figures in all but one of his 17 innings, he was one of the few to exceed 500 runs. But Thomson and (Gallop were the only others to average more than 20. Nicholson, in his first season in Christchurch had excellent figures—4B wickets at 14.1 each —but Gallop and Rapley were moderately expensive in a low-scoring season. The average score for an innings was only 176. There were 15 instances of teams being out for under 100—three of them under 50—and only five totals in excess of 300—three by Lancaster Park, two by Old Collegians. The highest score was Old Collegians’ 365 against East Christchurch, the lowest West Christ - church-University’s 41 against Riccarton. The runs scored for and against the teams, with the wicket averages, are shown in the table below: —

Won Lost D B Pt Ch Pt 12 5 5 I 0 L-P. .... 5 2 1 1 0 1 12 90 St. A. .... 5 0 1 0 3 1 8 75 East 4 2 0 1 3 0 16 75 OB. .... 3 3 0 1 2 1 10 64 O.C. .... 3 3 0 2 2 0 6 59 Bie. w.-u. 3 0 0 2 5 0 6 44 .... 2 0 1 3 4 0 10 42 Syd .... 1 2 0 2 4 1 8 34

Runs FOR Wkts Av. Runs AGAINST Wkts Average L.P. .. 3100 131 23.7 2585 162 15.9 + 7.8 O.C. .. 2939 150 19.6 2623 164 16.0 + 3.6 O.B. .. 2645 140 18.9 2676 155 17.3 + 1.6 East .. 2817 « 147 19.2 2809 155 18.1 + 1.1 Syd. .. 2810 157 17.9 3056 148 20.6 — 2.7 Rice. .. 2663 180 14.8 2722 155 17.6 — 2.8 St. A. .. 2475 161 15.4 2767 150 18.4 — 3.0 W.-U. .. 2405 170 14.1 2616 147 17.8 — 3.7