LETTER BOX

Press, Volume CIX, Issue 31926, 1 March 1969, Page 11

LETTER BOX

Cricket Report Our Club would like to express an official point of view on the report that appeared in “The Press" on February 24 on the senior cricket match, Riccarton v. H. 5.0.8. The reporter, a member of the Riccarton side, states the trouble started when a ball from Stead clipped Duncan’s leg stump. Although not contained in the report, the umpires did, in fact, consult over the decision and correctly ruled that Duncan was not out. We therefore feel that the reporter is unjustified in stating that the batsman was bowled. With regard to the tripping incident, the inference in the report is that this was deliberate. W. R. Barbarel has stated that any impeding of the batsman by’ him was accidental. Reference to bad language implies that all players were concerned. If bad language was used this was confined to only two or three players. We feel that although the incidents were unusual, they were of a minor nature and an incorrect construction has been placed upon them in the report. I. S. COCKS, Secretary, H. 5.0.8. Cricket Club. [Although a member of the Riccarton team, the reporter wrote as a journalist, not as a player. The state-

ment that the ball clipped the wicket was his personal opinion; the ruling on the tripping of G. R. McAulay was the decision of the umpire. The article did not suggest that the tripping was intentional. The reference to bad language did not imply that all players were involved. The article said that “most of the players” were involved in the "heated exchanges of comments.”—Spts. Ed.]