BATSMEN LOITER NO LONGER Performance points have brought back vitality to shield cricket

Press, Volume CXI, Issue 32494, 2 January 1971, Page 5

BATSMEN LOITER NO LONGER Performance points have brought back vitality to shield cricket

(By

R.T. BRITTENDEN)

THE first reaction to the x introduction of performance points in Plunket Shield cricket must be one of commendation. There was clear evidence in Canterbury’s match with Otago, and from reports of the Wellington-Central Districts game, that the new system, and the abandonment of points for a firstinnings lead, have been of benefit. It should not require such a change to remind first-class batsmen of the importance of running every possible single, and of converting ones to twos, twos to threes; but there is little doubt that the running between the wickets at Carisbrook, particularly by Canterbury, was very much better than the usual standard of Plunket Shield teams in recent seasons.

There was a definite edge to the cricket from the start. The old feeling that it was right and proper for opening batsmen to “have a good look” at the bowling, and therefore enjoy a licence to loiter without intent, had gone. That is no post-dated rebuke of M. L Ryan and

G. T. Dowling, Canterbury’s opening pair, both of whom are usually very

enterprising players, or of L. R. Pearson and G. M. Turner of Otago. But there was a considerable period during which it was not considered proper for openers, generally, to play shots or run with unseemingly haste. That day has, one hopes, gone forever.

There was vitality, too, « as the bonus.points scores were approached and passed. Canterbury did not score as many performance points for batting as Wellington or Central Districts, but there was intense interest as efforts were made to score a second batting 1 point—an effort which failed by no more than four runs. Performance points are not the full answer to the need for consistently enterprising cricket. Everything still depends on the attitudes and strictures of captains. But there can be no doubt that their introduction has injected the play with a new vitality. So too has the abandonment of the first-innings points. Dowling is an aggressive captain, and he

would probably have left Otago a very reasonable scoring rate, even had possession of the first-innings lead been relevant. It is clear already, however, that a captain who leads Will no longer be disposed to aim to retain that advantage, for it is an advantage no longer, except on paper. So there is a strong likelihood of further declarations even from a side trailing on the first innings, and further efforts to make bold bids for the now rich prize of 10 points for outright victory. Performance points and the abolition of first-inn-ings points do not provide a panacea for all of cricket’s ills. But they point the way to recovery.