Cricket trophy to reside in Canterbury

Press, 9 March 1984, Page 32

Cricket trophy to reside in Canterbury

By

R. T. BRITTENDEN

The Shell Trophy for cricket has joined the Ranfurly Shield, the Freyberg Rose bowl, the Nunneley Casket and other prestigious sports awards in Canterbury. At Invercargill yesterday Central Districts took only first innings points against Otago. Canterbury thus has an unbeatable lead before its final match, against Auckland at Eden Park today.

The points standings are: Canterbury 60, C.D. 56, Wellington 52, Auckland 40, Otago 32, N.D. 8. This is Canterbury’s first Shell Trophy success for eight years. It came in a season of wet weather and remarkable for the controversial victory won by Central Districts over Auckland last Sunday. It was reported yesterday that the Board of Control had accepted by a majority decision the recommendation of the sub-committee investigating the umpires’ report on this match. The Canterbury captain, Cran Bull, who is on the board’s executive, abstained from voting. Every season just about every batsman has to put a brave face on what he considers a questionable decision by umpires. None could have a clearer case of injustice than this finding of the board.

The relevant passage in

the playing conditions says it is not intended that a declaration should become the subject of agreement between the captains. In this instance, Auckland declared after scoring a handful of runs, Central forfeited its second innings. If there was no agreement, it is strange indeed that the Central captain did not enforce the follow-on. The sub-committee to which' the umpires’ report was first referred said there was some suspicion about the conduct of the match, but not sufficient proof of collusion. What does the board require? Written confessions by both captains? As it stands, the playing condition regarding declarations has been declared useless.

One can sympathise with Central because it suffered from wet weather more than most; but the rules allow an extra hour a day to help make up for such losses, and there it should end. What happened at Nelson was against the spirit of the game. Other sides have suffered from weather interruptions in this and other seasons.

The board’s decision is an open invitation to make further mockery of the rules. What, one might ask, is the merit of winning a hardfought three-day match when similar rewards can be obtained in three or four hours?