Cricket. By "Half-Volley."

Evening Post, Volume LXXIX, Issue 12, 15 January 1910, Page 14

Cricket. By "Half-Volley."

Local cricket was resumed last Saturday on one of Wellington's specimen days— one of the very best. Cricketers have been lucky so far through the season — all they want is a little drop of rain for the morning, something to fall during the week and keep the grass green — but now the Basin is taking after the desert — in patches, at any rate. The surface is wretchedly uneven in the out field, and positively dangerous in these hard times. It would be well for the Reserves Committee ot the City Council to consider the .ploughing up and and turfing of the reserve. No turf in New Zealand will stand for ever. There' is nothing here like some of the old English greens, which have been down for centuries. This is by the way of suggesting reforms in Wellington's most popular cricket field. The 'matches on Saturday on the Reserve were characteristic of the bumpy, dry pitch. The ball got up terribly, rendering «ome ovurs of little use to either side. ' East A made very small beer of East B in every department of the game. B were unable to stand up to the bowling of Gibbes and Hales, both of whom the fast wicket suited well. Gibbes clean bowled his four wickets with a. nice average — four for 20. Of the batting of B tho least said the better. Then East A went in with surprising vigour, Midlane and Tucker completely capturing the bowling, which was very ordinary. Nash got one past Tucker, when he /was 33, but Mahoney, following, kept the* ball moving. He played very dashing confident cricket, and was only got at 62 by an unlucky bump off his wrist into the slips. Hutchings was not so well at home, and had to leave at 19. Meanwhile Midlane was displaying brilliant form, scoring quickly after he j became set. He was loudly cheered j on passing his century. When stumps were drawn he was stilj not out — HI. East A will probably be content next Saturday to let B go in soon and then go for a thre6-point win. The match between North and Victoria College was very even. 1 Stan'Hickson and Berendsen were the principal scorers, with 38 and 34 respectively. Monaghan bowled for the College with considerable success, his average being four for 26. Foster played a good solid innings of half 'a century for the College, and was well backed up with 20 and 29 by Findlay and Berendsen, the latter of whom is still not out. Upham did fairly well with the ball — four for 45. Central had the better of their match with Petoniv Birch carried out his bat for 42 in good btyle, the next beel men being Beechey 32, Mason 24, and Naughton 20. Brice and Isherwood made a bit of a stand for Fetone, but

"the drawing of stumps left the suburbanites with only 96 for faeven wickets. Lord Hawke's speech at the Yorkshire Cricket Club's meeting at Sheffield has caused considerable- discussion in the cricket world. The statement that cricket nowadays was becoming too serious a business has something to justify it, says P. F. Warner in the Westminster Gazette. Still, we do not think that the great majority of firstclass players regard the game in quite the spirit that the Yorkshire captain imagines. Cricket in Yorkshire has always been a very stern affair, much more so than in any other county, excepting, perhaps, Lancashire, and the occasional failures of last season's Yorkshire eleven have been made too much of by their supporters. This, perhaps, is only natural, considering how Yorkshire has dominated the cricket world during the last ten or a dozen years; but in the ordinary course of things it was not to be expected that the same wonderful standard of excellence could be kept up for ever. No side -plays a keener or a fairer game than Yorkshire. They are indeed fine opponents in every sense of the word, but, as we have said, there is just that note of super-serious-ness characterising their cricket. Certain critics are, no doubt, apt to attach too great importance to cricket. The man, for instance, who drops a catch at the crisis of a match is sometimes criticised as if he had lost the British Empire, and not a metfe game, by his criminal carelessness ! Cricketers as a gene- I ral rule, however, laugh over their mistakes when the match is all over and done with. Not that they are indifferent as to their shortcomings, but simply on the principle that it is no good crying over spilt milk, and that, therefore, it is better to be cheerful, or, at any rate, philosophical. The only sort of criticism that players resent is inaccurate criticism, and, of course, spiteful criticism, which in my experience practically does not exist. The other statement alleged to have been made by Lord Hawke at Sheffield was to the effect that, but for the critics, England might not now deplore her loss of prestige in the Test matches with the Australians !v! v Surely it was not' the fault of the critics that we lost the rubber. Was it not rather the Selection Committee who chose the team to play at Lord's — the team whose bowling was represented by Hirst, A. E. Relf, King, and Haigh, which included a man who was so lame that he could neither run between the wickets nor field actively, and which was minus a fast bowler, at Lord's, of all places? Again, was it not the Selection Committee who were responsible for England's having no recognised fast bowler at the Oval? As for the idea that criticism wpset the sea soned players who did duty for England at various times, I cannot believe it. Does Lord Hawko really mean that these men would have made more runs or bowled better but for the critics? The composition of the Lord's team was, one ventures to think, rightly criticised at the time — for a more inadequately equipped bowling side never played for England — as was Buckenham's omission from the match at the Oval. Ninety-nine out of a hundred cricketers think that England would not have lost the rubber but for the mistakes of the Selection Committee, and it does not seem quite fair to put the blame on those who criticised. There was nothing but praise 'from the critics for the teams at Birmingham, Leeds, and Manchester. More people are talked into and talked out of teams by irresponsible individuals than the world knows of ; but in 1909 it was the fault of the Selection Committee, and not the critics, that the Australians won the rubber.