CRICKET

Evening Post, Volume LXXXVII, Issue 50, 28 February 1914, Page 14

CRICKET

(By Half -Volley.)

Interest in cricket in Wellington is undoubtedly being revived, though late in the season. Last Saturday a crowd which for championship matches was surprising watched the games on the Basin Reserve with evident interest. Altogether the cricket was worth watching. Baker's 94 for East A was gained in a style almost, brilliant. Baker is not a risky player; he does not take many chances, and gives fewer, but he is rarely dull. All bowlers he treated alike on Saturday, and the number of big hits in his score ib sufficient cvi-" dence of the lively time he gave the field. Gibbes, his partner, was also enterprising and vigorous, and the partnership altogether was entirety satisfactory for everyone except Old . Boys. Midlane was successful in hitting up a big score, but his success was to some extent due to Old Boys' slackness. Had wicket-keeper aud field maintained their alert attitude throughout the game Midlane would not have carried his bat for 72. Leys put up a very good bowling performance for Old Boys at the begin' ning of the season ; but lately he has not maintained the standard he set on. that occasion. Tucker was the most successful of Old Boys' bowlers, and speedily disposed of a rather weak batting tail. Southall greatly strengthened the North side with his bowling. In Southall, Casey, and Bray. North have a trio of bowlers who, backed by an efficient ' field, should not allow many centuries to be put up. In this match another matter which deserves mention was the wicket-keeping of Howe, the Collegian. It was excellent, and in its results showed that, if this department of the game receives proper attention, it pays. Cricketers who have played with or against Smyrk, of Petone, will acknowledge that he plays good cricket,- but few -would say he was the best all-round player in New, Zealand. The following from Cricket may interest all shades of opinion : "E. W. Smyrk, the Hawkes Bay representative, who is said to be considered by John Board the best all-round player in New Zealand, is now in Wellington. On what Board's opinion was based it is not easy to say ; certainly not on what Smytk has done when representing his province, for his figures in these matches would not even justify his being held the best all-round man in Hawkes Bay. Perhaps he will be seen in the Wellington eleven in the near future, ahd with extended chances may do something to prove Board right, though Smyrk has a very long way to go before he can be , reckoned the equal of Dan Reese, and there are also Sandman, Sneddon, M'Farlane, and others." "Not-out" comments thus in the Sydney Referee on the Australian-Welling' ton game: — "The Australians' match at Wellington was somewhat surprising in the fact that the province secured a lead of 87 on the first innings. It evidently stung the visitors, who promptly set about routing the local batsmen in the second innings, though the fact of L. A. Cody and V. S. Ransford being among the bowlers might give an altogether different impression. W. W. Armstrong made up for the first-innings blob by capturing seven wickets for 17, and the Australians won easily enough. It is to be noted that the bulk of the run-getting was done by the young men, Dr. Dolling making 74. L. A. Cody 66, and Vernon, Ransford 62. A. W. L. Gibbes, who captured four for 36, is _ a Sydney bowler who ■ played for Paddington" some years ago." "If the cable messages be correct/ says "Not-out," "W. *W. Armstrong made 'a pair' against Wellington — a novel experience for the, big Victorian." The writer evidently has his doubts of the correctness of the message. Wellingtonians may remember a sensational announcement at the beginning of the season of a player who was to do i great deeds ; also the sudden departure i of the said player. Cricket has a paragraph to interest them: — "Australian readers may be interested to hear that" B. J. Kortlang has started a cirular duplicating business in Buenos Aires, and advertises that any job not completed at the time promised will be done free of charge. Local conditions may possibly make this an attractive clause, but one doubts its policy. It has a touch of expected procrastination. Now, in England we don't work on such lines. The usual plan is to be behind tlfi promised time, and then charge, extra on account of unforeseen difficulties. After all, there are points about Kortlang's offer!" Referring to J. N. Fowke's retirement Cricket states:— "At 56 he can still keep wickets capably, and in his time was probably the best wicket-keeper New Zealand ever had. But the New Zealand paper which says that he, Arnold Williams, and Boxshall were in a class by themselves is scarcely fair to two or three other men — notably R. 0. Niven and E. Wright,\both really good in their day, though the latter did not last as long" as Niven." The expenses of the tour of the New Zealand cricket team which recently visited Australia amounted to £1157 12s 3d, and the total receipts and coni tributions to £1192 4s 6d, leaving a. credit balance of £34 12s 3d. This will be refunded to the various cricket associations as follows :— Canterbury, Otago, Wellington, and Auckland Associations each £6 9s lOd, New Zealand Cricket Council £8 12s lid. The reI ceipts from the matches in Australia, amounted to £714 4s £d (Maitland £50, Glen Innes £50, Queensland £75, New South Wales £193' 14s 7d, Goulbum £50, Albury £50, Victoria £75, South Australia £120 9s lid, Melbourne Cricket Club £50). • AUSTRALIANS PLAYING CANTERBURY POOR DISPLAY BY LOCAL MEN. (It TELEfIRAtB— SP6CUL TO IH£ POST.) CHRISTCHURCH, 27th Feb. The day was as nearly perfect as it could be for the match, Australia v. Canterbury. Reese captained the home team, and Sims led the visitors. There was an excellent attendance at the start, and it increased as the afternoon Wore oh. The gate takings were £95. Canterbury flattered itself it put a team in the field to meet the Australians very nearly equal to the best that could be got together in New Zealand, but so far the results suggest it rather over estimated the capabilities of its players. Winning the toss, the local men naturally elected to bat on a good easy wicket, but, for some unexplained reason — unless it was the .quality of the bowling — they made a very poor display. The Australians changed their bowling frequently, but apparently the changes were made merely to display (he high quality of their attack. Probably any two of the bowlers tried could have disposed of the whole side for no better score than it actually 'made. Woods and Patrick shaped confidently and well, but the rest of the local batsmen were either ' suffering from stage fright or experiencing uncommonly bad luck. The bowling was undoubtedly good, and the repeated changes were a little perplexing, but Canterbury has met equally good bowling before, and has mad« runs from it. On this occa- J sion, however, a rot set in from the ' first, and was never leally slopped. Strangely enough, and to the huge dis j appointment ot the spectators, the AusIraliano also fared badly when they went . to . the- .wicketa True, they refiervedj

some of their best batsmen as a draw for Saturday's gate, but. witli five wickets down for 104, it cannot be said they played up to their reputation. Cody and Noble gave a taste of their quality, but the earlier batsmen showed nothing better than second-grade cricket.^ If the form shown yesterday is continued to-day the game will not carry over to the third day. Canterbury. — First Innings. H. B. Whitta, b Ransford 0 R. G. Hickmott, b Crawford ... 6 F. Woods, c Sims, b Mailey ... 31 Bishop", b Armstrong 8 D. Reese, b Noble ... ... .... 6 W. R. Patrick, not ont" 20 D. Sandman, c Armstrong, b Noble 7 T. Carlton, b Noble ... ... ... 2 G. C. L. Wilson, lbw, b Mailey ... 1 J. H. Bennett, b Mailey 3 D. 'Boxshall, c Sims, b Mailey ... 0 Extras 8 Total 92 Bowling Analysis. — V. S. Ransford, 3 overs, 6 runs, 1 wicket ; W. W. Armstrong, 10 overs, 4 maidens, 13 runs, 1 wicket; J. N. Crawford, 23 runs, 1 wicket ; At. A.^ Noble, 8 overs, 2 maidens, 25 runs, 4 wickets ; A. A. Mailey, 6.1 overs, 1 maiden, 17 runs, 3 wickets. How the Wickets Fell. 123456789 10 0 12 33 54 66 81 87 88 91 92 Australia. — First Innings. H. L, Collins, c Boxshall, b Bennett 10 Dr. Dolling, c Boxshall, b Carlton 0 E. L. Waddy, b Bennett 0 M. A. Noble, c Sandman, b Carlton 36 A. A. Mailey, c Patrick, b Carlton 3 Cody, not out' 47 A. Sims, not out 0 Extras ... ■.., 9 | Total for five wickets ... 105 Bowling Analysis. — Bennett, took two wickets for 35 runs ; Carlton, three for 32 ; Wilson, none for 15 ; Sandman, none for 14. How the Wickets Fell. 12 3 4 5 0 28 28 94 104