Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

WELLINGTON V. INSTITUTE

First innings honours went to Wellington at the -conclusion of the first day's play against Institute at the Basin Reserve. Havirig the first use of the wicket the Institute. batsmen knocked up the very moderate total of 122 before the last man was. .dismissed at 4.40 p.m. Wellington's opening, batsmen, Airey and Whyte, met with little success, their combined scores amounting to only 20. When stumps were drawD, however, Wellington had improved their position substantially—a total of 125' having been registered for the loss of six wickets. . Institute's first inniugs did not produce' any spectacular batting, and the chief feature was consistent-bowling by Symes and BlundelLThe former bowler had fourteen overs as; compared with Blundell's 17.2, and secured four wickets for 35 runs. Blundell took four for 43.. Institute's opening batsriien, Wareham and Duffy, stayed together until the total had .just passed the half century, when Duffy was clean' bowled by Symes. The following three wickets went for a.total of 8 runs; and with the ex-ception-of Aldridge, who made the second best score, 21, there were no further performances of note. Price was injured by a fast ball from Symes, and had to retire for half an hour. When he returned he. .was quickly, caught by Morgan off Blunde.U," Ins^itu.t-'s; top. scorer, Warehahi, played some '; beautiful - strokes- but his judgment-'in his-, runs Was not good. His-total of 33 .did not include'one four'!' Although the Wellington batsmen broughtin runs fairly freely they did not hold out for long against: the, steady deliveries of the Institute batsmen. - Six wickets fell -in just over an hour and a half. The best partnership . was that ■of Hollings and Morgan who scored 25 and 35 respectively. The following are the scores in detail:— INSTITUTE. . . First • Innings. Wareham. c Monteath, b Blundell ... 33 Duffy, b Symes '" rg Owen, lbw, b Symes- '.'.'.'" 1 Price, c Morgan, b Blundell .." 7 1. Tucker, c Hamilton, b Symes " 0 Aldridge, st Whyte,.'b- Airey ....'.' 21 Hankins, b Airey _ Ritchie, lbw, b Blundell ..'.'.'.'.'.''".' 10 Bilby, b Symes ....;:........., -4 W. Tucker, c Morgan, b Blundell""" 8 Rogers, not out " 2 Extras I!!!!!!!!' 16 Total 222 Bowling Analysis.—Cousins none for 12 Blundell four for 43, Symes four for 35 S r?, an ,nona for 6> Airey two for 10 ' of wiokets.-One for 51, two for 50, four for 72, five for 86, six for 95 seven for 95, eight for 100, nine for 118. ' WELLINGTON. First Innings. Airey, o and b Bilby '.. ~. c, Whyte, c Wareham, b Aldridge *!_?T'.5 Holhngs, c Ritchie, b Bilby . " i% Morgan, c Hankins, b Aldridge ."" " 35 Monteath, lbw, b Aldridge ... fa Blundell, c Ritchie, b'W. Tucker"*" .1 Foley,: not out .. 7 Duff, not out '.'.'.'.'. " i Extras """"!"""."" in Total for sis wickets ~125 o7BTu'•!'~~ B _by took U'° tickets for il' Tnc.!f Se thr f ee fS M ' Prince none or 01, tucker one for 18.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/EP19330130.2.130.4

Bibliographic details

Evening Post, Volume CXV, Issue 24, 30 January 1933, Page 15

Word Count
479

WELLINGTON V. INSTITUTE Evening Post, Volume CXV, Issue 24, 30 January 1933, Page 15

WELLINGTON V. INSTITUTE Evening Post, Volume CXV, Issue 24, 30 January 1933, Page 15

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert