NAPIER CRICKET

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume XXIV, Issue 61, 22 February 1934, Page 3

NAPIER CRICKET

SATURDAY’S POSTPONEMENT DISCUSSED BY ASSOCIATION PROCEDURE EOR FUTURE I I competitions should be adjourned last i Saturday week on account of the state • of the grounds gave rise to a discussion I at last evening's meeting of the ninnI agement committee of the Hawke’s Bay Cricket Association. It was finally decided that on occasions when the grounds committee and the representatives of the Napier Borough Council were unable to arrive at a decision regarding whether cricket should be played or not, the decision should be made at 2 o’clock on the «Saturday afternoon, and that cricketers would be expected to be present to hear the decision. A copy of a resolution passed to this effect is to be sent to the Napier Borough Council, Cricket enthusiasts will recall that on Saturday, February 10, rain which had fallen earlier in the week continued to fall in the morning. The weather cleared at about mid day and the afternoon was fine. A large number of cricketers who assembled at Nelson Park were surprised to learn that cricket had been postponed, and the decision to that effect was adversely criticised by many. The matter was raised at last evening’s meeting after the secretary, Mr M. MacLeod, had read two letters from cricket clubs, both containing protests in regard to the decision to adjourn the cricket on the afternoon of February 10. The secretaries of both clubs expressed the view that through the decision to adjourn play for the afternoon in question, cricketers lost a valuable opportunity of getting experience on a slow wicket. SUITABLE FOR PLAY The secretary of the Scinde Club said that in the opinion of his club the ground was suitable for play at 2 o’clock, with the exception of the third senior wicket, which would have been fit for play by 3 o’clock at the latest. He made the suggestion that in like circumstances in the future, the players should be requested to muster at the ground and wait there until the ground is declared either fit or unfit for play. “It is considered that the association pays the Borough Council sufficient rent for Nelson Park to warrant its appointed grounds committee possessing sufficient power to decide as to the fitness or not of the ground for play”, stated the secretary of St. John’s Club. He added that if cricket in those centres which were not so climatically favoured as Napier, was postponed under similar conditions as existed on February 10, the grade competition would be prolonged indefinitely. After the two letters had been read, the chairman, Mr R. M. Chadwick, suggested that what had been done on that afternoon had been done in accordance with the procedure laid down. Ho thought that any discussion by members would not take the matter any further. What was to be considered by

the meeting was whether something could be done to prevent any misunderstanding in the future. Mr L. G. Fifield expressed the view that on the day in question the borough engineer, Mr W. D. Corbett, and Cr. C. D. Cox had made a hasty decision regarding the impossibilities of playing on the wickets. The chairman: I won’t let you express such an opinion. That gets us nowhere in a discussion such as this. Mr Fifield: It is the opinion of the grounds committee. The chairman: We must abide by what the Borough Council says. Mr C. Louisson: Then we might as well not have a grounds committee. The chairman: Don’t take that attitude, Mr Louisson. It is like Mr Fifield expressing an opinion that the council’s representatives made a hasty decision. It gets us nowhere. Some discussion then took place by members regarding what they thought was the duty of the borough engineer in matters dealing with the Nelson Park wickets, but it was cut short by the chairman, who said he would not let the discussion proceed along those lines. “If you do, I’ll close the matter altogether,” he added. Mr W. D. Corbett was of the opinion that the secretary had been at fault in not making an effort to notify players regarding the position. DECISION BROADCAST Mr W. L. Dunn: A statement was made that the notice broadcast was incorrect. That is not so. In order to make certain of the position I went to the park, where Mr Corbett and Mr Cox told me that there would definitely be no cricket. I returned to town and did the commonsense thing, which the grounds committee did not do: I took steps to notify players of the position by broadcasting an announcement. The secretary told me that I should not have done so, but should have notified him, but it is not my job to do so. Regarding sports announcements broadcasted, I am responsible not to the Cricket Association, but to the broadcasting station, providing my announcement is correct. The chairman; What Mr Dunn did as sports broadcaster was to inform the public what the decision of the council was. The secretary explained that on the Saturday morning in question ho had been given to understand that the final decision regarding play or no play was to be made at 2 o’clock in the afternoon. Not having received any advice at 11 a.m., he told all who ’phoned him to be down at the park at 2 p.m. Mr Corbett: Mr MacLeod has no grievance against the council, because at 9 o’clock in the morning I told him that the indications were that there would be no play. The chairman: As far as Mr MacLeod is concerned, he misunderstood the position. The resolution was then put to the meeting and was carried, Mr C. Louisson being the only member to vote against it.