CRICKET

New Zealand Times, Volume LXXI, Issue 4307, 16 March 1901, Page 6 (Supplement)

CRICKET

(BY THE “HITTITS.”) ■ In the first grade'championship of Sydney, the Paddington and North Sydney Clubs lead with 8 points each, Sydney Club being third with fbur points. Tiic Queensland Cricket Association had before, it last month a somewhat unusual appeal case. The question- in dispute was as under: South Brisbane

■ had dl runs to get and one hour to hat. I With the batsmen ready to start, the 1 North Brisbane captain refused to com- ! in moo play because a. new half was not provided. The umpires decided that play should go on, ttioir opinion being that the hall was good enough ; in fact, almost new. Norths still refused to , play, lienee the claiming of the match ■by iS.R. The point has been tho cause I of a great ileal of discussion, and the | verdict of the delegates was a most pop- | ular one, as Norths had not a solitary • sympathiser in the cricket world.'

At the annual Victorian Post-office pionic, held this year at Healosvilie, G. H. H. Trott thoroughly enjoyed himself. The local club, comprising several aboriginals, measured their strength against Die P.O. team, the highest individual scorer to be presented with a bat. Healesville made 51. Trott obtained most of the wickets, and won the hat by scoring 49 not out.

A South African team will shortly visit England, passages having been booked from Capetown for April .17. Murray Bissett, who led the South African eleven when Lord Hawke last took a. team to South Africa, will act as captain, ami Die side will include Sinclair, Rowe, Tailored, Graham, and Maliiwetl, nil well-known performers.

Jack Warrall, the old representative Australian cricketer recently unburdened himself on the .subject of umpires. In tho course of his remarks he made reference to an incident winch occurred at Leeds in the third Tost match. Tho crowd were thoroughly antagonistic to the Australians, and, naturally, very ojie-sided. Not. one Australian received a cheer as lie went to the wickets. One of the umpires was an old International player. Ho had previously told several members of our team that the reason he jiad given up “stoomping and taking to the oompiring” was that his “eyesight was going.” In the match, under notice lie gave an atrocious decision, giving Trumhle run out when lie was a yard behind the crease. The only appeal was from the wicket-keeper (Tilley), who had not the slightest idea where the batsman was. To the credit of the fieldsmen, be it mentioned. Unit every one of them bung his head down in disgust. At tho end of the day Li Hey—a hue sport, and a magnificent placer —came to our dressing-room and trusted that we did not think him capable of deliberately cheating a man out. We quickly disabused his mind of that idea. lie also conveyed a message from the amateurs, in 'which they • expressed their regret for the coourrouco.

A match.between Delegate and Delegate River was played at Delegate lately, when the Delegate River team completely vanquished their opponents, whose scoring 'was something remarkable. The River in their innings scored 100 runs (>V. Armstrong 32, L. Bedford 19, and A. A. Burgess 11), Delegate, following, scored 8 runs, two of which were oft the hat, and the remainder byes. For Delegate River Armstrong took four wickets for 0, Roberts three for 1 and Bedford three for 1.

Ranjitsinhji has displeased R. G. Barlow, the well-known umpire, :-o I gather from English files. Barlow’s statement is that early last season, during thcSnr-rey-Sussox match, “Ranji” used certain language to him, after lie had given a. decision regarding a boundary hit, that hurt his feelings very much. And in December last be reported the Sussex captain to tlie Maryleheno club, at a meeting of which Lord Hawke and Mr Lacey were present. It is said that ‘'Ranji’’ denied having made use of the language complained of. Following, is the' text of Ins reply:—Sir.—A statement nppeiued last Saturday in one of the London papeis concerning myself which 1 wish to contradict. 1c is almost defamatory in substance, and is as malicious as it is untrue. Trusting you will kindly give publicity to my contradiction by inserting my letter in your columns.—Yours, etc., Ranjitsinjbi. 112, Sidney street, Cambridge, Jan. 10.”