CRICKET.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 14784, 17 March 1910, Page 10

CRICKET.

Br Loxosti?.

AUSTRALIAN TEAM'S TOUR. The programme of matches .arranged for the tour of the Australian cricket team through New Zealand is as follows: — March 17.—Manawatu. March 18 and 19.—Wanganui. March 22, 23.—Taranaki. March 26, 28, 29.—Australia v.. New fcslimd—Second test match at Wellington. s April 1, 2, 4.--Hawko's Bay. ■. , There appears to be a misunderstanding between the Otago Umpires' Association and the local Cricket Association concerning tho payment of umpires for tho recent Olago-Australion mutch, and matters arc hung up .in the meantime. Acting on a resolution passed some five seasons ago, the Otago Umpires' Association claimed 10s pur day for the services of each.of the two umpires in the match against Australia. Strong exception has been taken to the amount of the charge, but I fail lo see, in the face of the resolution standing'.in the minutes, how tho local' Cricket Association can take "strong exception" to the claim, lint 1 do agree that when called upon (o pay tho fee tho' Cricket Association certainly has the ..right to appoint its own umpires. The Otago Umpires' Association places ■' its members in the- light of paid officials, and as such they must be regarded. "Where loss of time' only is claimed (as would have satisfied one of tho umpires in tho Australian match) the position would bo entirely different. As a member of the Umpires' Association, this official, had to conform, to' its rides, and ono of the resolutions'laid down is that for representative matches umpires bo paid 10s per day. Of course tho question may bo raised that "per day" means-a full day's pricket, in which case tho argument'of what should be charged .for' the third day of the Aus-tralian-Otago match, which occupied less than two hours, must be settled between' tho associations' interested. It should be clearly understood, however, that the claim is made, on tho .Otago Cricket Association not by the two umpires as individuals, but by tho Otago Umpires' Association, of which tiiey are members. Messrs Austin ! ",.™ e, 'S" SOll ~av. c "0 say in tho question. ' Tho finest wicket we have played on in New Zealand" was tho verdict of Air •M'Kenzie, .manager of the i Australian team, Mr Armstrong, captain: and: endorsed- by the Australian cricketers gene'v-' ;i JJ'. concerning the wicket prepared by Mr \) atson at Gar'isbrook. Tin's is' to •■ introduce the fact that at thc-conelusion'<of- tho contest the Carisbrook groundsman, who J'lid, ,in addition to preparing practice wickets and "the-finest match wicket in ftctv Zealand, performed many and varied services in connection with the' tourinlearn, was tendered a sum of money bv Ino manager which could not possibly lead Mr Watson to suppose- that lie was being t caled ovcr-gencrously. At the outset let it bo distinctly understood.-that'this is no affair of the Australian players themselves, tome of whom ,t ls alleged expressed surprise at he amount. The expenses of the tt d W" Co1 "" 1 ' 1 which Iwd >'- "bile °„ S > tO , tllo T m Z Qr of «* Australian team to keep he expenses down, would, ono may take if,, not dispute any reasonable expenditure o( the foregoing.nature!The sea«m of First Grade matches under he ausp,ees of the Otago Cricket Assonit.o.n concluded on Saturday with nothing' &me. ; I there was.anything noteworthy it wan ,n the defeat of Albion by the Opoho Woven,after a sporting attempt on the part of tho North-End team to secure l feat' 1 ' 0 " 1 """ an?l aV€rt "■ tm) -P° int do-

Opoho carried tlioir score ."from three rickets for 132 to 194, thochiefeontributor being the etoiic-waller Kenny,: who'went through tho. inningsfforar r a ;useful„ if 'somewhat' unattractive, 45. ", ■ ' , - , ' The Albion fast, bowler, Wordsworth was absent from the .bowling, crease against Opoho, but Corbctt made more .than,i'paenable amends for the Sydney -player's absence,. capturin<r eight;, wickets - for 63 ."ins in tho hrst 41 in Itooho « second etr.ikogv Cuhlmingj| ioW bow-led. well, tlipu K h': M lie'. l fail fl > d v L wicket in (he first,innings, and only secured one in the-second. '-f' ;-'■ : '•-i-.-',-'■-• In something like- fJO'.niinnt'es'• Wur'Aißion batsmen-Baker, Hiddleston, and Wd hams-rattled 'up 166 by. aggressive cricket. The Albion, captain then declared .his innings closed, leaving Opoho 11?. to get to wiir-m 80 minutes. At oho stage of the game it if Albion Acre K omg to secure a four-point Victory, but nil invaluable 34 not '.out''by ami* useful stand by M'Gavin" upset "Albion s calculations, and instead of a''.'Mill llicy had to submit .to a defeat on the first wirings. ■ , ; -- -?■■<

•1 ho outstanding feature of the match .was th'o batting of Hiddles(on,who showed in Ins 84- his veal form. It was certainly the best exhibition of batting seen on the North Ground this season. Hiddloston .played a. chanceless innings, scoring freclv on both sides of i,hc wicket. There was nothing of a sensational nature in. ■the conclusion of tho Carisbrook B v. Cansbrook A'match, the' game being scarcely-treated ns seriously as usual. Tho batsmen who' compiled tho riins on Saturday did;not exhibit-cricket out of the ordinary, \tlio.play for'tho most'part bears colourless. .'..-• ;;■-.'. ..: ■..., : ,-„ . 'For: the A- more: attractively than the- others,- oik! showed form which ono would have been pleased to sec against the Australians. Tho unchanged bowling of Macartney and Godfrey was sufficient to close'up tho A batsmen, and tho side went'timler to tho 1$ team, wbo won by 66 rjuirs. In the Dunedin-Grango match, concluded on (the North Ground, thero was some aggressive batting by Cha<lwick, who compiled 81, and by Ogg, who hit up 77. It was lively, cricket while it lasted, and was a sourco of delight ,to the spectators. Tho game was -not. cricket "by the book," being refreshingly unorthodox; but it was hard-hitting to a degree-. ' The Duncdin captain, 'realising" the position, gave several of the irregular bowlers a chance, wherefore wo saw S. Uoycn send down- "sky-dancers," and Eckhold, who had ■ been doing "terrier", work out in the country, trundling at tho crease. The match does not call for further comment. >

Some sohoes of the first test match: — The Australians had their very strongest team in for tho first test match, and there \vas a grim earnestness about their play that made it quite clear they were hot throwing away 'any chances. . . . Tho partnership between Bardsley and Armstrong was worth 'foing a long way to sec. Bardsley's play to leg and on tho oil' side was soundness itself. He rarely lifted, tho ball from the ground, and anvthing tho least, bit underpinned invariably got punished with clean, forceful strokes tlmt were pretty to watch. Ho was batting for just two hours, and only gave ono dilheult chance—when ho was 29. Armstrong's innings was just as sound. None uf the bowling seemed to trouble him, and at no time was his defence taxed. Ho nwjlo most of his runs.by forcing drives, and he put rare powor into these strokes. Of the. Australian bowlers, Wliitty was the chief factor in the 'downfall of Ihe New Zealand side. He swung, in with tha aim, and then bvoko from leg in a manlier that must,havo been most disconcerting to tho batsmen. Indeed, in tho early part of the innings lie repeatedly beat the batsman and tho wicket, and the frequency with which tlio ball whizzed pa 4 the | wicket augured ill for the New Zealand score. Armstrong also bowled splendidly, but sevoral of the batsmen made him more difficult by playing at tho pitch, and none of the' batsmen-with tho exception of Suns—showed any enterprise in going out to him. . . . Tho fine batting of Ihe New Zealand team on Saturdav suggested that (hoy had bad luck in having- to bat first on such a sticky wicket as'" that of l'riduy Morning; for on Saturday, when I lie pitch had thoroughly dried, thev appeared to have no difficulty whatever in playin" tho fowling, and had it not been for I couple of unfortunate run-outs, -the second day's play would havo left tho visitors with very little advantage. . . . Lusk, Sicilebcrg, Midlano, Hadden.' and Reese, all batted in a maimer that made the bowliii" look almost simple. Hadden- gave an excellent'display, whilst Midlaiie, after a. somewhat nervous start, performed in' a manne; befitting his reputation. Lusk also made his runs by stylish and attractivestrokes, whilst Reese was batting very confidently until a stupid mistake of MichWi mado a nufout inevitable, and the New Zealand skipper sacrificed his wicket to save his partner's. . . . Siedeberg's was a very painstaking innings. Ho showed a lot of defence in making his 35. but his scoring strokes—with few exceptions—were not by any means' indicative of his be6t style. He was certainly unluckv iir the manner of his getting out, and it is seldom that an umpire' 6 decision is received with so much disfavour as was Carlton's in this case. The batemau himself thought ho was

comfortably in, and many of tho onlookers who were in a position {o sec thuught the umpire had made a mistake. . . . Hidden played tho best, cricket of the innings, and lie has never been seen .to better advantage in Chrislelimeh. He played all the bowling with a correctness and ease which made it look far Irom difficult, and he ma<lc]his .runs by orthodox and forceful strokes in all directions. Lus"; played attractive cricket, as ho invariably docs when he make 3 runs. He did some fine driving, and brought his favourite pull stroke into play with considerable effect. Ho got a bit impatient, however, after being in for some time, and this brought about his downfall, though it was a remarkably good catch., that sent him back. Midlane was inclined to be a bit scratchy, on first going in. Probably the responsibility of making amends for his failure of the fii-4 innings cramped his play until he had settled down, but afterwards his batting was very gcod. He - was very strong on the leg side, and ho made sbmo fine hits', in that direction. . . . The New Zcalanders gave a good exhibition of fielding—a, very gratifying fact after their patchy 'performance on the first day. Every man on the 6rde did gcod work. Reeso was brilliant, and better fielding than his , has seldom been seen on the ground. There'must be luck' in cricket. Clement Hill has been playing in first class matches for the past 16 years, and has a wonderful i record,'.but-his brother, S. Hill, after his 'first season in big games,was able to ie.coivo a.gold Sheffield Shield mc<lal at the same time' as his well-known left-handed brother. J.'N. Crawford, who only arrived from England in December hist, also secured one, ~ ■

Kelleway (N.S.W.) is ono of the players who should do woll in Now Zealand (saysa Tasmanian writer). Playing in tho recent inter-State matches was a rather strenuous business with him. for it is said that on each day he played cricket he had to work till midnight to make up for' his absence. Such enthusiasm deserved success, but it is surprising that in the circumstances it was achieved. .

The following figures show A. E. Rolf's batting and bowling performances in Plunket Shield matches during the four seasons he has been coaching and playing for Auckland :—

BOWLING. Against Canterbury (at Hagley Park, December'H,. 10, and 17, 1907): Six wickets for 01 runs and v two for 48. Agaiiißt Otago (at the Auckland Domain, .January,2, ,1, and 4,' 1908):■ Six wickets for 22 runs ami six for 23. : Against Otago (at Victoria Park. Auckland, December 2,5, 29, and 30, 1903): One wicket for 65 runs and four for 35.. , . Against Canterbury (at the Auckland Damain, January. 1, 2,' and 4, 1939): 'Seven wickets for 42 runs and five for- 50. . Against' Wellington (at Auckland-Domain, December-27 and 28. 1009): Five wickets for 41 runs and one for 19. . .• ■ i . : Against Canterbury (at Victoria Park, '■Artcklarid; January-7, 8, and 10, 1910): One wicket for .23, runs and four for 44. Against Otago (at Auckland Domain, February 11, 12, 14, and 15. 1P10): Three wickets for .69 runs' and none for 5. Total: 51 wickets for 561 runs; average, 11. ■ . i ' B.VTTIXG. - Against Canterbury (December, 1907): 157 runs. Against Otago (January, 1908): 42' and S3. ■ Against Otago (December, IMS): 01 and 8. Against Canterbury -'(January, 1909)- d{ and 11.

. Against Wellington (December,. 1909)- io , Against Canterbury: (January,'l9lo): 37. , Against Otago (February, 1910): 118. ; Innings, 10;. tuns,,sßo;" average, 58.