OTAGO CRICKET ASSOCIATION.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 20006, 25 January 1927, Page 6

OTAGO CRICKET ASSOCIATION.

A meeting of the committee of the Otago Cricket Association was held last night. The president (Mr L. Joel) occupied the chair. A vote of sympathy was passed with the relatives of the late Mr Charles Corbett (a well-known Albion senior player, who had represented Otago against Southland on two occasions). Votes of sympathy ' were also passed with Mr G. G. Austin (whose wife had recently died) and Mr W. Holden /whose father had recently i died). , It was decided to grant sgns towards the cost of sending the two boys' teams to Christchurch on February 27. TEAM’S EXPENSES. Some discussion took place on the question of paying part of the expenses of a Second Grade' Otago team to go to Invercargill to play a Second Grade team. Mr J. J. Clark moved that the association pay 25s a head for the expenses of the trip. , ■Mr A. Restjeaux wanted to know the object of sending a Second Grade team. The Chairman; To improve their play. .On the suggestion of Mr F. Bmney, it was decided to alter the motion to read that the association pay the tram fare of each member of the team. —This motion was carried. The Chairman: Well, now, what about the team for Oamaru? This team, he said, was to be a senior team. It was suggested that the same terras should apply to the players to go to Oamaru. Mr A. Martin:. 1 think it is a downright shame when wc have come to this pass in cricket when wc have got to pay men to go away to play a game of cricket. 1 must enter my protest. It was decided to pay the tram fares to Oamaru for a two days’ match on March 23 and 24, provided that a good team was prepared to make the trip. OTAGO v. CANTERBURY. The Secretary of the Canterbury Cricket Association telegraphed that his committee haj agreed on February 4 as the date for the Plunket Shield match with Otago at Dunedin. —Noted. It was decided that tho selectors be asked to pick 18 men to go into practice for the march.-—Messrs Blamires, Blunt, and Torrance were appointed to have charge of the practices. MELBOURNE TEAM’S VISIT. The Now Zealand Cricket Council wrote stating that a three days’ match had been arranged between tho Melbourne team and an Otago team. The dates for the match wore March 11, 12, and 14. —Noted. The Secretary of the council also advised that two tests had been decided on with the Melbourne team-one at Christchurch and one at Wellington, both at the end of the tour of the visiting team. Tho Otago Association has to provide a guarantee of £3OO, subject to an arrangement for a refund on the same lines as for pro vious tours. Mr Clark said ho understood that tho test matches came into tho agreement regarding the refund. The Chairman said that the receipts from the test matches went to the council. Mr Clark held that the test matches should bear a certain ratio of the ex--8 Clark said he thought they should lodge a protest against not getting a test match in Otago. Members of the New Zealand Council had promised faithfully year after year that a test match would be given to Otago. They had had only one tset match in Dunedin ever since the New Zealand Council had been formed, and he thought he was right in saying that up to the time of that test Otago had topped the gate receipts for such matches. It seemed to him that some system should be adopted under which a test match should be played in Dunedin and Wellington in one year, and the next in Christchurch and Auckland. That would be one in the North Island and one in the South Island. It was absolutely unfair to cricketers, and also to the followers of the game, that owing to geographical conditions the claims of Otago and Auckland should be ignored. He thought they would be lacking in their duty if they did not protest strongly against the arrangement, as members of the council had promised them that Otago would get a test match. Every time a test match had come along ihe bait had been held out that some other time a test would be given to Otago. It was not fair to ignore the claims of Auckland and Otago year after year. The council was going the best way to prevent cricket progressing in New Zealand. The Chairman said he agreed that Otago should have a test match, as had been promised. Still, he had no doubt that the council had considerable difficulty in the little time at its disposal in arranging its itinerary. As the letter from the council had stated there were trotting and galloping meetings to be considered, and also the Duke of York’s visit. He had himself felt very dubious about asking for a test match, because it would have to follow shortly after the match with Otago on March 11, 12, and 14. There would only be two Saturdays to hold a test after these dates. He thought that a test under these circumstances would interfere with the takings from the Otago match. The council might turn round and offer them a test match, and they might lose £SO. Mr Clark: Not a bit of it. The Chairman added that ho was quite prepared to support a protest. Otago was not being treated fairly, as these tours wore arranged without consulting them at all. If Otago had refused tho dates of hi arch 11, 12, and 14, he did not. know what would have happened. He did not suppose they could have offered them any other dates. . , Mr Clark said that theoretically the chairman’s argument was correct, but in practice it did not work oat. The gate receipts at two big football matches were not affected by them being played on consecutive Saturdays. • Mr W. Rowland said he thought the association should take a broader view of the position The council wanted to save as much money as possible in view of the tour of tho New Zealand team Home, and bv plaving the matches on this occasion at Wellington and Christchurch they were saving travelling expenses. Had things been normal ho believed that Otago would have got a test match. . Mr “Clark moved—" That this association expresses* its great regret that the council has not allotted a tost match to Otago, as it had promised that Otago would have a test match.” It was stated in answer to a question i. -!v Morris that the promise of a test match in Otago had been an official Mr Martin seconded the motion. There was no dotiht that Otago had been promised a test match. Probably, however, there was no possibility now of securing a test match for Otago. Mr J. Robson said if the council had explained that there were extraordinary circumstances this year there could not have been any objection to Otago being overlooked.—(“Hear, hear.”) The Rev. E 0 Blamires said no doubt gicat interest was shown in the game in Wellington and Christchurch, and they got the plums, and Auckland and Otago was left very frequently with the remainder. He thought that the best centres for gates was Auckland, which had got the populotion. He thought that a wide vision and a long look would show the need for considering the claims of Auckland and also of Otago from time to time. The motion was put and carried. Mr Lowland dissenting. AUCKLAND v. OTAGO TAKINGS. Tho Secretary (Mr E. S. Wilson) said that the gross receipts from the AucklandOtago match was £285. The Otago Association received £7l 7s 9d, the Auckland Association £32 19s lOd, the New Zealand 'Council £5 9s lOd, and the Otago Rugby Union £7l 7s fid. It was stated that some £IOO should bn obtained for Otago from the match against Wellington at Wellington. WELLINGTON v. OTAGO. It w’as decided to send letters of thanks to Mr Alex. Regan and Mr Reg. Newson for courtesies extended to tho team which went to Wellington at Christmas time. It was also decided to write and thank the Wellington Association for the kindness shown to the Otago team.