CRICKET

Otago Daily Times, Issue 21536, 7 January 1932, Page 4

CRICKET

By Sup.

Ig: THE NORTHERN TOUR '•The Otago team which concluded its northern tour with a good win against Auckland on Monday probably performed better than most followers of the game expected. It certainly confirmed all that bad previously been said with respect to its possibilities, and established beyond doiibt the fact that the game has not gone back in the province. The team etlll has a chance of winning the Plunuet Shield if it succeeds in beating Wellington 1 at Dunedin later in the season and Auckland beats Canterbury. The position now is that Wellington has 12 points (a straight-out win and a win on the first innings), Canterbury 10 (a win and a loss on the first innings), Otago 8 (one win), and Auckland none. If Canterbury wins against Auckland in the match whicn will begin to-morrow the issue will ue between Canterbury and Wellington, but if- Auckland wins Wellington and Ctago Will fight out possession of the shield. Alter the; Canterbury match the chief criticism of,'the Otago side was that the performances of only three men—Blunt, Badcock, and' Hawkesworth—saved it from heavy defeat, but it was only good team work which enabled Otago to heat_ Auckland, almost every member of the side playing a/more or less important part in its sucC6 The fact that. Blunt went cheaply .in both innings against Auckland was ■ a great disappointment, but he was very unlucky in being run put in the first innings. No player gave better all-round service to the side thah Badcock. Though he-is not an ideal opening batsman, be filled the position witn great; success during- the tour, and his'los ,; against Canterbury and 84 against Auckland were scores of very great value.- As a howler be also performed well,'. though- he could not produce his most deadly form against Canterbury. Knight made a couple of useful scores, and justified bis selection, as did Smith, who, after moderate totals in the Canterbury match, made a useful double of 39 and 36 run out against Auckland. These performances should assure him of a place in the team against Wellington. hut they were no more than was expected of a young batsman who will certainly do much better. Elmes proved Kiiiaself to he more useful as a batsman than as a howler, scoring 19 not out ana ?A * against Canterbury and 49 and lo against Auckland. , He is easdy the best and the most attractive left-hander m : Dunedin, and is a good enough batsman at his best to earn a place in the representative side even if be were not a bowler. Coupland, who was not an obvious choice for the tour, nevertheless quite justified his selection, hut the performances of Moloney wera much below his capabilities. He has not so far justified his trials, but is certain to do so if the selectors retain him in the side. Dunning concluded the tour with an excellent average of five for 65 in Auckland s second innings, his figures on other occasions were not as good as might have been expected. Nevertheless the side could not have done without him. Cherry atoned for his failure against Canterbury with scores of 27 and 79 against Auckland, the latter being an exceedingly valuable knock. He is certain to retain his place. Hakweaworth was one of the fiucceE f e ® of the tour. He established a reputation . as a first-class wicket-keeper, and his hatting performance against Canterbury was one of the features of the tour Priest, who is not a good starter, was unlucky in the Canterbury match. The performances of the team on tour should have a very beneficial effect on the game in Otago. Club cricket should he made much more interesting as a result of the experience gained by tne players on the trip, but the most important benefit will be a greater spirit of \ confidence in the' representative side The following are the averages ot tbe Otago team;-^nre,.

PARTNERSHIP RECORDS Record partnerships in Plunket Shield cricket are as follows: First Wicket—239, by C. S. Dempster and. W. Dustin, for Wellington against Canterbury, 1931-32. ' Second Wicket.—227, by W. A, Baker and B. J Kortlang, for Wellington against Otago, 1923-24. Third Wicket—222, by S. G. Smith and If. G. Sneddon, for Auckland against 'Hawke’s Bay, 1920-21. ' 'Fourth Wicket—27B, by M. L. Page and A. ■W. Roberts, for Canterbury against Wellington, 193X;32. 'Fifth Wicket—l 97, by C. Dacre and C. Alcott, for Auckland against Otago, 1926-27 Sixth Wicket—lß4, by D. C. Collins and H. M. M'Girr, for Wellington against Otago, 1923-24; Seventh Wicket—l 74, by C. A. Snedden and A. Anthony, for Auckland against Canterbury, 1920-21. Eighth Wicket. —154, by K. L. James and F. T. Badcock, for Wellington against Canterbury, 1926-27. Ninth Wicket.—lls, by E. H. L. Bernau and K. C. James, for Wellington against Canterbury, 1923-24. Tenth Wicket.—lß4, by R. C. Blunt and W. Hawkesworth, for Otago against Canterbury, 1931-32.,

OTAGO’S RECORD Though Otago has held the Plunket Shield for only one season, it has probably made more cricket history in New Zealand than any other province. The highest score that hag been made in Plunket Shield cricket is 643 compiled by Auckland against Canterbury in the 191920 season, when Smith made 256. The next highest, however, was made by Otago against Canterbury in the 1928-29 season,' when, mainly owing to a fine innings of 221 by Blunt, a total of 602 was compiled for the loss of eight wickets. These are the only two totals which exceeded the score of 589 which Otago made, also against Canterbury, this season. The highest individual score in Plunket Shield cricket is held by an Otago batsman, and Otago men also hold the record for a last-wicket partnership. Otago was alfeo associated with Wellington in the 1923-24 season in the compiling of an aggregate of 1905 runs, which has been exceeded only twice in first-class cricket, and the score of 495 which Otago made in the fourth innings of that match when set 641 to win has been bettered only five times in firstclass cricket. Otago is the only province whose opening batsmen have made over 100 runs in both innings of a Plunket Shield match. This honour goes to Worker and Shepherd, who made 154 and 155 in the famous match against Wellington. NOTES In his first 10 overs in Otago’s first innings, on Christmas Day, W. E. Merritt was hit for only 17 runs. In his first 10 overs in the second innings, on Monday, he was hit for 36. C. Ritchie, the ex-Dunedin batsman, is Dow performing well for the Petone Club in Wellington. . . Roger Blunt hit 41 scoring his 338 not out against Canterbury. Twelve of these boundary strokes were made off I B. Cromb, 11 off W. E. Merritt, eight off R. O. Talbot, six off A. W. Roberts, two off J- T. Burrows, and one each off S. G. Lester and M. L. Page. Canterbury’s score of 519 in the second innings at Christchurch last season is the highest ever made against Wellington in « Plunket Shield match. Wellington’s highest score against Canterbury is 553 made in the match just concluded.

Probably the reason why A. W. Roberts is not given more bowling to do in Canterbury's representative cricket matches is that he tries to be a fast-medium howler in such games (states a Christchurch writer). When he bowls at medium pace he is a good off-break bowler, but he seems to have the curious notion that in representative matches he can bowl at a faster pace and still turn the ball with a good length. Abroad, Blunt has made eight centuries for New Zealand, with his 225 not out against Gentlemen of England, in the 1931 tour, as his highest. He first appeared as a New Zealand representative in the 1920-21 season, against Vernon Hansford's Australian team, and now he has .scored more runs for the Dominion than any other player,, his .aggregate of 4522 runs for New Zealand .in first-class matches exceeding C. S. Dempster’s by 531 runs. Moreover, only W. E. Merritt has taken more wickets for New Zealand than Blunt has taken. Good judges of cricket in Australia and England have frequently stated that in Blunt the Dominion possesses a batsman good enough to hold a place in the representative eleven of any country. By running up the great score of 338 not out for Otago against Canterbury, he gave another proof,of his outstanding ability as a batsman. When it is remembered that heamassed this mammoth score against bowlers of the calibre of Cromb and Merritt, it will be realised what a peerless batsman Blunt is (says a writer in the Dominion). ~ The Sydney Sun says that Eddie Gilbert, the Queensland aboriginal bowler, was “ no-balled ” by Umpire A. N. Barlow, in the Queensland-Victoria cricket game, tor “ jerking the wrist.” Barlow, in keeping .with cricket - tradition, has offered no public explanation of, his action. _ Gilbert feels his, position keenly, believing that he has let his team. down. The Queensland skipper, ...Prank Gough, classed Gilbert as the fastest bowler in Australia. He said Don Bradman and Alan Kippax, against whom Gilbert bowled in the Sydney Shield game, agreed that Gilbert “yards faster than Harold Larwood. "Probably one of the most notable performances in the country week cricket tourney at Eden Park (states the Auckland Star) was that of R. Kaho, a student at Wesley : College. Playing for Pukekohe against Kaipara, he _ made a good all-round score of 131, -retiring when th er . e was no more space left in the score book for the record of his runs. Bowling f in the first innings, he took six wickets for eight runs, and in the second four for two. The latter performance included the “hat trick," and all three batsmen' were clean bowled. In the first innings he had eight overs, and of these four were maidens; in the second innings he had four overs, two of which were maidens. The outstanding performer with the bat for Auckland against Wellington was Vivian, who demonstrated that the English tour had been of great value to him in 'the course of his development as a first-class cricketer (states a Wellington writer). With him there was no lack ot enterprise, hut there was quite an amount of uncertainty in his first innings. A great “knock” by Vivian in Auckland s second innings produced easily the highest score of the match—l6s. The young batsman displayed a good range of strokes, and his forcing play delighted the spectators. It was indeed a fine innings, and it brought forth some high praise. However it would be a great pity to load Vivian to believe that it was the best ever played on the Basin Reserve. It was far from that. There have been many better displays’ by cricketers, Aucklanders among them, who have reached a standard to which Vivian is only now advancing. If he continues to go on the right way, Vivian should become a great cricketer. His bowling—left-arm slow—was not very impressive in this match. The_ other Aucklander to come to the fore in tins match was D. Cleverley, the fasthqwler of the team. Handled well by Weir in the first innings, he made a fine achievement in taking six wickets in Wellington’s first innings.

The action of the Wellington Association in presenting R, W. Rowntree, the Auckland wicket-keeper,. with a case of pipes at the conclusion of the AucklandWellington match will find considerate appreciation throughout the Dominion (says an Auckland writer). Rowntree has been Auckland’s wicket-keeper for a number of years, and during that time has become much esteemed ,by players and public alike. Rowntree has served Auckland well, as a glance at his performances will show, and his -brilliance, behind the stumps has prompted critics at .various times to place him among the world s best, A similar presentation was made to Rowntree by the Otago Association in 1929 at the conclusion of the Auckland-Otago contest. Rowntree was at his best during this match, taking three catches and stumping three batsmen. The following scores of over 200 have been made in Plunket Shield matches: 338. not out.—R. C. Blunt (Otago) v. Canterbury, 1931-32. 256.—S G. Smith (Auckland) v. Canterbury, 1920-21. „ '■ 221. —R. C. Blunt (Otago) v. Canterbury, 1928-29. „ , ... 214, not out.—B. J. Kortlang (Wellington) , v. Auckland, T 925-26. 212.—J. S. Hiddleston (Wellington), v. Canterbury, 1925-26. 206.—M. L. Page (Canterbury), v. Wellington, 1931-32. 204.—J. S. Hiddleston (Wellington), v. 1 Auckland, 1925-26. 204.—A. Cox (Canterbury), v. Otago, 1925-26. .

In. N.O. H.S. Runs. Avg. .. 4 1 338* 376 125.33 Badcock .. Elmes .. .. Cherry .. .. 4 .. 4 .. 4 .. 4 1 105 212 49 108 79 120 39 101 -53.00 36.00 30.00 25 25 Knight .... 4 Hawkesworth 4 2 42 98 21 42 24.5 21.00 Coupland' Dunning .... M'Haffie . .. .. 4 .. 4' .. 2 — ■ 24 66 36 50 13 19 16.50 12.50 9.50 Moloney .. .. 4 r—' 11 31 7.75 Priest .. 2 — ~ . BOWLING. Runs. Wkts. Avg. Coupland . Badcock .. 136 246 7 9 19.42 27.33 Dunning .. Moloney .. 228 140 158 7 4 4 32.57 35.00 39.50 Smith .. 115 2 57.50 Elmes .. .. .. 84