CRICKET

Otago Daily Times, Issue 23341, 5 November 1937, Page 13

CRICKET

FIFTH PLUNKET SHIELD TEAM CRICKET CONFERENCE REJECTS PROPOSAL EIGHT-BALL OVER ADOPTED (Per United Press Association) CHRISTCHURCH, Nov. 4. The proposal for a fifth Plunket Shield team, consisting of the minor associations in the Wellington province, was rejected by the biennial conference of delegates to the New Zealand Cricket Council to-day. The matter was brought up in the form of a remit from the Manawatu Cricket Association, which was read by the association's delegate, Mr A. M. Ongley. Although the conference voted on the remit and it was lost by 18 votes to 9, it will be brought up at the annual meeting of the council to-morrow evening Actually six delegates voted against the remit, and nine for it, but anion g the six in opposition were the four delegates from major associations, who were each entitled to four votes. This swayed the voting with the result that the remit was lost. Mr Ongley said that there were four main reasons for the inclusion of the fifth team. These were: (1) The population of the area; (2) the number of players; (3) the standard of play; and (4) the number of cricket nurseries such as secondary schools. Mr Ongley said that within a 75-mile radius of Palmerston North there was a population of 343,000, or equal to more than one-fifth of the total population of New Zealand. In the area there were 60 seniors teams and at least 3000 cricketers. Two-thirds of the senior players were as good as senior competition players in the cities. Three of the members of the present New Zealand team were from the proposed new district, against two representatives from Wellington. There were seven first-class secondary schools in the area. Mr M MacLeod (Nelson) seconded the motion and pleaded that it should be given a trial for a year or two. Mr T. A. Cameron (Rangitikei) and Mr E. Elliot (Hawke's Bay) supported the remit. Opposition Expressed The remit was opposed by Mr W. G-. Miller (Auckland), who said that the Hawke Cup games should be reorganised. A lot was being done for the country players in Auckland. Mr C. Well (Wellington) also opposed the remit, saying that the selection of the Wellington Plunket Shield team was made irrespective of the domicile of the players. Mr I. B Cromb (West Coast) said it might be possible for the winners of the reorganised Hawke Cup competition to be matched against the winners of the Plunket Shield. He urged that players from the minor associations should bt given more chance to show their worth. Support for the remit came from Mr L. F Casey (South Auckland), who said that a young Hawke's Bay fast bowler was not given a fair trial. Had he been included in the touring team the loss might have been less than £SOO. "Oh £SOO is it?" said Mr A. T. Donnelly, chairman of the Management Committee of the New Zealand Council, amid laughter Newspaper Campaigns Mr W Barratt (Marlborough) supported Mr Ongley's remarks. He spoke of the inclusion in the New Zealand team of M. P. Donnelly and N Gallichan, who owed their places to newspaper campaigns. "Would vou like u leave the selection of the New Zealand team to the press? " asked Mr Quirk. "Well, they seem to be doing it now." Mr Barratt plied. This is almost a hardy annual." said Mr E. R. Caygill. He thought the proposal would break up the present home-and-away fixtures. Mr Donnelly said he was doubtful it the inclusion of a fifth Plunket Shield team would provide a satisfactory solution Referring to the present touring team. Mr Donnelly -aid that the council would be very short of funds for some time as a result of the loss on the tour. "In fact. I think that the guarantors of the tour will have to be asked to pay up some of their guarantee to allow the council tu carry on." he continued. Selection finance' and co-ordination were among the problems which would have to be solved.

Mr W. L. King (Canterbury) said his province did not favour the idea. The remit was put after Mr QngJey had replied, being lost by 18 votes to 9. Hastening Batsmen A further remit Oin Manawatu with the idea of hastening the game was carried in an amended form. It,concerned the time taken by batsmen to reach the crease after the dismissal of the previous batsman. It finally read: "That an incoming batsman not at the crease withL two minutes of the fall of the last wicket shall without an appeal forfeit his wicket, unless both umpires shall otherwise direct." A request for selectors from the minor associations, one to represent each island, on future New Zealand selection committees, was contained in a remit from the Wairarapa Cricket Asssociation. There was only a short discussion on the remit, and it was then lost without any votes being recorded in its favour. In the absence of a delegate from Wararapa, the remit was moved by Mr A. M. Ongley (Manawatu). He maintained that any selector who was watching the games played by any major association could not devote the time to see minor association players in action. Some, he said, had not bothered to watch minor association games when they had the chance. Mr W. G. Milller (Auckland) said that his province was definitely not in favour of the remit. The New Zealand Council, he was sure, would know about any minor association player in good form. " Very Unsatisfactory " "We had four selectors last year, and the Management Committee as a result would be very disinclined to have four again, let alone another two. Our experience of four men picking the New Zealand team to tour England was very unsatisfactory, and with two more it would be so cumbersome that it would not work at all. The suggestion is not feasible," said Mr A. T. Donnelly, chairman of the Management Committee. Eight-ball Over It was decided to adopt the eightball over for all matches. The decisions will require to be confirmed formally at the annual meeting of the New Zealand Cricket Council to-morrow night.