CRICKET.

Otago Witness, Issue 3111, 29 October 1913, Page 53

CRICKET.

NEW ZEALAND TEAM IN AUSTRALIA. December 12, 13. —v. Northern District No. 1, at Maitland. . December 16, 17. —v. Northern District No. 2, at Glen Innes. December 19, 20, 22.—v. Queensland, at Brisbane. December 26, 27, 29. —v. New South Wales, at Sydney. December 31, January 1. —v. Southern Districts No. 1, at Goulburn. January 3 and 5. —v. Albury and Border, at Albury. January 8,9, 12.—v. Victoria, at Melbourne. January 16, 17, 19.—v. South Australia, at Adelaide. , ~ , January 21, 22.—v. Melbourne C.C., at Melbourne.

NOTES BY LONG SLIP. A double honour has been conferred upon Jim Baker by the Albion Club and by the members of the Senior Eleven. At the annual meeting Baker was elected captain of the club, and on Saturday the Senior Eleven appointed him their loader for the season. As club captain and captain of the First Eleven Jim Baker bag splendid rcsponsibili ties, which he is certain to realise. The seats which have been erected on the North Ground between the Albion and Grange pavilions wore greatly appreciated Jay the cricket-loving public on # Saturday. On the terrace under the trees is an moaT place to watch the games from. If the donor of the seats could have hoard all the expressions of appreciation he would bo more than repaid tor h;s generosity. A Christchurch cricketer writing to an Otago enthusiast says we are all wondering up here at the non-inclusion of Hayes. Bennett, of course, can be relied upon to play the batsman in, but if he gets any sort of a bowling average ho will surprise me. Bvd Orchard’s inclusion as manager was unnecessary, as Boxshall, Hemus, or Reese could have acted, and allowed another player,- to be taken. The inclusion of Collins (of Wellington) is surprising, as is that also'of Tattcrsall. Hayes should have been included, and the general opinion is that the following should have been the team: Reese, Boxshall. Patrick, Sandman, Hayes. Hickmott, Condliffe, Torrance, Hemus, Sneddon, Taylor, Robinson, Bonnet. ExAustralian players should have been left out altogether. Personally I would dispense with either Robinson or Bennett and put in another batsman The team has not got a bowler of the same class as Fishei- or Downes or Upharn of the -last team, and they only won one match (Northern Tasmania in a mid-week match) thanks to Jun Baker. The talk about the educational value was only for the benefit of the other associations. It is alleged that a veteran member of the New Zealand ‘team for Australia was vaccinated six weeks ago There may be nothing in that fact, but it has occasioned some comment. There is being exhibited a deal of selfsatisfaction and self-gratification over the New Zealand team by certain Christchurch writers who may not be altogether disinterested. One such sees nothing wrong with the team whatever. Everything in the garden is just lovely. The more the Christchurch writer thinks of the team the better he likes it. Viewing the selection from the lino of thought of the Selection Committee, the Christchurch writer has taken a safe load, but a little less eulogy and some sound criticism on the education side would have been more convincing, particularly as it was this phase of the tour which the Christchurch promoters stressed in order to get the various associations to promise the guarantees necessary before the tour could eventuate. Having obtained the co-operation of the associations, Jhc Selection Committee did not hesitate to discard the educational idea and chose instead the strongest team available. The strongest team, and not the best team for New Zealand cricket generally,, appears in the minds of those who were instrumental in forcing the bands of the associations to be the most important consideration in connection with the team chosen for Australia. A little light thrown on the principle of how the New Zealand team was selected would make interesting reading and afford food for reflection. Instead of eulogising the Selection Committee it is to be taken to ask fo- the principles of its selection and the results: A selector’s lot is not always a happy one, especially when lie has a critical friend who has the temerity te bo candid (says “The Native”). The candid friend—most cricketers will recognise him by Ids outspokenness—was talking to Dan Reese _ at Hagley Park on Saturday, and, seeing Chattel Hayes and Charley Boxshall in the distance, he called them over. “ Mr Hayes, allow me to introduce you to Mr Reese. Mr Reese, Mr Hayes is the unluckicst cricketer in New Zealand not to get into the team for Australia.” Then, turning to Boxshall, he said : “ Mr Reese, allow mo to introduce you to Mr Boxshall. Mr Boxsliall is the luckiest cricketer in New Zealand to got into the team.” The candid friend spent 10 mirutos in bringing argument to bear on his contention. On the eve of the departure of a New Zealand team for Australia, after a lapse of 14 years, the .oliowing concerning New Zealand cricket, from the viewpoint of the English publication Cricket is interesting:— “ Admittedly New Zealand cricket is scarcely on the same plane with English, Australian, or South African. But, given equal conditions, a representative New Zealand team would probably prove itself stronger than n representative team of any of the other cricket communities. New Zealand v. United States, New Zealand v. All India, Now Zealand v. Canada, New Zealand v. the West Indies. New Zealand v. the Argentine —if any of these imaginary matches were to be played I should back the Maorilandors every time. Barton King might astonish them, J. S. Warden or E. P. Meherhomji take a century against them, 'George Challenor, P. H. Tarilton, or H. G. Garnett do likewise; but I think Dan Reese and his men would pull through. “A representative New Zealand team at the present date _ would have Reese as captain beyond doubt. The others likeliest on recent form would be L. G. Hemus and C. Olliff, of Auckland; J. 11. Bennett. R. - ’ . ■- ’ ’ ■ ! ■ . / r • ,*■ " >-■ 11-.I 1 -. ■ .

G. Hickmott, H, B. Luek, apd D. SiUidraa.il, of Canterbury; T. M'Fsrlane, of Otago; and C. Robinson, of Wellington. The lastnamed province has many good cricketers; but most of them failed to show their true form last season. J. P. Blacklock F. A. Midlane. W. S. Brice, C. G. Wilson, T. R. Soutnall, E. M. Beeoliey ; and the Rev. E. O. Blaires (now, however, in Taranaki, I believe) are among her players who would have to be considered. Then there are E. V. Sale, W. Brook-Smith, N. 0. Snedden, F. Taylor, and others in Auckland, W. R. Patrick, W. Hayes, and A. Sims (if he is not still over here) in. Canterbury, H. G. Siedeberg, C. C. Hopkins (like Wilson, an Australian), B. J. TucKwell (another Australian), and more In Otago; and Hawke’s Bay and the minor associations no doubt possess players worth considering, though information concerning them is scanty. ’ The report presented at the annual meeting of the New Zealand Cricket Council 'stated that the necessary financial support having been arranged, it had been decided that the New Zealand team would leave Wellington on December 5 for Australia. Matches had- been arranged with the four leading States in Australia, with several minor associations, and the ' Melbourne Cricket Club. The committee had been unable to accept the terms of the New South Wales Association regarding the proposal to send a New South Wales team to New Zealand. Arrangements had been made for a first-class team from Australia to visit. New Zealand next season, on the basis of 60 per cent, of the gross takings per match against the four larger centres, without any guarantee, and 60 per cent, of the gross, with, a minimum of £SO per match against other associations. The balance sheet showed that -feceipte, including a credit balance of £97 Is 5d from the previous year, had been £lB9- 18s 3d, and the expenditure £4B 2s Id, leaving a credit balance of £l4l 16s 2d’. The assets were £257 6s lOd. and the liabilities nil. The report and balance sheet were adopted. The following officers were elected:—Patron, his Excellency the Governor, Lord Liverpool; president, Mr Heatheote Williams; hon.. . secretary. Mr F. C. Raphael; hon. treasurer, Mr J. H. Williams; Management Committee—Messrs G. F. Franc’s, 3. Orchard, E. J. Austin, J. F. Peake, and A. T. Donnelly; auditor, Mr F. H. Labatt. At. the annual meeting of the New Zea» . land Cricket Council last week a long discussion arose out of the eans'denition of * the annual report and the forthcoming tour of the New Zealand team in Australia. Mr D. Reese said, ho regretted that a match against South Melbourne was not included in the itinerary of the Now Zealand ream. - The South Melbourne team had come ever to New Zealand last year, and lie felt that something should have boor, done in the direction of arranging a match with them. He noticed that Scuth Melbourne had guaranteed £25 towards the expenses . of the tour. Mr Wilson (Wellington! agreed that a match should have been arranged with South Melbourne. They had acted in a very sportsmanlike manner *in coming over to New Zealand on a tour must have enta'lcd an enormous amount of work. The Wellington Association knew nothing about the proposed tour of the team dn . Australia until they saw the Sjxhiey papers, and they were absolutely jn ti* dark when asked for-a guarantee of £75. Another question he wished to ra;sQi was that of visits of Australian team’s to New Zealand. He thought that teams from Australia might visit Now Zealand for four years, and that in the fifth year a Near Zen land team should bo sent to Australia. The question of matches with Tasmania might also be considered. Mr-Wc-ston sa <1 that in regard to the question of arranging a programme with Australia, for several years ahead, there had been in the past great difficulty in getting matches with Australian teams, even for the current season. Personally, he thought that. New Zealand cricket was not sufficiently attractive to Australian associations, and unless matters improved 9 he could not sec how thev could arrange -- matches for a long time ahead. First and foremost (writes “ToueMiue”!, I am decidedly of the-opinion that O. Boxshall. the Canterbury wicket-keeper, ha.? no earthly right to bo in the team, mainly for the reason that he is a long way removed from the top-notch “keeper” these days fhro’io-h increasing wws and too much enbonpoint. I am told that on the fast wickets of Australia the ball will rise much higher than it, does in New Zealand. It will need to if Boxshall is to give even a decent display behind the sticks. T do not wish to dive into history, but in the only other New Zealand team that toured Australia Boxshall was a passenger after the first match, owing to an iniury to his hands, and it seems to me that he will bo a passenger on this occasion for another reason. ‘ln my f opinion T. Condliffo (Otago), a younger man whom a trip like this must improve, should have been selected before Boxshall. “Tommy” learnt his cricket at the Mount Cook School, and early showed his ability as a wicket-kccncr. so much so_ that he gained his school cap in this position, and in one match in particular gave an exhibition that presaged for_him a good career. In course of time bo worked his way up to senior status, and had just gained the wicket-keeper’s position in the Wellington representative team, as a member of the Central Club, when he was transferred to Dunedin. In the Scotch city lie has shown form good enough to keep him in the Otago representative team, and this higher honour of being a New Zealand representative should have been paid him. The story : s going the rounds In Dunedin Selection C’ern-mtee r.f the New Zealand team for Australia deliberated for two hours on the selection of Hie wicketkeepers. Boxshall is alleged to have been . - voted out on the score of "trr and CondHfTe was selected as first wicketkeeper. Then in the subsequent del’bevatiori* Ho v‘-ha 11 was reinstated as a candidate, and was finally f A i-+o tb"_ tc-un " ’ r “■ ;y -'-etko-per. Tattorsall second, and Condliffe, who ifl -11. .rrwl t.n V c been o-‘ ;,<* first wicketkeeper, was dropped! Comment : s unnecessary if this story is correct. The Albion Club has bright prospects before it this season. / A deal of enthusiasm has been displayed in practice games, wt.lrb have been welt attended. ar-1 the club expects to place good elevens in tho various grades. The First and Second Elevens will be particularly •-ood. The only player lost to tho club since last season ; s Gale, who has gone the country, while M’Neill. late of Carisbrook W. Johnston, the ex-Grange player, and W. Strang are at the service of Albion this season. A* the annual meet-T" of the New Zealand Cricket Council on Thursday night, Mp Brittain read a motion from the Otago Association to the effect that, as th<r manager Of the New Zealand team was. a. player well . able to take part in matches ahould <m». ■ ■ ■ -■ v •’ • w-crh-*:. . y, ' ”, iv .v,” ;

Bion arise, it was inadvisable to send a fourteenth man. He moved —“ That a fourteenth man should not bo sent.’’ "The u €C ' retary said that the associations had been asked if thov would guarantee a further £ls each towards the cost of a fourteenth nian, and if so, the council would contribute £ls—Mr Donnelly said that the duties of manager would prevent Mr Orchard from taking the field. —Mr G. F. Francis said that he was opposed to the motion, for the -financial success of the tour would depend on the success of the team in the firs matches, and it was quite necessary that a fourteenth man should be sent, and the Selection Committee’s recommendation should be earned out.-Mr Orchard endorsed Mr Donnelly’s remarks, stating that without a fourteenth man to strengthen the bowling the team would take a great risk. —Mr Labatt suggested that, even if one association did not guarantee «tra *ls, the delegates to the council amount themselves—Mr T. M•/ Reese said that a fourteenth man was necessary, because the team / now included a Junior ■wicketkeeper who was selected only as a wicketkeeper—The motion was lost.