CRICKET

Southland Times, Issue 21832, 8 October 1932, Page 16

CRICKET

(By

“Onlooker.”)

THE "RESHUFFLE” EIGHT SENIOR TEAMS. NOT A POPULAR MOVE. Whatever thought members of the Southland Cricket Association’s Management Committee gave to the allimportant question of grading, or regrading, the various club entries this season has been offset by the adverse reception their deliberations have met at the hands of the ones who count, the players themselves. It is no secret that since the concluding stages of last season, in fact during the middle stages, the obvious question of a reshuffle, and possible “dumping,” of senior teams, was the uppermost thought in the minds of members and prospective members of the S.C.A, They gave it plenty of thought all right, and they are entitled to credit for the interest they displayed in Southland cricket by giving it plenty of thought, but beyond that, one can only criticize their decision as a bad mistake calculated to do more harm than good among the younger players of the city. It has been argued, and probably proved as far as possible, that there are not 66 senior players in Invercargill. Yet the association’s latest decision asks us, in effect, to believe that 22 more have sprung up since last season, and, in keeping with the numbers available, two more teams than last season are admitted to the senior competition. The splitting of the competition into two sections has no bearing on the grading or the rating of the players concerned in the teams. They, all eight teams, will take the field next Saturday as part and parcel of the first grade competition and cannot be regarded as anything else. It has been claimed that the B section teams are really second graders under another name and the logical stepping stone from junior to senior ranks. One has only to scan the names of the players in three of the B teams to realize what utter nonsense this is. There are 15 present and past representative players in their number and we are asked to believe that these players are second graders or juniors! It would be anything but a difficult matter to go on and outline the absurdity of making the senior competition an eight-team one this season. There are not 88 senior players in Invercargill, and the standard, low as it is, can only be further lowered by persevering with eight teams. Indeed, instead of raising junior cricket to a “senior” standard, if one may be permitted to use the term, the association is really lowering senior cricket to a junior standard. Had the Management Committee called the sections junior A and junior B they would have been nearer the mark.

In deciding to make an eight-team competition, divided into two sections, the association already created enough damage, but in their classification of the teams, ostensibly to have the stronger teams playing in the A section, they acted almost ruinously. Of what use were the classification lists of players to the association? According to the ultimate shuffle they were useless, and might not have been submitted to members at all. Comparisons are odious at all times and circumstances alter cases, but nothing will convince the writer as well as most senior players that the young High School team should have had preference over Union in the A section.. It is here that the association is looking for trouble, and their actions might have the effect of producing a setback to several young cricketers whose careers are worth nursing. It is only once in a while that a secondary school will have such an array of outstanding talent as the High School team fielded last season, but once the nucleus, no, the whole backbone, of the side is removed, it is courting not only failure, but disaster to ask this team to carry on in senior cricket. Ken Uttley, Pickard, Scandrett, Baillie and Rodger were a quintet who could ill be spared from the School team, and as there has been only one replacement of note (Allan) it is not hard to see that the younger boys of the team are going to be asked to do too much. Frankly, I believe the High School team, as at present constituted, masters included, is not up to the standard set by the junior A section of last year and nothing but harm can result from the pitting of these boys against mature and experienced players. During the last two seasons there was no doubt whatever that they made the grade, but they cannot hope to this season. I hope I am very much wrong in my calculations, and hope that the boys will do well, but I fear they are not strong enough and must suffer. Union’s position is unique for such a strong and old-established club. Their members are to be commiserated with in their “bereavement” and the hope is expressed that a full round will not be required to have them reinstated to “senior” ranks. The association has blundered badly. And after all the thought given the question! From an outsider’s viewpoint their action savours too much of “sopping” one or other clubs. It is time merit was rewarded with merit but until a firm stand is taken this state of affairs is not likely to exist. RULES OF CRICKET SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS. (Contributed by “Senex.”) As there have been amendments to the rules of Rugby suggested locally, I may be excused for hinting at improvements in the laws of ericket. By the final choice of Bowes, the English selectors probably have added to Jardine’s team the worst menace, to Australian batsmen, for he is likely to prove dangerous in more than one sense. The possibility of a bowler of the build of George Purdue hurling on Australian wickets high-delivery shortpitched bumpers is rather alarming, and reminds me of a time when I suggested that umpires should have the right to disallow bowling which they think unduly dangerous to a batsman’s person. I sympathize with Hobbs in his objections to the Yorkshireman’s deliveries, but he should not have acted as umpire in his own case. It will be interesting to see what “J.8.H.,” as journalist, will have to say if Bowes uses similar deliveries against the Australians. It is disconcerting for batsmen to face bowling that is a menace to their heads as much as their wickets. If such bowling is allowable, Australia may use one or two of their bowlers who can do likewise. I think also that there is room for improvement of the replacement rule. As an illustration I adduce the Brisbane Test match so disastrous to the Australian team, in which Gregory and Kelleway broke down so badly that their first-class careers were ended. So far as I remember, R. K. Oxenham and Cecil Thompson acted as substitutes in the field. One was a capable all-rounder, and the other a brilliant batsman; but the rules forbade them either to bowl or bat. Australia was then reduced to two bowlers and nine

batsmen. If full use of the substitutes had been allowed, the defeat might not have been so heavy. If the Englishmen were unfortunate enough to lose completely the services of two of their best all-rounders in a Test match, it would be poor satisfaction to Australia to win. In any case, I think the umpires should have authority to decide to what extent replacement should be allowed. BIG CRICKET COMING TOUR OF M.C.C. TEAM. FIRST MATCH THIS MONTH. Exceptionally keen interest is being taken by all grades of cricketers in the coming tests, Australia v. England. The M.C.C. team is travelling to Australia by the Orontes, which is due at Colombo to-day. A special representative of the Australian Press Association reported from Gibraltar that up to that stage of the voyage the English cricketers had treated the voyage as a pure holiday after their overdose of cricket. All, however, have been playing vigorous deck games, in which the Australian Davis Cup team also participated. The Australian Press Association representative added: “Brown and Hammond are gluttons for swimming.” It is expected that the team will reach Fremantle on October 18. Three days later the first match at Perth will be commenced. This will be against a West Australian side, and it will be followed with a match against a combined team, also at Perth, commencing on October 27. The combined team is to include some leading players from other States, and the West Australian selectors are hoping that Bradman, Woodfull, and Grimmett will be available for the combined team. Grimmett’s “Mystery” Ball. After the matches at Perth, the M.C.C. team will proceed to Adelaide, and there, in the match with the South Australians, the tourists will be able to decide for themselves whether there is any truth in the rumour that Clarrie Grimmett, formerly of New Zealand, has a “mystery” ball, unless the wily bowler keeps something in reserve for the Tests. The south Australians have been prastising for some two. or three weeks in preparation for this match. A few months ago it was announced that Grimmett had discovered a “mystery” ball, which cut ever so many capers before it hit the wicket. As a result of investigations, it was found that there was nothing in the report. Since then, according to an Australian paper, Grimmett has been puzzling his brains to find a real mystery ball. ‘Tve got it!” he exclaimed the other day. - “And how do you work this one?” he was asked. “Well, I set my field with the silly point very close to the pitch and about four or five yards from the batsman, he answered. “Then I throw the ball fairly high in the air (to encourage the batsman to come out), at the same time dropping it short. The batsman leaves the crease to meet the ball—but the ball, instead of going on to the batsman, breakes at right angles into silly point’s hands, and this fieldsman promptly throws the batsman out”