“SKIMMING THE CREAM”

Taranaki Daily News, 16 January 1931, Page 9

“SKIMMING THE CREAM”

PLAYERS WHO STAY AT HOME CRICKETERS VOICE COMPLAINT (POSSIBLE PENALTY IN FUTURE ‘Some hard words were said at a meeting of the Taranaki Cricket .Association at-New Plymouth last night about players who for presumably selfish reasons consistently decline to travel on representative tours when eelected to do so, yet are always “on deck” when a representative match against some distinguished team is being played “at home.” A resolution was passed empowering the association if it thougnt fit to exclude such players from home matches. • “This has always been a sore point with me, and I think justifiably so,” said Mr. H. D. Hughes. “Time after time in the past we have had cases of good players simply skimming the cream off the season’s programme. Quite a number of. them can never be persuaded to make the big sacrifice of the time and money necessary in travelling out of the province to a representative match, for a cricketer always has to pay his own expenses, and yet they are always ready to turn out when an overseas team comes along. On the other hand, you have the enthusiasts who carry the flag of the province when the team goes on tour, and even though they might do well they are dropped in favour of better-known players when it comes to the next match at home.”

ELIGIBILITY FOR HOME MATCHES.

Mr. Hughes’ remarks were endorsed by Mr. Bottrili, who moved: “That this association will consider the eligibility of players for home matches who consistently refuse to travel with representative teams.”

Mr. V. Duff opposed the motion on the grounds that it was not putting cricket in its proper place and might easily do an injustice to some player or players. Who was to say whether or not any particular player was justified or not in declining to travel’ And when it came to an overseas match in the home town the public, who paid for admission to the match, had every right to see in action the best team the province could put in the field. He thought that whether a team was travelling abroad or playing at home, the selectors should select the best eleven available.

Mr. Bottrill said there was no question that feeling amongst a certain section of the cricketers was strong on the matter. The resolution did not create the danger of injustice suggested •by Mr. Duff, for in the first place there was no onus on the selectors to leave out any ■ players—that onus was on the association—and in the second place there was nothing binding in the motion. The association would judge the cases on, their merits. It knew the individual players quite well and was not at all likely to take action unless it was thoroughly satisfied players were acting from purely selfish motives in declining to go on tour. There was unquestionably considerable bitterness amongst cricketers over the present' state of. affairs. RECENT EXAMPLES. Mr. T. H. Bates referred to the recent attempts by Taranaki to wrest the Hawke Cup from Manawatu and Waikato respectively, on each of which occasion a comparatively weak team had tp be taken on tour through players declining to travel. “Of course,” he said, “there are cases of genuine hardship, when players are justified in, staying at home.” . . Mr. Bottrill; The association knows the circumstances of the players fairly well. Mr. Duff: Suppose, .four of the recognised outstanding players in the province do not go on tour; are you going to leave them out of the team when an overseas team, comes • along to play in the home, town? The public would not stand for that. Mr. Bottrill; If they declined to travel for selfish reasons, then my opinion emphatically is that they should be left but. Mr. Hughes: Hear, hear! Mr. C. Massey: They are not sports if they do that, and deserve to be left out. Mr. C. E. Betts said he was in sympathy with the motion, and thought it a good one, though in the case bf the last match against Waikato the necessity to travel on Christmas day did not appeal to him. Everyone liked to be home on Christmas Day, and possibly that affected some of the’ players originally selected. However, when players were deliberately dodging outside matches for the sake of their pockets he thought they ought to be penalised by omission from home matches. Mr. Duff having left the meeting when the motion, was put, it was carried without dissent.