TIMARU B. V. SOUTH END.

Timaru Herald, Volume XIIIC, Issue 14142, 28 February 1910, Page 2

TIMARU B. V. SOUTH END.

To the Editor of the "Timaru Herald." Sir,—l beg-to take, exception to the report as furnished by tho Timaru B in your issue;pf this morning. In tho first place it ;is ; a-most unusual thing for a defeated' team to supply, a report, to the papers; unless Yequested to do so by the winning team; and iu the second .. place, to refer to the wicket as "a mud hole"' after being badly defeated, is "not cricket." Is it feasible for the South End to put up the respectable total of 139 on a wicket that could, be described as a mnd-hole? The writer of your report is used to.flaying on "decent wickets.'' "Decent wickets" are net always productive of big scores. Waimate, on their own wicket, made 44 runs, on Park 40; Temuka, on their own wicket 88, Park "wicket 63: Timaru A, own wicket 77, Park wicket 57 and 68; Timaru B, own wicket 152, South End 119. And although beaten by the Timaru B, the members of my team did not explain, the defeat by referring *:o the wicket as a "mnd-hole." Take the Timaru C. v. Temuka match last Thursday, played on a "decent wicket," •ad only producing 84 and 57 runs. Timaru B's two -innings, 46 and 36, against South End 138, has a more obvious explanation than "mnd-hole" wicket.—l am, etc., A. C. MANLY, Captain S.E.C.C> Timaru, Feb. 25th.