School and Playground

Star (Christchurch), Issue 17014, 12 April 1923, Page 3

School and Playground

m Note* by

" Demos.”

CRICKET,. Pv E PRESENT ATI VE AYER AGES. The batting and fowling average- of tbo. Boys' Association representatives, both under eighteen and under sixteen, appear below, and there can he no doubt that some of the players, particularly Holmes in the hatting- and Lilburne. and Athiieid in the bowling, have done very well indeed. On the whole the batting averages rue higher than those recorded last season. but the bowling does not appear to have been quite as good. Last: year, with both fifth and sixth grades under sixteen, there was only one representative team, and Lisle proved the most consistent scorer, having an average of 28.30 scored in eleven innings. Holmes, who heads the list this year, hae easily surpassed (liis averaging 43.39 in nine innings. Desmond. who took the bowling honours last year, captured thirty-two wickets with an average of 5.15 runs per Wicket. whilst Gordon, second on the list, had an average of 6.17. Of the under eighteen batsmen Holmes wa easily the most successful. He twice topped the century, scoring on one occasion 111 and on another the exact hundred. On two other occasions he secured top score for the association in representative games. Fleming, who is second on the list, owes iris position mainly to a 70 not out, but all his other scores, save two, have reached double figures. Lisle, a 1 r hough neither his aggregate nor his average is as good as those recorded by him last season, has done well and lias proved himself still a very conistent. batsman. Last year his aggregate was ‘283 and his average 28.30. However as he averaged 21.38 in eight innings without a not out, his highest score being 30, his performance can be safely said to be the most consistent, recorded this year. Previous to the Wellington game. Calder had an average of 28.75. but after that match he had fallen to bis final figures of 19.67. Grafton did well for 18.40, whilst Lilburne pulled himself up in the later games. (Johns, although fairly far down the list, lias improved his last year’s figures a great deal. Last season his aggregate for twelve innings (three not outs) was 78 and his average 8.67, whilst I this season in six innings he totalled 76 ! and averaged 12.67. The under eighteen j batting averages are as follow:

right, averaging 16.09. Lisle also was less successful, not succeeding in taking a wicket for 20 runs, whilst, las*, year lie, took four for 55. averaging 13.75. The under eighteen bowling list follows:

Kiddey three for 35 and Sweeney five for 56 (both under sixteen players) took wickets for the senior representative team. Lisle also bowled in twej representative games, against Malvern and North Canterbury. taking no wickets for 20 runs. The under sixteen representatives whose batting averages appear below did not play as many games' this year as they did last season, hut their performances wore considerably better as far as batting goe. It is indeed pleasing to see that only two of the players failed to average double figures, and that those two were both above an average of eight. Last season out of twenty-one in all who played for the representatives no less than twelve averaged below eight runs, and it would appear that the hatting at. least has improved this season. Marshall, who heads the list, was without doubt the most finished batsman of the team. His 29 not out against Wellington was a verifine performance. His average last, season in representative games was 6.00. Kiddey. who is second, is rather lucky to lie so high up and owes his place to the 80 not out he scored when playing for the under eighteen team. England only batted in one innings and then gained the not out with 21 runs to his cvedit. Dawson gets above the twenty mark, whilst Sweeney, Watson and Sim., monris are very close upon his track. Athfield, perhaps, deserved to be a. little higher up- He batted very solidly for an average of 14.67. which can he considered highly (satisfactory as he was allotted the difficult task of "opening” in every game played by the representatives. Athfield also played for the under eighteen team against North Canterbury in ('hristchurcb. The averages are as follow: —

The following also played in representative games but did not bat in at least six innings:—Westwood, 4,0, 25. 9.25: Waine, 4,0, 32, 14.75; Lattimore. 3, 0. 34. 17.67; Wilson. 2,0, 19, 9.50; Mahoney, 2, 0, 14, 7.50; Jamieson 2,0, 5, 3.00. Kiddey and Athfield each batted for the senior representatives but their totals have been reckoned in the under sixteen , averages. As stated above the bowling figures in the under eighteen grade were not quite as good as those recorded last season, hut this no doubt was in some measure due to the highei- standard of batting shown by the teams the representatives played. Lilburne, who took twenty-six wickets at an average cost of 6.11 runs, was easily the most successful bowler. Some of his performances, particularly against North Canterbury, at. Rangiora, when he took eleven wickets for ten runs, were exceedingly creditable. Calder, alI though below Grafton, in tlie averages. | made on the whole a better showing. | Gohns seems to have gone off. Last seai son he took nineteen wickets for 6.36 runs ! each, whilst this season he only captured

j The under sixteen bowling figures arc ’ ' nowhere near so satisfactory as those registered last year, for then no loss i than six bowlers had better figures than the leading man this year. Athfield’s : bowling performance of taking nineteen wickets for 7.73 rune each—when one realises that he bore the brunt of the . bowling in most of the games—is quite , satisfactory. England six wickets, each , costing 9.33 runs, and Simznonds five wickets. averaging 12.20, also did fairly well. The others do not call for comment. The averages are as follow:

Murray none for 13 bowled against Wellington, whilst Spicer none tor 23 bowled in three- games

Not Highest AverTn’its. outs, score. age. Holmes ... 9 1 111 43.39 Fleming • • * • 2 2 ,i^ Lisle . . . H — 30 Jl.JH Cakier ... 7 1 60 19.67 Grafton . • • 1 S 37 18.40 e . % -» 41 is.oo Tomlinson . - » — 1J.90 Moore I : : s * "21 784 * Not out. ... . K ..., ....

Runs ;>ei Wickets. wicket. Iiilbwrne . . - 26 6.31 Grafton ... 7 6.80 Caider .... 20 9.40 Mahoney . . . 2 10.50 Jjattimore . . 2 ' 15.00 Gohr>« . . .S' 16.09 Tomlinson . . 3 24.33

Not Highest Aver. Marshall . °1 ~£)° 32/)0 HI : 1 1 -21 *-21.00 3 — 38 20.67 t ] *25 10.67 Simuiomls •5 — 39 10.34 Athficlil -1 1 *25 1-1.67 : Williams - 3 1 *10 12.00 2 — 14 8.50 4 1 *12 8.34

Runs per Wickets, wicket. At.hfield • • • 19 7.73 ISngland ... 6 9.33 Sim mo lids . . . 32.20 Kiridey • * Kerr .... 1 47.00