Canterbury Needs Strong Team For Plunket Shield Match Against Auckland Xmas Day.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 18012, 24 November 1926, Page 9

Canterbury Needs Strong Team For Plunket Shield Match Against Auckland Xmas Day.

TWENTY-FIVE PLAYERS ARE SHOWING FORM THAT ENTITLES THEM TO CONSIDERATION BY SELECTORS. (Written for the “Star"). CANTERBURY’S first Plunket Shield fixture this year is to start on Christmas I>av. iu«t four weeks from next Saturday. It is hisrh time that the selectors of the Canterbury Eleven picked a number of nlavers for special practice, with a view to inclusion in the team. The frame on Christmas Day is aerainst Auckland, and already the selectors of the Auckland team have chosen a number of men for special practice. The Auckland team is likely to be a strong one, and Canterbury cannot afford to put other than the very best side available into the field. Then, at the New Year, Canterbury is to meet Wellington, and tlie present Shield holders expect to have a particularly strong side. In fact, judging by some of the published remarks of Wellington critics, the province has a side just about good enough to represent New Zealand. This perhaps is an exaggeration, hut there is no doubt about the cricketing strength of Wellington. Canterbury has to depend almost entirely upon Christchurch players for her eleven. There are not many first-class players in the province outside of Christchurch, or, if there are. the annual Town v. Country match has not revealed them. For Plunket Shield games Wellington can draw on such large centres of population as Wanganui and Napier. C. Dempster, who is now residing in Wanganui, R. de R. Worker, late of Otago, who is now in Napier, and T. C. Lowry, of Hawke's Bay, are all eligible to play for Wellington, and they are three players of the very first rank, who have all represented New Zealand.

These facts are mentioned to indicate the undoubted strength of Wellington, but, if the best Canterbury team 1 is selected, there is no reason why it. should not fully extend the Wellingtonians. Last season Wellington de- j feated Canterbury by an innings and 332 runs. In that match Can tor bury were unfortunate in having to bat on a very bad wicket, but the desire to avenge this overwhelming defeat should prove a strong incentive to the. Canterbury eleven this season. SELECTORS’ DIFFICULT TASK. It. is not going to be a very easy task to pick the Canterbury team this season. In some, seasons in tne past the work of the selectors was rendered comparatively * easy by the fact that there were not many players with strong claims for a place in the team. This year there are a large number of players whose claims deserve serious consideration. This, of course, is a good sign, but it is not going to simplify the task of the selectors, and for that reason no time should be lost in getting on with the preliminary work of sorting the players out. A study of performances this season (and 411 some cAses also bearing in mind past performances) shows that there are at least 25 players who are entitled to consideration when the Canterbury eleven is being selected. There are, of course, some players who are sure of a place, and it looks as if the competition for the remaining places is going to be very keen indeed. The 25 players are:— St. Albans—F. Woods, C. G. Crawford, D v Sandman, R. Norrie and L. R. Brunton. Riecarton—A. Cox, G. W. Haines, W. P. Guiney, C. T. Rix and C. S. Gibbs. Sydenham—J. Robertson, C. Oliver, W. R. Patrick, and W. Cunningham. Old Boys—G. Mortlock, J. Jacobs, I. B. Cromb, and J. T. Burrows. Old Collegians—l. M. Hamilton. Linwood—T. Kennedy, R. Read and M. Boon. West Christchurch—J. L. Findlay. East Christchurch—G. R. Gregory and J. M’Ewin. The Canterbury team last season consisted of E. A. Gasson, R. O. Talbot, M. L. Page. G. R. Gregor)’, A. Cox, F. Woods, L. R. Brunton, J. M’Ewin, I). Sandman. R. Read, J. L. Findlay, with O. Mortlock twelfth man. Gassv£r"is not playing senior cricket now. Just at present Talbot is back in Christchurch, but. not to reside permanently here, and it is doubtful whether he would be available for the team. It is presumed that Page, who lives in the country, will again be available for selection. In addition to the members of last year's team there are Patrick, Cunningham, Crawford and Oliver who were away with the New Zealand team in Australia when Canterbury played her Plunket Shield g mes last season.

that once he gets set he is a very hard man to dig out. Last season he made 100 for St Albans and one or two other good scores, but in other innings he failed. One would like to see him ge>t a chance- to show what he can do in bigger cricket, but it is doubtful whether the opportunity will come his way this year. A PROMISING BOWLER. "The claims of Burrows for inclusion in the team rest on his bowling performances for Old Boys this season. To date this season he has taken sixteen wickets for 181 runs, so that he has the excellent average of 11.3. Burrows is ' a good bowler. He keeps a good length and can bowl all afternoon without showing any signs of tiring. It has been said that Canterbury lacks good bowlers. This is true if by “ good ” “ first class ” is meant. Cunningham is the only bowler in Canterbury who is in the first flight of trundlers in the Dominion, but there are a number of aspirants for the other places as bowlers in the Canterbury side. There are those two tried men. Read and Sandman, who have done yeoman •service for their province in the past, and, as far as club cricket is concerned, they both seem to be about as good as ever they were. On a wicket that suits him. Sandman is one of the most dangerous men in the senior competition to-day. Last Saturday, against West Christchurch, he took six wickets /or 60 runs, and in the Plunket Shield games last season he finished up with the best average of any Canterbury bowler, an average of 19.91 (twelve wickets for 239 runs). His best performance for Canterbury last season was in the second innings of Auckland, when he took seven wickets for 99 runs. Read has been bowling well for Linwood this year and to date has taken twenty-one wickets for 238 runs, an average of 11.33. For Canterbury last year Read took eleven wickets for 411 runs, an average of 37.36. CLAIMS OF YOUNGER PLAYERS. However, although Read and Sandman are both still good bowlers, it would be a mistake to depend on them too long, and thus prevent some of the younger players from showing what they can do with the ball. Burrows is probably the best of the younger brigade. Kennedy is another player who might develop into a really good bowler if he had the chance. The other Saturday he took five of West's wickets for only 6 runs. This was perhaps a “ freak ” average, but last Saturday, against Sydenham, Kennedy took four wickets for 29 runs. To date this season he has a bowling average of 5.2, ten wickets for 52 runs. Besides showing promise as a bowler. Kennedy is also a very fair bat. Certainly he has not done very much this season, but last season he made 116 against St Albans and besides made several other good scores. Cromb is another j useful all : round player. Playing for ; the Canterbury junior team against Wellington last season, Cromb, in the first innings, took five wickets at a cost of only eight runs. In the bowling averages for the senior competition last season Findlay finished up second to Cunningham .with an average of 13.54 (forty-four wickets for 596 runs). Cunningham’s average was 13.23, forty-two wickets for 550 rui.s). Findlay was given a place in the Canterbury eleven last season, and. on the whole, he did fairly well, considering the heavy scores of 497 and 4i6 made by Wellington and Auckland respectively against Canterbury. This . season in senior cricket Findlay has j taken nine wickets for 138 runs. Another colt, who promises to develop into a good bowler/ is Gibbs, of I Riiccarton. He first played senior cricket towards the end of last sea * SOn, so that he has not had a great ' deal of experience. This season he has i been bowlirg well, and has taken twelve wickets for 11S runs, an average of just under ten runs a wicket. Gibbs ( can also make runs, though, so far this j season, he has not shown his best j form with the bat. j WHO WILL BE WICKET KEEPER? f Amongst the players mentioned as I being in the running for representa- ' live honours are two wicket keepers, ‘ Boon and Brunton Last, season Brun- | ton kept stumps for Canterbury, and | there is no doubt that, when he is on his game, Brunton is still the best ; wicket keeper in Christchurch.. Boon ; has played for Canterbury before, and has also kept wickets for New Zealnad. . He keeps the extras down well, but he J is not always quick enough at accept- , ing chances. In this respect Brunton j is superior to Boon. Both Boon and

FIFTEEN HAVE REPRESENTED CANTERBURY. Of the 25 players whose names are given above, fifteen have played for Canterbury in past seasons. They are Cox, Rix, Findl. v, Gregory, M’Ewin, Oliver, Patrick, Cunningham, Woods, Crawford, Sandman, Brunton, Read, Boon, and Mortlock. The last mentioned played for Canterbury against Taranaki last season. The ten others are mostly young players who have been showing good form this season. For instance, there is J. Robertson, the ex-Victorian, who has proved himself to be one of the best bats in the senior competition. In the first match of the season against West he made 32 and he followed this up by making 186 against Old Collegians. Last Saturday against Linwood, when most of the other Sydenham batsmen failed, Robertson batted in great style and had 37 to his credit when he lost his wicket through being stumped. There is no doubt that Robertson is a very fine bat and it. seems likely that he will l*e given a try out. in the Canterbury team. Another very promising young batsman is Hamilton, of the Old Collegians Club. So far. in the senior competition. he has perhaps not done so well as was generally expected, but still he has been one of the mainstays of his side. He is regarded by some as the most promising left-hand bat seen in Christchurch for some time. Norrie, > f St Alban . started off the Reason well by making fii against Old Boys and 00 against Riccarton. Last Saturday, against West, he was dismissed for a couple. Norrie is not a graceful bat and his performances in club cricket in the past have been somewhat erratic, but there is no doubt (

Brunton are good bats, and they often knock up respectable totals in club cricket. A couple of years ago. when playing for Canterbury. Boon made 17 and 25 against Auckland, and 62 against Wellington. Me is in good form with the bat at present Brunton is a quick scorer who will often knock up runs when thev are needed His best performance for Canterbury last season was 49 in the second innings against Auckland. Cox, of Riccarton, who made 204 for Canterbury against Otago la*t season, has not struck form with the bat si< far this season, his scores for Riecartor. being 4. 0. 52 and 6. However, there is no doubt about COx's ability t-» make runs. A eduple of seasons age, in the second match that he played for Canterbury, that against the Victorian team, he knocked up 82, and that season for Riccarton he scored with wonderful consistency, bis best effort being 166 against West. Last, season in club cricket Cox batted well, though not so well as the previous season, but his double century against Otago was a magnificent effort, and stamped him as a batsman of out standing ability. He has struck a lean patch this season, but that has been the experience Of many a good and it should not alone be sufficient to deprive him of a place in the Canterbury eleven.

OTHER GOOD BATS. One player, who has been batting very well this year, is Gregory, who has knocked up 209 runs in three innings. His score of 124 not out against Old Boys was a masterly effort which won the game for his side. Last Saturday, against Riccarton, he made. 58 when most of the other batsmen on the side failed. For Canterbury last season Gregory made 53 against Otago, 5 and 21 against Wellington, and 58 and 6 against Auckland. Th a gave him an average of 28.00. Gregory looks like being one of the ceitainties for the team. Two Riccarton batsmen. Haines and W. P. Guiney, have been showing goo 1 form this season. Guiney, who re cently returned to Christchurch from Australia, signalised his first mater, for Riccarton by knocking up 87 run: in the second innings. Guiney made the runs quickly when they were badlv needed by his side for a three-pom. will, and probably, if he had not had the misfortune to be run out, Riccarton would have won the game Although he has never played for Canterbury, Ilaines has made many useful scores for Riccarton in past seasons. His best effort this season was the 68 not out that he made against Linwood in the first match of the season. He was associated with Gumev in the St Albans match when he carried his bat for 41. Two promising young batsmen in the Old Boys team are Mortlock an 1 Jacobs. Against East this season they were associated in a great firsc wicket partnership, Mortlock making 105 not out and Jacobs 94. Jacobs played for the Canterbury junior team last season when he made 86 (top score) against Wellington. It is four years since Rix played fo* Canterbury, and he was not a great success then. This season, however, he has been bowling well, having taken thirteen wickets for 161 runs, an average of 12.3. —:J.O.P.