BOWLING.

Waikato Times, Volume 107, Issue 17964, 8 March 1930, Page 11

BOWLING.

THE GAME IN GENERAL. GREEN AND PAVILION GOSSIP. SELECTION OP TEST TEAMS. (By “Toucher.”) The publication last week • of the test match teams to represent South Auckland against Taranaki to-day at the Hamilton Club’s green aroused considerable adverse comment, the burden of which was, judging from what one has heard and what has appeared in the correspondence columns of the press, that the selectors had disregarded to a large extent the “ claims ’/ to inclusion of South Auckland bowlers who had been members of the party which toured Taranaki last season. As “ Toucher ” himself happens to have been a member of this party he may, perhaps, be permitted to remark that, to bis mind, this claim by itself, amounts to nothing. It wasn’t a sense of duty tnat took him to Taranaki—he went because he expected (and had too) a jolly good time amongst the Taranaki bowlers. And that, he has not the slightest doubt, is why the other members of the party went. Of course, everyone in that party would relish another opportunity of playing against some of the good fellows they met on that occasion, but honestly, “ Toucher ” cannot see that last year’s tourists have a preferential claim to meet our visitors of this season. If such a course were strictly adhered to it would, in the long run, mean that those bowlers not fortunate enough to be able to spare time or money for such trips abroad would be, to a large extent, cut out from participation in the play when the visits were returned. This, surely, is not in accord with the democratic principles which are supposed to hold sway in the sport of bowling. Before closing the reference to last year’s Taranaki trip one might mention that the owners of cars which conveyed the party to New Plymouth did not do so wholly at their own expense, as might have been wrongly inferred from “ One Up’s ” letter in the correspondence columns of the Times earlier this week. Passenger members paid to the car owners a sum deemed to be sufficient to cover fuel and wear and tear on the trip, and would gladly have made the payment larger if required, as all were duly grateful to the car owners for the comfort and convenience of travelling in this fashion. This point would not have been referred to had not “ One Up ’ left the non-car-owning members under the undeserved implication that they *• sponged ’’ on their fellow’s who did own cars for “ buckshee " transport. A Little Different. It sometimes happens in connection with a one-day inter-club fixture that a player, or players, will, at some personal inconvenience, travel from home io ensure that his club is adequately represented. In such cases, one thinks, all things being equal, that the players who travelled should have preference over those who did not when the return match is played. Under the circumstances quoted it may ha\e been a certain sense of duty to his club that animated the player concerned, and his case is rather different from that of a touring party. But to be quite frank, one thinks that, a lot of us are far too touchy about such .things. It is quite possible that our views of our oivu capabilities do not .tally with those of the selectors (unhappy devils) and the selectors surely cannot be wrong every time. They do their best to pick good teams, and if w r ith that object they leave us out cannot we just pity their stupidity and let it go at that. Surely it is not necessary to our dignity to give up bowls, or join another club, or take to croquet, or any of those desperate measures to which affronted bowlers sometimes resort ? Cutting off one s nose to spite one’s face is usually more funny to the onlooker than to the one who performs the operation. The Centre Seleotors. The blast concerning the South Auckland team’s selection to meet Taranaki centred, of course, upon the selectors. As “ Toucher ” understands the position, the selectors, three in number, were appointed by the annual meeting of delegates to the Centre, with a free hand in making their selections: consequently the decisions of these selectors cannot, or should not, be considered subject to review by other executive officers of the centre. It would seem, therefore, that the. selectors are responsible to nobody except the club’s delegates at the annual Centre meeting, and if the delegates at the next of these gatherings consider that the present delegates “botched” their job, no doubt the meeting will find others to replace them. Meantime, what the selectors say must go, and rightly so. Which Policy?

The question next! arises of the mandate conferred by the delegates upon the selectors. Was it to pick teams, which, to their view, would provide the strongest bowling ability; or was it to give the clubs of the Centre proportional representation in matches such as the one with Taranaki, and for this or other considerations of policy, include players who otherwise would not gain a place by reason of ability on the green? If the latter, is there any use l'or selectors?. Clubs could 'be asked to nominate their quota, with classification as leads, two’s, three’s, and sldps. Then all the nominated skips and so on could be placed in respective compartments and teams drawn haphazard therefrom. Such a method, of course, could produce only weak combinations, but if more general satisfaction is likely to be procurable by such a plan it will be quite open for future meetings of delegates to adopt it, which would do away with the need for appointing selectors at all- It would seem to be a question of policy as between the competitive and Hie social sides of bowling, and in fairness to Centre selectors they should, prior to appointment, be given a duly recorded expression of opinion by the meeting of delegates as to which aspect should be given chief consideration when selections are made. Quite probably it would be hard to get selectors under such conditions, but another alternative would be to constitute the whole Centre executive a selection committee, which could make its decisions in council and give them out afterwards, with at least some appearance of unanimity. If a change in the method of selection la adopted in future, it might be

worth considering whether members of the executive, to the extent of at least one rink, should' not be entitled bv virtue of their office to inclusion in test teams. The fact that members of the executive carry upon their shoulders much of the burden and heat of the day, should not be o\erlooked altogether. The Hard Word. "Toucher” regards all those principally concerned in the present difference of opinion as warm personal friends, and hopes that they so regard him, whether he secs eye to eye with them or not. Any comments in this column at any lime are made wholly without bias, and an endeavour is always maae to avoid quoting ex parte statements, or attributing unworthy motives to anyone. Concerning the case under review', “Toucher” believes that the two selectors responsible did their job according to their convictions as to what W'as right, and that they are entitled to more support from other members of the executive than they are getting. Neither does one think that the third selector is entitled to cavil at the decisions arrived at by his oolleagues at a meeting he could have attended himself had he so desired. However, the really “hard word” the scribe .thinks he should get off his chest is this: Such a wretched squabble between component parts of the body which is controlling bowling in the South Auckland 'Centre, and the amount of random talk that has accompanied it, cause far more ill-feeling and injury to the game throughout the Centre than a few errors in selection ever could do. Surely'it is possible for differences of opinion between Centre officials to be dealt with in a less undignified fashion than has, unfortunately, sometimes been the case, The Taranaki Visitors. The touring bowlers from Taranaki were extensively engaged against the clubs of Hamilton and surrounding districts during the earlier portion of the week, and then moved on to the Goldfields end of the 'Centre, returning to Hamilton l’or to-day’s test games. Our visitors appeared to enjoy themselves wherever they went, and most certainly local bowlers who played against them did so. Without question these inter-Centre visits provide one of the most enjoyable forms in which the sport of bowling may be participated in. The song of greeting the Taranaki-ites brought with them (“How do you do,", etc.), ■and their haka went very well. At the Hamilton green on Tuesday a graceful little act was performed by Mr T. Petty, the Taranaki president, who decorated Mr Le*s Harvey, the greenkeeper, with a Taranaki badge, in token of appreciation of the beautiful greens provided. -All Taranald bowlers who bad played on the Hamilton greens, Mr Petty remarked, ever afterwards raved of their perfection, and they wished Mr Harvey, whose skill and attention had so much to do with this, to be the first recipient in Hamilton during this tour of a Taranaki badge. The badge was then pinned upon the- recipient- amidst warm applause. The Thomson Shield. Wednesdav, when the Carlton and Hamilton Bowling Clubs did battle for the Thomson Shield at Hamilton, proved a delightful clay from both the climatic and playing points of view, and the visitors at the conclusion expressed themselves in terms of warmest appreciation regarding the greens and the enjoyability of the games throughout. Hamilton managed to win 5 out of the eight games played, and retained the trophy. Garlton'’ had sent strong rinks and the standard or play was high. Of the Hamilton skips Yeaman won both his games, and Chapman, Belt and Hawken had one each way. Truscoff Avon both his games for Carlton, and Clarke got the other. Whose Fault? •>\ whitiora Bowler” writes complaining that, in the report of the games played at Whitiora against the visitors from Taranaki, the _ scores were incorrectly reported in the Times. He says, “whoever was responsible for the figures as issued in your columns was not a very good arithmetician.” He adds that in the game between Evans (s) and Abbott Os) o the scores were 24-22 in favour of Evans and not in favour of Abbott as reported. Perhaps the untortunates who collect news for the piess are not all arithmeticians, but most of them can read the written V '°T 3, and the card supplied regarding the game referred to by Whitiora Bowler" showed Abbott 24 and Evans 22. This card Touchei still holds, and “Whitiora Bowler,” or ■anyone else interested ' a took at it. Does “W. 8.” think pressmen should all be clai FJ° y the not how are they to tell that the scorers meant something different to what they wrote on the cards The score card as supplied was not signed,' certainly, so we can take it the actual facts are as stated hi "WB” If anybody’s arithmetic was at fault it certainly wasn’t the Times reporter’s, however.