CRICKET.

New Zealand Graphic, Volume XXIV, Issue VI, 10 February 1900, Page 258

CRICKET.

The final games of the first round of the Association First Grade matches were commenced on Saturday. Though the weather was beautifully fine and the wickets, as a rule good, the scoring was much lower than was to be expected. This was especially the case in the United—Auckland match, as when the former team won the toss and decided to bat. a big Score was generally anticipated. However, it did not appear to be United’s day out, and though a good start was made the rather poor total of 148 runs was the final result. In the Ponsonby—Gordon match the scoring was also poor, whilst at North Shore the local team after making a fine start, were all out against Parnell for 142 runs. UNITED V. AUCKLAND. F, Clayton won the toss from his brother, and of course United batted first, D. Hay accompanying his captain to the wickets. A very useful stand was made, both batsmen playing nice, though rather careful cricket. Just after the score had passed 50 Clayton was eaught off R. Neill for 22, and D. Hay did not long survive him, being bowled by Neill for a nicely played 32. P. Hay and Stemson did not give much trouble, and then N. Lusk and C. Hay made a fair stand. The former obtained 29 by hard hitting, but his innings was not at all a good one. C. Hay carried out his bat for 32. and with the exception of a hot chance to point, his innings was a really good one. United developed rather a “tail" on Saturday, none of the later batsmen making any stand, and the total of 148 runs must be considered a very poor one under the circumstances. Auckland on going in to bat made a disastrous start, T. Neill being given out l.b.w. before he had scored, and D. Clayton after hitting up 12 was clean bowled by Sloman. Worse still, 11. Neill, who followed, was cleaned bowled by Sloman with his third ball. From this out things took a turn for the better, so far as Auckland was concerned, Nicholson and Hicks making a very useful stand. The latter after making 12 was bowled by P. Hay, and then Stone, with Nicholson, played out time, the total being 105 runs for four wickets. Nicholson’s contribution of 45 was obtained by first rate cricket, and his determined batting quite changed the aspect of the game. Stone batted very freely for his 21 runs, some of his strokes being particularly nice.

PONSONBY V. GORDON

Ponsonby won the toss' and batted first, but with the exception of Sanders and Mills none of the batsmen showed very good form. Sanders obtained 32 runs by careful batting. W. Mills on the other hand obtained his quota of 38 by free and vigorous hitting'. The other wickets fell very cheaply, ami the total only reached 121. Gordon had not very long to bat. but they managed to lose three wickets for thirty odd runs. Seccombe had the hard luck to get caught off a big hit which would have pretty well fallen out of bounds, but Sanders made a brilliant running catch with one hand, ami the batsman had to retire.

NORTH SHORE V. PARNELL.

The local team batted first and started very well, but after the first few wickets fell the remainder went In quick time, ami the total only reached 112. G. Mills (56) made top score and his innings was about the best he has shown this season. Denby (26) was the only other batsman to give Purnell much trouble, and his runs were obtained mostly by singles and by ultracareful batting. 1. Mills and Ohlson started batting for Parnell, ami kept up their wickets until time was called, the latter obtaining 29 and Mills 27.

There seems to be an impression that the article in last week’s issue of this ' paper on the umpiring in the United-Gordon match imputed partiality to the umpire. There was, however, no such intention, and if such an impression exists I beg to correct it. Although it was contended that the umpires in that match made several very bad mistakes, still no one for a moment contends that the decisions given were not the honest opinions of the gentlemen acting as umpires. With reference to the remarks that there had been other complaints as to the umpires appointed by the Association, and especially as to the age of one of those acting, I find that I am in error on this point, as the gentleman in question is not a member of the Association. An apology is therefore due to the Association for the imputation that there was any general dissatisfaction as to the umpires appointed by them. Of course, the umpires make mistakes; still players recognise that any error made by them is a mistake, and are convinced that the decisions are the honest opinions of the giver. In every respect the umpiring, since the Association took charge, is a great improvement on the state of affairs that previously existed.