AS OTHERS SEE US.

New Zealand Illustrated Sporting & Dramatic Review, Volume XVII, Issue 985, 21 January 1909, Page 11

AS OTHERS SEE US.

The match between Auckland and Otago for the Plunket Shield bred an amount of bitterness that is happily a rarity in New Zealand cricket, and will not soon be forgotten (says the “ Weekly Press.”) It was a regrettable business right through. The Southerners were not wholly blameless for this deplorable state of things. They were aware that the understanding was that it was to be a three days’ match. There was, therefore, this essential difference between the requirements of the two sides, that Otago had to win the game to claim the Shield, whereas Auckland retained it by either winning or drawing. The Southerners appeared not to appreciate this fact, for they were to some extent a party to the waste of time which meant so much to them. For instance, they acquiesced in an adjournment for afternoon tea —twenty minutes on the first day and a quarter of an hour on each of the other days. Then, again, their tactics on the last day, when they occupied the wickets for nearly two hours for 89 runs, showed woful lack of enterprise, and was playing right into Auckland’s hands. However, on the other hand, the Shield holders pursued a policy right through which betokened an intention to retain the Shield if it were possible to do so by any legal means. “Long Slip,” in the “Otago Witness,” during a lengthy criticism of the game and its incidents writes: — “ It may be that Auckland is not to blame for the latest absurdity in cricket, but I cannot altogether hold the northern province guiltless, and would have admired the spirit which

would have prompted them to have played the game out, even at the risk of losing the shield. The holding of the shield in this incident was paramount, and was allowed to outweigh the true sporting feeling which should have existed between the contesting sides. Auckland may think exactly what it pleases about the match against Otago for the Plunket Shield, and may even think it has done a clever thing; but I cannot shake off the feeling that there was the sportsmanship of the game to be considered, which was indeed of even greater importance than the holding of the shield.”

These sentiments will be shared by nineteen-twentieths of the cricketers outs'de of Auckland (remarks the

“ Press.”) Indeed, the Dunedin scribe puts it very temperately. From Canterbury players who saw the last day’s play, I learn that the way the Aucklanders wasted time in scheming for a draw was shameful. Another very unsavoury feature was the way in which the opposing skippers snarled at one another, and this was punctuated at times by remarks that were — to say the least —decidedly uncricketlike. It was a sorry affair right through and it is to be hoped the Plunket shield will not be responsible for any more such inglorious exhibitions.