page 47

Cricket Club

In reviewing the past season, one cannot help feeling a sense of lively satisfaction in the doings of the team and of the club in general. Yet, as in former years, we regret to say that the men students have not shown the interest in the club they might have done. It is a lamentable fact that there are quite a number of good cricketers attending College who did not lend the Cricket Club their support during the long vacation. Nevertheless, our hopes run high for next season, and we would urge every man student who knows a ball from a bat to join our ranks and support the fair reputation of the 'Varsity in athletic circles.

At the end of last season much dissatisfaction was felt by the members attending College at the increasing number of "outsiders" who were playing for 'Varsity. This has been remedied this season, however, and the club, though small, is entirely a College club. We regret to say that we have been compelled to loose our senior status, but the keenest satisfaction has been evidenced by every member at the season's play. The practice pitches at Kelburn Park have been all that could be desired, and granted the solid support of all the men students, there is no reason why a senior team should not be entered next season.

We did not manage to carry off the laurels in the competition, yet only two teams—Hutt A and Wellington College—secured more points than us. It is a significant fact that in our three defeats, we could not muster a full eleven. The number of pressing engagements members had out of town on these days were indeed remarkable.

The following is a record of the team's exploits during the season:—

v. Ordnance: Won by 115 runs on the first innings. Ward 70, Morton 37, Burns 29, Hemery 25, Graham 25, Raines 22, were mainly responsible for our score of 258. Woods (4 wickets for 28) and Dwyer (5 wickets for 35) were the "star" bowlers for the day. A good start-off.

v. Scot's College: Won by 67 runs. Our first showing (83) was the worst of the whole season. Things improved in the second innings, however, Morton knocking up 88 and Raines 51. Woods (5 for 13 and 6 for 38) did havoc amongst our opponents' wickets.

v. Munitions: Lost by an innings and 148 runs. This is the one disappointing feature of our matches. Their team was not a strong one, and our eight men should have made a better showing. But why revive a black past?

v. Hutt A: Lost by 10 wickets. This team won the junior championship. We made 90 (Graham 19 and 85, Dwyer 31). The local team compiled 155, and in the second innings made the necessary runs to win without losing a wicket. Woods took 3 wickets for 12 on a pitch that could hardly be described as new.

v. Old Boys: Won by an innings and 61 runs. The outstanding feature of this game was the fine stand made by Barker (98) and Kane (111 re page 48 tired). When separated, they had compiled 203 between them. Morton (3 for 15) and Woods (4 for 32) were our best bowlers for the day.

v. Base Records: Won by 35 runs on the first innings. Dwyer (27) and Morton (20) were the principal scorers. Morton secured a good average on a soft wicket—6 for 25. This match was not finished owing to rain on the following Saturday.

v. North: Won by 59 runs on the first innings. Graham 48, Morton 42, Barker 35, Aitken 22, Kane 20, distinguished themselves at the wickets. Morton took 3 wickets for 44. Had North had a full team, it is doubtful whether we would have won so easily.

v. Wellington College: Lost by an innings and 15 runs. Barker 44, Pope 29, Dwyer 24 and 21, played a good game. Quite a sensation was caused by Jenkins, who took two wickets in one over.

v. Hutt B: Won by 9 wickets. Our second visit up country was a bit more successful. Aitken 45, Barker 35, Kane 23 not out, and Dwyer 21 were mainly responsible for our total of 119. Woods's average of 6 wickets for 11 was the best of the season.

It may, perhaps, give one an idea of the prowess of each member of the team to glance at the averages, remembering that a man's play cannot always be judged by mere figures.

Batting averages: Barker 26.1, Morton 24.3, Kane 21.0, Dwyer 16.9, Graham 16.4, Aitken 14.2, Raines 10.1. Bowling averages: Woods, 52 wickets, average 9.3; Morton, 22 wickets, average 9.6; Raines, 12 wickets, average 28.1.

In complying with a request to supply a criticism of the 'Varsity XI., the writer reflects that a criticism is necessarily a finding of faults, and if the standard set is perfection, it follows that faults can be found in everyone; but the writer would remind players that, though he mainly mentions their faults, he has stated his view in the hope that they will be useful to those players that desire to improve by ascertaining and correcting their imperfections.

*Aitken: Safe catch, and a good long field, who gave evidence of previous experience that with more practice would have put him among the first batsmen in the team. He has made good scores, but has not the knack yet of putting his body into his strokes. Skill in this depends chiefly upon the placing of the feet.

*Barker: A player with a very good "eye," who improved so rapidly that in a few months he became one of our fastest scoring and most aggressive batsmen. He scored one century, and with better use of his feet and reach in forward play he should score others. A safe catch, who fields well in any position.

Burns: An excellent wicket-keeper whose services we lost early in the season. In this capacity he was a tower of strength in the team. A cricket team without a good wicket-keeper is like a football team without a good half-back, or a scrum without a good lock. We simply must have a good wicket-keeper next season.

Dwyer: A left-banded batsman who showed marked improvement towards the latter part of the season. Like most left-handers, his strong strokes were on the leg side, and he is inclined to use them too freely; he can make some good off shots, and should practise the straight drive. With the confidence that comes of experience, he should develop into a really good batsman. A splendid field at cover-point, with an excellent return.

Graham: A safe batsman of correct style, but rather inclined to too much defensive play on fast wickets, where the best defence is forward play unless the length forces one back. Has played some useful innings, but not aggressive enough for an opening batsman. Should practise bowling slow or medium off break. Could be keener in the field.

Greig: A useful bowler of good, natural action and length. As a batsman, too reckless, and as a fieldsman too hasty.

page 49

^*Hemery: A safe batsman with a fine, clean off-drive. A good scorer who uses his feet well, but is just a little inclined to play back on good wickets. Useful medium-paced bowler and good field, who, unfortunately for the team, went into camp before the close of the season.

Jenkins: An enthusiast new at the game. Made good improvement in fielding. As a batsman, should adopt a more free and aggressive style. One of his stature and activity, by practice, should develop into a useful medium-to-fast bowler.

Kane: A useful left-hand bowler of good length and slight break-back. He is difficult to score off when on the wicket, and with the accuracy that comes of much practice he should be very dangerous. Bats well right-handed though a little cramped; has scored a century, and with more freedom of style and better use of his feet, he should become a consistent scorer.

Kirk: An excellent secretary who has the cricketer's best asset—enthusiasm. By adopting a freeer style he began to improve in batting towards the end of the season, and he shows promise of becoming a mediumpace bowler.

^*Morton: A captain who is an example to his team in every department of the game. A free yet steady batsman who always makes runs. A valuable slow leg-break bowler. A good field with a first-class return. As a captain he could keep his team more on the attack, and as a batsmen he is, if anything, not quite keen enough.

Pope: A new member of the team who will be one of our best batsmen next season. Makes good, clean strokes all round the wicket—aggressive as well as defensive. A smart field.

^*Raines: One of the best bats in the team, and one of the few whose style can be said to resemble the correct. Plays carefully, and has no inclination towards "up-country" and "shut-eye." Makes use of his feet and reach to get well over the ball and consequently drives nicely. Was unfortunate in not getting into his stride more often. A useful change bowler and a player never known to hurry in the field.

Shoreland: Did not play in many matches, but gave promise of being a valuable addition to the team next season.

Smith: Another new member. Left-handed batsman with an attractive, forceful style; fast scorer with good attack. Also left-handed bowler with good pace and length. Good field. He and Pope form a valuable pair for next season.

Ward: One of the best batsmen, bowlers, and fielders in the team. He bats very freely, and has good, clean strokes all round the wicket. A good, fast bowler of good length who, perhaps, takes it out of himself, a little too much, in his run. Good field. He went into camp about the middle of the season, unfortunately for the team and for cricket in general, as he was just ready to step into senior ranks to finish off.

Woods: A very good fast bowler with good length who comes-in slightly from the off. He should stick to this one ball, practice it and bowl no other. His action is good and his pace should increase during next season. Can make runs when he bats freely. Not keen enough in the field.