Touchy " Touchline."

NZ Truth, Issue 135, 18 January 1908, Page 3

Touchy " Touchline."

During my absence from town, "Touohline," of the "Free Lance," . bas been commenting on my remarks regarding boundaries, and I was too late to refer to the subject last week-. "Touchline," m reiterating his- statement that there was no ground with an inner and outer boundary, only liounders deeper into thehole., he placed himself m when, "slinging off" at "Overs" remarks > m the "Everang Post" on this point. Apparently "Touchline" has not followed the Australian cricket news this season or he would have known that, amongst other things discussed by Mr A. O. Jones, the English captain, and Mr Joseph Darling, was the inner boundary of the Adelaide Ground. This ground, which is the largest playing area m Australia, bas long been a bone of contention and the inner boundary has now been short- v ened, and still counts four, whilst the "out of .the ground" hits remain six as before. "Touchline" should know that the- reason six is awarded for a hit out of the ground is because the ball is practically .lost, and "lost ball" is considered six according to the rules. "Touchline," m referring to the Wellington College ground, says tlrare is no boundary inside .the St. Mark's ChurchNdividing fence, for which a hit. over counts less than five. '•Touchline" evidently ignores the. fact that m the Teachers' match the slopes were agreed upon as an inner boundary, for which four was allowed. There is no presumption about fTouchline," who considers he knows as much about the laws of the game as men who have spent a lif etime at it, yet there are men m Wellington who played and controlled cricket before "Touohline"" was born. It is news to me that "instructions to umpires govern the rules of the game." I always understood that "instructions" were merely for umpires' guidance. Judging by some umpires they certainly require a lot of guidance. As for the rules providing for only one boundary, "Touchline" is very much at sea with this statement, as Rule 44 clearly states that umoires shall arrange all boundaries, and the allowances to be made for same, and there is absolutely nothing to prevent the umpires arranging boundaries five yards from the pitch if they care to. I agree with "Touchline" that the City Council should do something to the Basin/ Reserve for the benefit of cricketers, and I also regret to note the paucity of attendance at some of the matqjies. But to deliberately "sling off" at men who are experienced at the game when they proffer their assistance', m solving difficult -questions connected with cricket, is not the way m which to gain supportecs. Cricket m New Zealand is certainly m its infancy, and both officials and cricket writers should welcome the advent of those who are able and willing to assist m popularising the game. Coaches are required for our younger players, «and it should he the aim of all interested m the noble pastime to cordially welcome anyone who is capable of lending a hand m this direction, and there must be numbers of such among the many immigrants constantly arriving from Australia and the Old Country. Referring again to "Touohline's" notes iof last week, I note that, referring ,to a correspondent, he says, "much of his letter is too lengthy . . and, m my opinion, would not be interesting to my readers." Is that the real reason for suppressing the letter ? "Scout" , doubts it, as "Touohline's" previous reference to the same writer distorted his statements. At any rate, "Scout" considers that if could not publish the whole of his correspondent's letter, he had no right to select only portions that suited himself, as, m the majority of cases, "half the truth is worse than a lie." "Scout" thinks the probability is that "Touohline's" correspondent told him a few plain truths and the truth is not always pleasant, is it "Touchline"? Anyway, "Scout" would much like to see the letter referred to. \ ' . . . "Touchline" is a dual personality —I would not for a moment suggest that he is double-faced. He recently wrote of the difficulty of getting senior players to umpire m junior matches, and for some time has written pathetically of the arduous task of an umpire. But what do we see when we refer to his notes ? Quite recently, referring to. the manner m which Patrick got out m a club match, "Touchline" writes, "I have no hesitation m saying that he was umpired out, and I make the statement with a full sense of the responsibility' of it." "Scout" refrained from commenting on this remark at the time, as he was afraid the matter might have been the subject of litigation. However, it ill becomes the secretary of the Umpires' Assocoation to write m such emphatic terms of one of his colleagues, and such unpleasant incidents will not tend to get experienced men to undertake the duties of umpires. The Umpires' ■ Association will be lacking m its duty if it fails to demand an explanation of "Touchline's" conducts and failure to supply a satisfactory explanation, failing which it should be a sufficient ground ' for , suspending the secretary from acting "as &ji umpire, and he should be relieved of his office. If the Association does not take steps to protect its members from unfair criticism then it is not worthy of its name, and will experience great difficulty m getting capable men to officiate as umpires m any of the matches under its jurisdiction.