ON THE GREEN

Sun (Auckland), Volume I, Issue 268, 2 February 1928, Page 9

ON THE GREEN

Bowls and Bowlers

Ey

“JACK HIGH.”

THE persistency with which a section of the more proficient players seek to break away from the rank and file of bowling, and thus create a split in the ! game, is a subject which is providing serious food for j thought in bowling circles. Our bowling contributor, 1 ‘‘Jack-High,” effectively deals with the position in this I week’s notes.

When the inter-club pennant competition was discussed last winter, there was a move to split the competition into two sections/ while at the present time the question has been raised whereby the self-same section can capture the fine tournaments conducted by the Auckland Centre for their exclusive glorification. These sectional ambitions should be carefully noted and effectively countered. The move can be rightly regarded as a real menace to the sport. Indeed, it may be *aid that it is entirely in opposition to the basic principles underlying the general -welfare of bowling. The remarkable progress of the game of bowls cannot be wholly assigned to the special features of play. It has a much wider attraction. An Australian writer discussing this point says: “It cannot be too often reiterated that bowls is something more than a mere game of skill. Few would play it for that alone. Still fewer would enjoy It as they do, if skill were the be all and the end all, as it is in almost any other fond of sport. And yet considerable skill is required to play the game well. Merely to trundle a delicately biased bowl up and down a green prepared with scrupulous, almost mathematical, care for worthier purpose would be nothing less than sheer contempt for game and players alike, and open confession of one’s own imbeciliy. THE COMPETITIVE ELEMENT At the close of the last Easter tournament Mr. James Pascoe, president of the Auckland Centre, in no uncertain term:* expressed himself most fully on the dangers that would assail the sport if the game were to degenerate into one solely of competition. He pointed out at that time that the ever-grow-ing list of competitive events could be deplored as a menace to the welfare of sport, and asked the clubs to consider the fuller development of club life. In addition, Mr. J. W. Hardley, immediate past president of the Dominion of New Zealand Bowling Association, has seldom failed on any occasion to stress the advisability of the sport developing on these broader lines; while responsible officers in most clubs have affirmed the principle that the maintenance of the bowling traditions of the past is the policy that should be upheld. However, in all fairness, it must be admitted that the standard of play has developed to a very marked degree, and that year by year this improvement will steadily proceed. Moreover, it can safely be predicted that the big events of each season are attracting more and more attention. But, it may be advanced that to place the more proficient exponents of bowling in a class by themselves would be fatal to the steady progress of the sport. The Centre tournaments are open tournaments, which means that they are open to all players in the Centre, or bowlers outside the Centre for a matter of that. They have been a huge success from their inception, and it would be a thousand pities if the entries were restricted to a section of players no matter how high their standard of play.

If the stronger players desire to have purely classic events placed upon the list of annual fixtures, they should press for rink and pairs champion of champions competitions, on similar lines to our annual champion of champions singles competition, where the. champion singles bowler in each club meets in contest to find the singles champion of champions of the centre. But to attempt to make open tournaments the opportunity for the display of strenuous and exclusive competitive bowling is wrong in principle, and would only lead to disruption in the ranks of the sport. AUCKLAND V. SOUTH AUCKLAND For the first season of the Auckland v. South Auckland annual contest, the Hardley Shield comes to Auckland. Auckland won easily. Bui: the victory is not so important as that the fixture has established a closer relationship between the two great bowling centres of the North Island. This was the primary and worthy object in its promotion. The South Auckland Centre covers a huge stretch of country. In the past the members of this widely-scattered area have found it difficult to come in contact with the bowlers of the Auckland Centre. There is no large city there for the players to .congregate in, and apart from the big annual tournament at Rotorua and a few scattered club tournaments, there_ is no annual fixture of any pretensions that attracted the players of the Northern Centre to participate in and thereby come on friendly terms with one another. The inception of the Harley Shield Competition has therefore filled a long-felt want. Also, it is proof positive of the success of the general scheme that the friendly match that was played in addition was over-sub-scribed with entrants. Mr. Hardley deserves every credit for his wisdom and foresight in the initiation of the contest. There is no doubt that all the pai*tioipants thor-

oughly enjoyed themselves. It looks fair that this fixture will become in future one of the great annual events in the life of the South Auckland and Auckland Bowling Centres. A CHALLENGE THAT FAILED

In the light of the unfortunate experience of Mr. J. H. Trayes, the popular Mount Eden bowler, when contesting the Dominion championship singles competition, played in Christchurch recently, the current rules laid down for the challenging of bowls call for thoughtful revision and even drastic alterations.

For some years past this player has made it a practice of having his bowls, which he has played with for many years, tested periodically. Indeed, early in January before going to Christchurch, he submitted them for approval to the official bowl tester for the Auckland Centre. Yet despite the 1928 official stamp of the Dominion Association being indelibly and clearly punched into the wood of the bowls, they were subjected to a challenge by a Southern player. Moreover, what was the most striking feature of the unfortunate incident was that the news of the challenge was made the common knowledge of the participating contestants, and the spectators on the bank and at the same time the whole affair given for Dominion-wide publicity to the Press.

As it happened the challenge failed, but this news was not broadcast by the authorities in the South. However, the finding of the tester there was duly filed among the papers of the Dominion Association, and, as far as that supreme body in bowling administration and the challenger is concerned, the whole matter has ended at that. Justice in the eyes of the association has been meted out to the challenger. Both parties have been satisfied.. But what of the third party, whose bowls were challenged and found to conform to all requirements of the association? Is justice meted out to him? One of the most serious charges that can be made against any bowler in New Zealand is that he is seeking a mean, unsportsmanlike advantage over his fellow opponent by playing with bowls that are below the standard test laid down by the Dominion Association. It is not disputed that any mean man who plays with narrow bowls—for he could not be called a sport or a bowler—should not thus be brought sharply to book. But it must have been assumed by the challenging player and the Dominion Association officials that Mr. Trayes tampered with his bowls between the time of testing early in January and the date of challenging, Which makes the case even more aggravated in the light of the failure of the challenge.

Surely there is a real need for the revision of oppressing rules that permit a player to be thus victimised by being subjected to such a humiliating and unjust experience. If the association must make public that a player's bowls have been challenged, surely it is time to broadcast the information when the bowls have been found wanting. In all fairness, it should not be done before that time. Moreover, why rush into the publie Press over such an intimate matter! Surely it is a matter between the challenger, the challenged and the Dominion Association. NOTES AND COMMENTS During the last few days there has been a round of farewelling players who are participating in the contest between Great Britain and New Zealand. Many splendid evenings have been spent at the clubs. At the Carlton Club a presentation was made to Mr. A. R. Coltman on his departure to take up his new position at Cambridge.

BOWLING TEAMS SATURDAY’S MATCHES The following teams have been selected to represent their respective clubs in the inter-club bowling compV titions on Saturday: Dominion Road v. Takapuna. —At Dominion Road: Virtue, Barton, Truman, Hawken: Taylor, Jones, Blair, Denison; Smith, Beck, W. Richardson, Yeoman; Hinkley. Swap, Winthrop, Benson; Wombwell, Davis, Hoppy, Kelly.*At Takapuna: Betts, Tattersall, Sharkey, Ashby; Bathgate, A. Clark, Robertson, Cartwright; Sessions, Rogers, Stephenson, Bush; Gentles, Hook, Newton, Brown; Bellamy, Ranum, Winks, Sayers. Dominion Road v. Henderson. —At Dominion Road: W. S. Fisher, Ironside, S. E. Chappell, Goldsmith; D. Richardson, P. Ferguson, Cannon, Clews. At Henderson: H. Ferguson, Roget, West, R. H. Fisher; Speir, Percy. A Chappell, Gifford. Rawhiti v. Otahuhu. —At Otahuhu: Jackson, Schofield, F. Bennett, Paterson; Barker, Robertson, Keller, McKinlay; Wilmot, Hamlin, Martin, Oldham; R. Walker, Woods, T. Gallagher, Haslam. At Rawhiti: J. Smith, Worthington, E. T. Walker, Wooller; E. C. Bennett, Roberts, Murray, Moncur; Wayte, Barnes, McMahon, Taylor; Ryder, Samways, Watson, Vaughan. Rawhiti v. Edendale (first-year players).—At Edendale: Vincent, Katterfeldt, Cameron, Culpin. Ellerslie v. Papatoetoe. —At Papatoetoe: A. Hill, H. K. Mackenzie, Watson, J. Taylor; Ganley, A. Fergusson, Lynch, J. Crosher; Richmond, Ryan, Flyger, T. Henry; White, A. McKenzie, W. Osborne, F Osborne. At Ellerslie: Bartlett, Postcard. Sykes, Somerfleld; Arthur, Fairbrother, Coppins, Wood; G. Hunter, Westbrook, Toy, Macklow; Coomlic, Holland, Diggens, R. Reed. Ellerslie v. Avondale. —At Ellerslie: J. Camobell. Christmas, Woodward, B. Thompson. At Ellerslie (fjrst-year team): McDermott, Empen, Pilkington, Longville. _ _ . . . Takapuna v. Dominion Road. —At Dominion Road; Blolette, Perfect, Arrowsmith, Audley; McMurtree, Johnson, Collins, Spencer; Oborn. Re.sk, Boulton, Hanna; Elliot, Buckley, Cutler, Hayden; O’Neill, Kay. F. A. Smith. Brake. At Takanuna; Riddell, Blenkhorn, Eckersley, CoddP Schofield, Edwards, Galbraith, Christey; White, Prentice, Bennet, Matthews' Eade. Brinsden, Somerfleld, R. P. Smith; Booth. Corfe, Dunlop, Hooper. Otahuhu v. Rawhiti. —At Otahuhu: Gorrie, S. E. Whitmore, Goodwin, Carson; West, Hickson, R. Todd, Everitt: O'Connell Martin. Sinclair, Lippiatt; C. B. Whitmore. Patton, Cook, Bailey. At Rawhiti: Tomes. Robinson, Pinkey, Pearce; Pov,nev, Taylor, Fearnley, Murdoch; Kimber, Moss. Morton. Ferguson; Crawford. Nixon. Whyte. Davies. Epsom v. Mount Eden. —At Mount Eden: Dingev. Johnson. Kendall, De Kailnay; -Maddocks, Hoycs, McCowan, Tanner; Newman, F. Richmond, Mcßeath, Wright: Gladding. Penn, A. Taylor. Mingins. French, Hill, Lewis, Taylor: Harris, \\\ Harrison, Greening, Boyne; Wylie. T. Harrison, Smith, E. Richmond. Firstyear players at Mount Eden: Wiseman, Gl'ibble. Miller, Hooper. Mount Eden v. Epsom. —At Mount I Eden: Marshall, Harle, Woolley, Trayes

(skip); Bruce Smith. IT. O. Brown, Bourke, Gill (skip); Mackenzie, Cordes, Elliott, A. Nairn (skip); Gregson, D. Nairn, J. B. Robertson, Cornes (skip); Wright, Jones, Serjeant. Rankin (skip); Burley, Ross. Miller, J. Smith (skip); Jos. Smith, Reid, McCarthy, Tutt(skip); T. Nairn, Wagstaff, R. Robertson, Turner (skip). At Epsom:—Chambers, Fogerty, Gatenby, Barker (skip); Boyce, Faram, Hull, Surman (skip); Douglas, Barry, Gribble, Findlay (skip); Bailey, Johnston, Joll. Bidgelow (skip); Sherriff, Battersby, Vivian, Fraser (skip); Stone, Fulton, Delamore, Walton (skip); Dignan. Rintoul, Middleton. Daisley (skip); Meuller, Hoyte, Shirrifs, Bainbridge (skip). Mount Eden v. Epsom First Year Team. —Beere, Alexander. Murdock, Watson (skip). OTAHUHU BOWLERS FAREWELL TO MR. A. CARSON The Gas Company’s social hall at Otahuhu was the scene of a very happy gathering last evening, when a large number of the members of the Otahuhu Bowling Club gathered co bid bon voyage to their club mate, Mr. Arthur Carson, who is leaving New Zealand on February 10 as one of the bowling representatives of the Dominion who are touring England. The president of the club, Mr. G. V. Pearce, extended the best wishes of the Otahuhu bowlers to their club mate, and wished him a very pleasant trip. Mr. Carson thanked the members for their good wishes. A number of musical items, which were much enjoyed by the large gathering, were given by Messrs. E. V. Sutherland, C. Suisted, R. Sutherland and Captain R. Gibbons. Mr. W. fc3. Turner acted as accompanist. During the evening Mr. Pearce took the opportunity of presenting to Mr. Carson a handsome +ravelling companion.