Plunket Shield Problem Takes Startling Turn

Sun (Auckland), Volume II, Issue 573, 28 January 1929, Page 11

Plunket Shield Problem Takes Startling Turn

Auckland Looks Like Winning EFFECT OF RULING With one match still to b« played, the odds are that Auckland will be declared the winner of the Plunket Shield for 1928-29! THIS is the effect of the ruling given on Saturday by the chairman of the New Zealand Cricket Council, at the request of The Sun. It has cornpletely upset the widely held View in Auckland that, with Wellington’s win. Auckland's chances of winning the Shield had gone. The whole question was vigorously debated while the Wellington team was here. Mr. Donnelly, who was a spectator at the match, gave his personal opinion then in the same terms as his official pronouncement on Saturday. But the opinion was still widely held in official circles in Auckland that if Auckland lost the match, it lost its chance of winning the Shield as well. The crux of the argument was whether only outright wins or the best match record counted, before averages were considered. Even after a semi-official announcement last week, there were still doubts about the interpretation of the rule. To put the matter beyond doubt. The Sun wired Christchurch for an official decision on the question. Mr. Donnelly now makes it clear that only outright wins count for the Shield. A draw or a loss is of no account, except in the averages. As the position stands at present. Auckland and Wellington are the only two provinces which have had an right win. Canterbury and Otago have still to play. If either province secures an outright win, it will bo equal with Auckland and Wellington —one win each. Then the awarding of the Shield will be decided by averages. Auckland and Wellington have played all their matches. Their averages cannot be affected by the remaining matches. Auckland’s net average is greater than Wellington; therefore Wellington is definitely out of the running. HOW THE AVERAGES STAND Auckland's net average is plus 14.9 runs a wicket; Wellington’s plus 3.05. With a match still to play, Otago’s is minue 17.09, and Canterbury's minus 18.79. It can be seen therefore that to win the Shield, either Canterbury or Otago would have to secufe an outright win, and that by an overwhelming margin. It is possible, but improbable. It may seem unfair that a side which has an unbeaten record should lose the Shield, as Wellington has done. But the effect of the rule is obviously to impose a penalty on the practice of playing for a draw. instead of making every post a winning post. It means brighter cricket for the public, and a keener and better test far the players. With a four-day limit imposed this year, it is perhaps a little unfortunate that the rule waa not more widely understood before the Shield series staxted. Had it been clear from the start, it is certain that more than one match would have been much more keenly contested. Nobody, however, could have anticipated the present extraordinary position, with three games drawn out of five so far played. When the apparent unsoundne.ss of the rule is carefully examined, there is rally nothing unsound in it at all. Wellington drew with Otago in what practically amounted to an “even break,” whereas Auckland’s draw with Otago was overwhelmingly in favour of Allcott's men. Wellington certainly showed up better against Canterbury, but it waa not comparable to Auckland's big win. Wellington’s only win was against Auckland by a margin of 36 runs in a grand total of 1,254.