CRICKET.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LVI, Issue 252, 23 March 1914, Page 7

CRICKET.

THE AUSTRALIAN TEAM. • N,EW ZEALAND COUNCIL EXPLAINS. Christchureh, Fridav. A special meeting of the management committee of the New Zealand Cricket Council was held to-night to consider tlie criticisms and statements that had been made by the. various association* with regard to the recent visit of the New Zealand team to Australia. Particular exception was taken to some statements published in the Auckland Herald, of the 14th inst., in which (he methods of the council were severely dealt with. The article particularly criticised the balance-Bheet of the tour, and the items of expenditure. The chairman, Mr. G. F. Francis, said the meeting had been called to consider whether the committee would reply to the published statement. A sub-coni-mittee had been set up to frame a reply, but the council would have to decide what steps to take in the matter. The secretary read the reply drawn up by the sub-committee, which referred in particular to Auckland affairs. The chairman said he thought they Bhould not assume that the Auckland Association was responsible for the information published, and he proposed that copies of the reply be sent to the Auckland Association and the Auckland Herald. This course was agreed upon.

It was decided that the following communication should be sent to each guar anteeing association:—"There has been some misunderstanding among a number of the associations as to the reason for the expenses of the tour of the New Zealand team to Australia exceeding the estimates. The management committee think it right, therefore, that an explanation should be given to the associations. When the tour was first proposed, it was assumed that it would not last longer than six weeks. It was found, however, that if the South Australian match were included the tour could not be completed under eight weeks, thus adding considerably to the expenses. The quarterly meeting of the council was emphatic in ifs opinion that the South Australian match should be played, especially in view of the Council's aim for years past to arrange regular annual tours in New Zealand from the South Australian, Victorian. New South Wales ■- and Queensland teams. In the next place, the team was travelling in Australia during Christmas week and the week after, and on account of the railway regulations relating to Christmas travelling no concessions in fares were allowed. The difference between the original estimates of railway fares and the actual amount spent was considerable, and other items., for ground men, attendants, etc., were charged for, which could not have been foreseen before the team left New Zealand. The charges are usual, and were recognised by all the teams playing in the big grounds in Australia. They arc not in the nature of tips. The New Zealand team paid less than most interState teams. Further, it was proposed to play two matches in New Zealand before the team left, and the receipts from tljese two matches were included in the estimates of receipts. The disorganisation caused by the strike prevented -either of these two matches being played. In fact, it was only:with extreme difficulty that the team was got away at all. There had been some criticism of the item 'players' allowance,' but this criticism overlooked the rule of the council dealing with this particular question. The council under its rules is bound to reimburse players for loss of wages. In the case of the New Zealand tour to Australia in 1599. and all New Zealand matches since that date, players have been reimbursed Ly the council for loss of wages according to the duty which is upon the council by virtue (if its own rules. The council felt, however, that it could not afford toiwvthß players' loss for wages during the whole of the last tour, and instead the committee decided to make a spa. eial allowance to the players to pay them as a day in lieu of loss of wages. This arrangement was accepted by all the players." From the council's point of view', this was the best bargain that could be made under the circumstances. Whatever the opinion members of t-T»e committee may undoubtedly have had concerning the propriety of making allowances to players, the committee as a body could not disregard one of its own rules while it remained in the ru'e book. We might also add that this arrangement was confirmed bv a meeting of th n delegates."