Cricket 1912

66 CRICKET: A WEEKLY RECORD OP THE GAME. A pr I l 20, 1912. H. GRADIDGE & SONS, Manufacturers and Exporters of all requisites for Cricket, Lawn Tennis, Racquets, Squash Racquets, &c. Reblading Cricket b a ts and Restringing Tennis b a ts a Special feature. F a c t o r y :— ARTILLERY PLACE, W00LWI0H, §.E0 Pa ten tees and Sole makers o f the “ I M P E R I A L D R I V E R ” Cricket Bats made in Mens, Small Mens, College, 6, 5, 4, & 3, sizes. Every other requisite for Cricket, including balls, leg guards, batting gloves, gauntlets, stumps, nets, &c. Price Lists and Special Quotations free . ALL COODS CARRIAGE PAID TO ANY PART.OF THE1UNITED ____ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ KINCDOM. Sole Makers o f the “ Imper ial D r i v e r ” and “ Improved Gr ad i dg a ” Lawn Tennis Racquete. HISTORY OF THE PLUNKET SHIELD. The Plunket Shield was presented to the New Zealand Cricket Council during the season 1906-07 with the condition that it was to be awarded to the province which, in the opinion of the council, had the best record for the season. Many of the delegates on the council claimed that Auckland should be the first possessor of the shield, but others were of opinion that Canterbury’s claims were paramount. On a vote being taken the Plunket Shield was handed over to the Canterbury Association. Auckland challenged, and the fi»st match for the shield was played at Hagley Park, Christchurch, on December 14, 16, 17, 1907. D. Reese captained Canterbury and Haddon did a similar duty for Auckland. Canterbury won the toss, and in the first innings compiled 190. Auckland replied with 539 (Relf 157 and Hemus 148). Canterbury’s second innings realised 213. The game was abruptly concluded, Malone, the last Canterbury man in, got a fast ball from Belf, which split the batsman’s finger, and he “ retired hurt.” Auckland thus won the first challenge match by an innings and 136 runs. On returning to Auckland the visitors were accorded a mayoral reception, and Lord Plunket, the donor of the shield, sent a message congratulating the team on its success. ”Ot*igo was the next to challenge for the shield, and on Decem­ ber 22, 1907, the Otago touring team which was to play Canterbury, Wellington, and Auckland left Dunedin in high hope to bring the shield to Otago. The team was ingloriously defeated by Canterbury and Wellington, so that when it left the latter city for Auckland without Fisher and Downes (who had returned to Dunedin) there were grave misgivings as to the result. The match— the first played in Auckland—was commenced on January 2nd, 1908, and Lord Plnnket was present. Auckland won the toss, and hit up 267 for the first innings (Brook-Smith 110). On a good wmket Otago collapsed for 81. Auckland's second innings yielded 211. Again Otago made a poor stand, being all out for 82, the game ending in a win for Auckland by 315 runs. In the belief that Otago had not shown true form in the first match against Auckland, the Otago team again challenged the following year, and, principally through the agency of C. G. W ilson, an Otago team again set out in quest of the shield. This was iu December, 1908, and on the 28th of that month the third match for the Plunket Shield was commenced. Otago was repre­ sented by what was recognised as a good side, albeit Downes did not go at the last moment. Otago won the toss, and on a perfect wicket compiled 338 (Wilson 144). Auckland’s first innings realised 190, and Otago’s second 196. Then, owing to an absurd arrangement that the match should be confined to three days, Auckland, m a losing position, stonewalled on the third day and played out time, having lost five wickets for 160. The match was declared drawn. The absurdity pointed the way to the authorities, and it was decided that future Plunket Shield matches shoul I be played to a finish. Canterbury followed immediately after Ota^o.and on January 1st, 1909, commenced the fourth challenge match. ( anteiburv made 112 and 187, to which Auckland responded with 239 and 92, winning by 32 runs. Wellington next threw down the gauntlet to Auckland, and on December 27th, 1909, commenced a match against the holders. Wellington won the toss and compiled 140 in the first innings and 108 in the second. Auckland replied with 233 and 16 for no wickets, and won the match. The sixth contest was that of Canterbury and Auckland, com­ menced on January 7th, 1910 Reese won the toss, and Canterbury took strike, scoring 140 and 238, Auckland responding with 275 and 104 for three wickets. Auckland won by seven wickets. The seventh match was that memorable contest of 1910 in which Otaga was so ingloriously defeated by an innings and 161 runs. Auckland won the toss, and compiled 579 (Hemus 109, Relf 118, bale 121) to Otago’s 237 and 181. The eighth challenge match was that between Wellington and Auckland during Christmas week, 1910. Wellington won the toss, and compiled 188 and 179 to Auckland’s 154 and 215 for six wickets. Auckland won by four wickets. In the ninth match (1910-1) Canterbury won a fine victory at Auckland by six wickets. But in the twelfth, reported in this issue, Auckland snatched the shield from Canterbury, after that side had successfully defended it against both Otago and Wellington. G E OR G E L E W I N & Club Colour Specialists and A thletic Clothing M anufacturers. OUTFITTERS B Y APPOINTMENT TO The Royal Navy and Array, Cornwall, Kent, Middlesex, Somerset and Surrey Counties, and London Scottish, Irish and Welsh, Blacklieath, Harlequins, Rich­ mond, Catford Rugby Football Clubs, and all the leading Clubs in the British Isles and abroad; M.C.C. S. African Tour, 1909, 8 . African Cricket Association 1910, and Queen’s Club, Kensington, the M.C.C. Australian Team 1911-12. and the South African Association Cricket Team 1912. Established 1809. W rite for E stimates . Telephone: P.O. 607 CITY Works at Camberwell. 8, CROOKED LANE, MONUM ENT , E.C.