To the Editor of the "Norta-Cama Dairy News."
Sin—Recently in the cricket match, Hongkong v. United Services at Hongkong, a confident appeal was made against Mr. Pearce, who had made 149, for caught be-bind the wicket. The umpire did not see the snick nor hear it and immediately gave not out.
Simultaneously Mr. Pearce started to move towards the pavilion thereby indicating that he was out. (He afterwards admitted that he was out-)
Having given a decision, would the umpire have been justified in consulting the other umpire before allowing the match to continue? The rules of cricket do not appear to cover this.
The mistake proved costly as another 100 runs were added before the two remaining wickets were obtained, Mr. Pearce making 201 not out. That does not affect the point at issue, but shows how a mistake can influence the result of a match.
T am, ete..
CricKerer. Shanghai, Feb. 23.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.