SUNDAY CRICKET

Bay of Plenty Beacon, Volume 14, Issue 61, 9 November 1949, Page 4

SUNDAY CRICKET

Sir, —It was with regret that I read in a recent Beacon a further reference to the fact that the United Cricket Club was unable to take part in local competitions under the Whakatane Cricket Association. This is entirely due to the United Club itself.

Perhaps Sir, if you were aware of the facts of this unfortunate business you would realise that the country clubs are in no way to be blamed.

Last season a proposal to play competitions on a Saturday was not accepted by the Whakatane Association, with a result that four teams took part in a most enjoyable cricket competition. United played games too, but orfNt Saturday, and these matches were mostly against outside centres. At this year’s annual meeting of, the Whakatane Association considerable discussion took place as to which day would be the day for play, Saturday or Sunday.

United delegates were quite pared for other Clubs to play on a. Sunday, as long as the games against United took place on a Saturday. However, it was pointed out by, other Clubs that this would mean they would have to field weak teams, if any at all, when they played United. After a brief adjournment a proposal put forward was that, in one round of the competitions, United play other clubs on a Saturday and in the next round play them on a Sunday. This would make the competition a bit more even, as it would permit all concerned to field their best teams when it suited them.

The United delegates refused to entertain this proposal. Do you not agree Sir, that this would have been a reasonable and satisfactory compromise*? v However, the original proposal was put to the meeting and Sunday play carried by 12 votes to 6. I might add in passing that cumbe, for example, stated that if they had to play Saturday, they would be without the services of six of their players by reason of their occupations. Taneatua, also, with the shops open Saturdays, would be without some of their players. However those are only two of the clubs. Two other clubs favoured Sunday play also.

Later on, however, the United Club ruled out any possibility of Saturday play by a letter to the Association, the terms of which made it impossible for Saturday play to be a success. Briefly, the requirements were:— (1) Saturday play and nothing else, (2) All other C-lubs to field their best elevens \so that games would not be a farce, (3) The Whakatane United Cricket Club would have to reserve the right to withdraw from the competitions if at any time, the said Club considered the standard of play to be below the required level.

Whew! Imagine that? And we are supposed to be playing the game held up as an example of sportsmanship!

The usual way is to abide by the decision of the majority. Apparently not so “United.”

Despite the fact that United will not play in competitions under the Whakatane Cricket Association, cricket will be played, cricket that, if perhaps not up to international standard will at least be played in the friendly manner in which it should be played and will, I’m sure, give pleasure to players and spectators alike. Trusting this will serve to put country clubs in a better light in the eyes of the public. Yours etc., , ij#' J. W. BARKER,

President, Taneatua Cricket Club,

COMPULSORY UNIONISM Sir, —Your leader under the head ing “Strange Reasoning” calls for , some comment. Like every 'other subject it has two sides'which ought to be brought forward. ' Two questions I would like to ask: 1. Do' you believe in having ,an award? . , 2. Do you consider such awai'd ought to be carried ou; by employer and worker? It might be just as well to state in this district, before compulsory unionism, carpenters had no award, with the following results: Up to 60 hours per week all on a flat rate of pay at one stage sent out on country work, 2 or 3 men would be supplied with a few billies, camp oven, a sack to make a bunk, and a tent. , We then had to get food and water as bes;fc we could. If we wished to return'home, that, like our food, we had to pay for. You appear to oppose compulsory unionism or, in other words, .workers’ making some payment towards the cost of getting conditions in. keeping with the times. What might be the effect of your idea? It would put the workers into two camps, in the following way: That section paying union fees woulS expect and rightly so, some protection. One must at all times remember that we have two classes of employers, just as we have of workers. The next question would be, would those making no payment by way of 'Union fees §et the same advantages as the other employees? or would they be working in competition with each other, as two sections in ' the same firm’s employment? I remember a few years ago when the wage rate in' Whakatane and Opotiki varied to the extent of fid per hour, does that lead to fair competition in business? If you advocate workers receiving the benefits of awards without taking any part in the payment of obtaining them, and seeing ‘they are carried out, would you use the same yard stick in other directidps, including goods which are the product of labour. If not, why not? You complain about the use of Union funds. Is it not the duty of every member to' attend meetings,' so they may. have a say in that direction, why complain if they don’t use their rights in such matters?

Many times in your paper you have stressed the point that interest in local bodies and other organisations lags well behind, the same few having to carry the load. That applies to money matters, too. I would like to point out that compulsory unionism is nothing new to some of the older tradesmen. In the North of England we had it as far back as I can recall over 50 years ago. I had to join the Union in June 1905. Had I not done so, it would have "been a case of 6 years 11 months apprenticeship being lost. Let me conclude by saying I don’t oppose a secret postal ballot. In business shareholders can vote by proxy. Why the difference? Yours etc.,

, HARRY CARR. It would seem Mr Carr disagrees with us more than we disagree with him. If he does not oppose a secret ballot amongst workers on the question of whether there should be compulsory unionism or not, we'll; consider that a reasonable and fair attitude. We understand such a ballot is part of the National Party’s policy, and we sgfd' we approved. If the vote shows workers want compulsion, let them have it, by all*, means.—Editor.