LAWN TENNIS.

Press, Volume LVII, Issue 17127, 23 April 1921, Page 13

LAWN TENNIS.

NEW ZEALAND'S DECISION. TO TERMINATE DAVIS COT PARTNERSHIP. A Press cablegram from Melbourne this ivoek convoyt& a wrong impression regarding the relationship of the New Zealand Lawn Tennis Association with th* AtistrahMiaa I/awn. Tennis Mention was mad* of New s Zesland*s intention to withdraw fron* 'the Australasian body, and of tho effect that this would have on Davis Cup contests, wbito it was also stated that New Zealand would receive."bue-thirS of all.net unapplied proceeds derived from the Dsvis Cup compet'f tions'iu New Zealand." The correct position' was given to a'Wellington "Post" reporter on Thursday by Mr M. E. Dennistqn, shairmnn of the New Zealand Lawn Tennis Association. "The position, in so far'as the Davia Cunt u concerned," ho said, "is that when th* late Anthony Wilding we* in his prime, it was recognised that lie was the only player who could be associated with Brookes in *) teiun of world's champion standard. Consequently, New Zealand joined Australia, : the combination being known as 'Australia with New Zealand.'. Under the conditions, agreed upon between: New Zealand and Australia, one match in every .three played in Australasia had to be played in New Zealand, .and in the event of a termination of the partnership New Zealand would be entiUed to onethird of.the accumulated Davis Cup partnership funds. This'now amounts to about £4OOO, excluding any moneys that may hats been derived from tho last contest at Auckland. This fund was primarily instituted to send teams in pursuit of the cup wben*tn* contest is'played outside 'Australasia. Th" agreement is so arranged that money can bo toien'from the. fund fo sond a team, eay, to-New York'this year, at a cost of, maybe, £ISOO, but should any profits accruo, from such a trip, the grots proceed* are paid >in(o the Australasian Lawn Tennis AssochUkm funds (as distinct from the Davis Cup fund), and Now Zealand would only be entitled to receive one-seventh- of the money in tb* event of leaving the Australasian Lawn Tennis Association; New Zealand being one of ths> seven bodies affiliated. "It therefore follows that the whole of tbs accrued- moneys to tho credit of tit* Davis Cup 'fund 'could boasnent in a vain pursuit of the Cup, -and the Management Committee) of tho Now Zealand Lawn Tennis Associa-tion,-not Ueing able, at. present, to "see stay •New Zealsnd player likely to be sufficiently prominent to be chosen to t«ko part'in thif contest. hat, after mature consideration, eomo. to the conclusion that it would' be w the best interest* of New Zealand tennis to terminaty tho partnership and secure it* share o>° tho fiind. This could be' car-marked and used as a fund for the ' encouragement of tonniii in Now. Zealand. "It in not the intention of the New Zealand Association to, sever it* affiliation to the Australasian. Lawn" Tenni? Association.* If its the future players who nre considered worthy o r challenging for tho Cup should be found. the money which will be received as a result of the severance of the partnership could b* used, to send a purely New' Zealand team V» p!«y for a coveted trophy. The agreement doe* not iKTinjt of Nuw Zealand seceding' from partnership while Australia with New Zcalu'ud'are challengers, us in the position now, but one year'*' notice can be given, end lbi« is what New Zealand has donp." Touching on th© question of sv separata n:ilion, Mr J)cn)iinlo*ii stated that Now Zealand ii a separate entity as affiliated to tbs Knglfch Lawn Tennis Association, aixl h»* I>ceu for many'year*. It was not con«i«l«r«t that existing regulation* would icquire to l>* | altered other' than the application l>y New Zealand to lie rccoguired as a separate : nation. . Mr Dcnniston Recounted for the irregularity oi the cabled statement by reason of itsj ljeiujr feut from Melbourne, whereas the headquaitcrs of 'ln* Australasian Lawn Tennis Association arc ia Sydney.