LAWN TENNIS UNIVERSITY CLUB’S CRITICISM OF RULE

Press, Volume C, Issue 29498, 27 April 1961, Page 4

LAWN TENNIS UNIVERSITY CLUB’S CRITICISM OF RULE

A further letter from the president of the University club (Mr D. D. M. Stewart), criticising the present application of the rule governing atarting tiroes at Wilding Park and the penalising of the University senior men's team, was received by the management committee of the Canterbury Lawn Tennis Association at its meeting on Monday evening. Allegations of slackness by members of the competitions committee in defaulting some players and ignoring others in the same circumstances were repeated in the letter. “On March 11. the day in which the University team was opposed by the Shirley team of only three players, 45 minutes after the starting time the fourth player arrived. The competitions committee member on duty was so busy seeing that our senior men's team was defaulted. that he completely ignored other matches on that day," the letter said. "On the same day was played the country championships. All who attended the recent delegates' meeting will have heard the Avonside delegate say that his senior women's team, opposed by Fernside-Kaiapoi, had to attend with its opponents coming and going at will throughout the afternoon to play in these championships. Here again it was only the University team which was penalised. "These circumstances serve to bring into ridicule a rule which purports to be completely inflexible, yet is in fact enforced only at random.” the letter concluded.

"It looks as though he Is searching all over the place for evidence," Mr R. P. Murphy said. "I don’t think we have anything to answer. I don't think we should carry it on.” "In years gone by we have been too easy. They think they can get away with it as they have done in the past.” Mr R. N. C. Hill said.

, The chairman of the committee (Mr G. E. R. Atkinson) suggested that all the association could do was to say it was ? or ry that the University team had been penalised, and to ask a delegate to attend the next delegates' meeting. It was agreed that the University team had committed a Junior Grade Winners The following are the results matches:- competition Boys Under 18.—Section I. Barrington: section 11. st Ninlans; section 111. Linwood Avenue. Finals: St. Ninians beat Linwood Avenue. 4-2; St. Ninlans beat Barrington. 6-0. T u 4 nder 1 5 -—Sectkm I, N°rth Linwood; section H, Beckenham A; section IH. EdseFinals: Beckenham beat North Linwood, 4-2; Edie, ware beat Beckenham. 4-2 _ *?*T Is Under 18—Section I. South Christchurch; section 11. Edgeware. Final: Edgeware bea * South Christchurch. 4-3. Girls Under IS—Section 1. Edgeware A; section 11. Becken--5?™.. s. m ' Elmwood. Finals: Beckenham beat Edse--6'o: , Becken ham drew with Elmwood. 32 games each.

breach of the rules and that even if the situation was a trifle unfortunate “rules are rules and you have to «tlck to them." A motion was then carried that the letter be received and no further action be taken by the committee.