THE PRESS FRIDAY, APRIL 20, 1979. Replacement called for

Press, 20 April 1979, Page 14

THE PRESS FRIDAY, APRIL 20, 1979. Replacement called for

The Wellington businessman. Mr Ron Evans, who was reported yesterday as saying he would pay for a national referendum on New Zealand rugby’s attitude to contacts with South Africa, may never have had so swift a return from an investment idea. A vote which defeated Mr Ron Don, of Auckland, in the election of council members at the annual meeting of the New Zealand Rugby Football Union amounted to firm support for the views expressed by Mr Evans. He had challenged a statement made by Mr Don. who said he had been quoting a survey carried out by “Truth” newspaper, which claimed that 95 per cent of New Zealand sportsmen were in favour of the visit he made to attend the jubilee celebrations of the Northern Transvaal Rugby Union.

The defeat of a sitting council member is a rarity. Mr Don has been on the council for nine years. But he has come far too close to implicit support for New Zealand ties with South Africa for the comfort of many New Zealanders and, obviously, that of union members.

When a New Zealand team was invited to play in the Transvaal jubilee fixtures last month, the council declined. Mr Don reopened the matter, and the council gave approval for six All Blacks to play. Two more first-class players — the former All Black, Kevin Eveleigh, and the Auckland forward, Greg Denholm — also went to South Africa, and Mr Don was forthright in his support for their acceptance of the invitations. The council, quite properly, decided yesterday to ask the South African Rugby Board how eight players could be there, when permission had been given for only six.

To people not familiar with the

kind of control that sports administrators like to exert over players it may seem strange that a rugby organisation can question what individual, amateur players elect to do in another country, in the first instance the council would have done well to have nothing whatever to do with the Transvaal invitations. Instead, the council chose to endorse the invitation and thereby it put New Zealand’s reputation at risk in the confusing and untidy international debate on apartheid. Two other players did no more than this when they made their independent decisions to play in Transvaal.

Rugby administrators may feel that, apart from the independence of the actions of the two players, the political result simply emphasised the unwise nature of the council’s own decision.

Mr Don has made clear his belief that because there is now some form of racial integration in South African rugby, the way is open for a resumption of South African-New Zealand tours. Many New Zealanders will not see it in so clear a light. New Zealand is bound by the Gleneagles Agreement not to support South African apartheid policies and there can be little prospect of the proposed Springbok tour of New Zealand in 1981 taking place. If it did no more, the union vote which put Mr Paul Mitchell, of Wanganui on the council in place of Mr Don will do something to dispel the popular belief that rugby administrators have no regard for public sentiment or for the practicalities of politics. Mr Mitchell considered that he had been elected on a protest vote. It was a sane and healthy protest, a sane and healthy decision, and one that will be warmly and widely welcomed.