FOOTBALLER SUSPENDED

Chronicle (Levin), 8 May 1947, Page 4

FOOTBALLER SUSPENDED

Club Warned About Coach's Actions r 4 ' The suspension for two playing Saturdays of a Rahui Football Club player, C. Bloomfield, was the outcome of his appearance this week before the management committee of the Horowhenua Rugby Union. He was called on to explain his alleged conduct during the game between Rahui and College A on Saturday, April 26, In a report to last week'sr meeting of the committee, the referee, Mr. J. D. McFarlane, stated that he had been compelled to order Bloomfield off for persistent questioning of his decisions, ^ A warning was also issued to the coach of this team, Mr. C. J. . Pussell, who was also reported by the referee, and his club will be adyised that any recurrence of this nature may result in the suspension of the whole team. By way of explanation, Mr. Bloomfield claimed that he had not questioned the referee's decision directly, but had remarked on one of his decisions, He gdmitted that he had "moaned a bit," but that he was unaware that the referee had heard him. When taken to task by the referee he had said: "We only want a fair go." In all other respects he considered the game had been a good one, and his team mates had dnjoyed it: , , . At this stage he was asked to leave the room while t^ie committee further discussed the incident. A suggestion that he _ should be suspended for two playing Saturvdays was forthcoming from Mr. C. E. Wiseley. . Supporting this suggestion, Mr. F. G. Carrington said he did not want to appear to support the player in question, as he should be censored as an example to others. He agreed. with Mr. Wiseley, but thought that" last Saturday should be included as one of the two. stand-down periods. Bloomfield had been employed on the line last Saturday, and his behaviour had been commendable. Prior to the passing of a motion that Bloomfield be stood dowh for two Saturdays, including last Saturday, the president, Mr. A. Gillespie, said he took a very serious view of play ers disputing the decisions of a referee, and chaos would result if it was allowed to continue. Coach's Explanation Contending that his team had been , sub j ect to harsh treatment in the first half, and that there had been "glaring incidents" which had been overlooked by the referee, the coach, Mr. C. J. Pussell, said he wanted to .know why the referee had been so harsh on one team. "The boy who was ordered off asked a fair question, and he should.. have /been fairly answered," he added. One glaring flva.mnlfi. he contended* was a

knock-on by which College had made 20 yards. "The boys were .getting hostile and would have walked off if I had not intervened. ff I had not asked the referee for a fair deal, the results would have been more serious." * Asked by one of the committee if he considered the match had improved after Bloomfield had been ordered off, Mr. Pussell replied: "I wouldn't say that, but I will say that the refereeing was much different." Mr. G. Clunie: Do you think you have the right to go on the ground and question a referee? Mr. Pussell: I think player or coach is entitled to an explanacion from a referee. The president: On the day in question we were short of referees and Mr. .McFarlane refereed this game under sufferance. You must appreciate . the difficulty ..the association has in " obtaining referees, and you yourself might have been asked to take over' this game. If that happened would you have done so? Mr. Pussell: I have often refereed games, but I will only do so in friendly games. Mr. T. Winiata: What would have been your attitude if you had. been the referee in this case, and had been approaehed on the field by a coach? Mr. Pussell: I would have tried to talk reasonably with the coach. Mr. McFarlane didn't do that with me. A The president: I have never heard of such a thing. There is no o.ccasion when a coach is allowed on a field during a game. Mr. R. L. Robinson: If a coach wants a ruling he can ask for it at half time or after the game. At this juneture Mr. Pussell was requested to leave while a decision was made. Should Referee Call Off Game? Commenting on the coach's explanation, Mr. C. E. Wiseley said he thought that the committee could take very little action against him. He suggested, and subsequently moved as a motion, that the club be advised that in future the referee will be advised to '-call off a game and award the match to the opposing side if similar incidents arose. This was objected to by some members who considered that the suspension of » the team would be more desirable than calling off a . game. Mr. Winiata: It would be unfair, because of the actions of its ^oach, to award a match against a, first offending team. It would be better to .give the team a chance to get rid of the coach. Mr. W. O. Neas.: I don't think the referee should have the power ,;to call off the game. ' It , would be better if teams were

warned beforehand that they might be suspended. Mr. Carrington: The referee might be lucky if he got away from the ground without being assaulted by the crowd. Stating that from the discussion it was obvious that a better motion would be forthcoming, Mr. Wiseley asked leave to withdraw his motion. 1 On the motion of Mr. Robinson, it was decided that the coach be warned and the club advised that any recurrence would bring about the suspension of the club at the pleasure of the union. A further motion by' Mr. J. DUnlop, seconded by 'Mr. Carrington, • that all clubs be notified that any similar occurrences would result in the suspension. of' .the. club concerned, and." the with'drawdl of : the coach's . ticket, was passjqd unanimously: Coach ShouM 'Set Example Addressing Mr. Pussell, the president said the committee loked upon his actions with disfavour. The game had to be played in the proper spirit and a coach should also be a coach in good manners and should set an example to the team. Replying, Mr. Pussell said that he had had considerable experience as a player, referee and coach and had never been before a union. He agreed that a c.oach should set an example, but pointed out that it was hard for anyone who was "wrapped up" in a team to do so when his team was not getting a "fair go." "I would like to know," he said, "if a referee has. the right to order me up before a management committee?" The president: He has the right to report you, which he has done. Mr. Pussell: He ordered me to-* l report to the committee. " ' / The president: The referee has* 4 submitted this report and that is what we.are acting o*fi. Oontinuing, the president emphasised the difficulty the Referees' Association was having in obtaining suitable men, and it was up to^the clubs to give it all the support they could. Last sea-' son the association had practically had to disband as it was unable to muster sufficient referees to carry on. Play ers and club officials should, he continued, be very careful in their attitude to these men who were voluntarily giving up their time for the game. They * .-■•hould know that they could exer3ise their right of protest after the game and to the proper persons. The committee would not tolerate the growing practise of "bawling" referees out on the field. An objeetiqn to the use of the word "bawling" by Mr. Pussell was over-ruled.