Objection Taken To Letter From Union

Chronicle (Levin), 11 August 1948, Page 4

Objection Taken To Letter From Union

No rugby referees will take "the field this Saturday and they will not accept.' any „ further appointments until the Horowhenua Rugby Union withdraws what they feel is a vote of no-confidence in them and their Appointment Board. The trouble lies with a recommendation received at a meeting of the Horowhenua Referees' Association last night from the union to the effect that the union should have a say in all future appoiAtments, and forwarding a letter from the Shannon Football fclub seeking an explanation of certain decisions made in a recent competition game by the referee, Mr. J. Elvidge. A three-hour discussion, cFuring which the union and the Shannon Club were subjected to withering fire from an almost 100 per cent attendance of association members. resulted in the belief , being expressed that the pessonal integritj of the association had been questioned. It was decided to reply to thc union pointing out that the matters forwarded by it from the Shan: non Club were questions of fact and that "if the Rugby Union members knew their rules they woulc

realise that the sole judge^of factjl was the man in charge "of thei? game." , - E It was further moved that "this., meeting of the association instructic the secretary to write to the secre-r tary of the Horowhenua' Rugby J Union, stating that in view of the',' vote .of no-confibence which their r recommen'dations infer, 110 appoint-, ments will be made and no referees.3 of this association are available forj appointment until such time as the! union alters its opinions and'; unreservedly withdraws the slur on/ the integrity of the referees thatj! their recommendations imply." When the recommendation waslj read at the meeting, it was point-/ ed out by Mr. C. E. Wiseley that;' during the discussion that led up to;' it being forwarded; it had beenj! state'd by members of the manage-j ment committee that the union wasi not aware of the appointmentsl made by the Appointment Board. i He had stated that this was wrong.j It had been further said that, "incompetent" referees were used.v Members -had clearly stated that referees should not have club ties. In this regard he had made inquiries in the Manawatu district and had foun'd that most.of the referees were interested in -a club, and that no conjsideration was taken of this when appointments were being made. The same applied in the Wellington Association. The president of the association, Mr. J. A. Zuppicich, sai'd_ that the recommendation was in direct conflict with the rules, which were not made of concrete, however, and could be changed. Before making any statement "or _ expressing any opinion, he would like to hear other members' comments. He sai'd that the- only instance in New Zealand in which a union had any say in the appointment of the referees was in the case of matches for the Ranfurly Shield. However, all associations were subservient to their particuiar union. It would be futile for the board to consist of one member of the union and one member of the association, said Mr. H. D. Aitchison. If the union coul'd be persuaded to have one member to two of the association's it would be more advantageous. Mr. Wiseley pointed out that a deadlock could easily be reached with only two members on the board, and that if this occurred the final decision' would be given by the president of the union. The opinion that the matter should be left to the association was expressed by Messrs. J. Elvidge and F. D. Chainey. Mr. Elvidge pointed out that if the union was endeavouring to get away from club ties, then it should

remember that every member of the union was brought into.it by club ties. The appointment board, as it consisted today of one member; Mr. Zuppicich, had no club ties. The recommendation was in fact a vote of no-confidence in the board and the. association as a whole, It meant pointing a finger at a referee and saying, "No you can't do that game because you are . not honest enough." If club ties were going to be brought into the matter, then it, meant the finish of the referees. Agreeing with this opinion, Mr. Aitcheson said that it had not only been the Shannon Club which had brought the trouble . about. Hui Mai and Paraparaumu had also aired grievances. Although he had had ties with Shannon Club, he.was going to withdraw from hiS association with it in farness to himself. Regarding the incident concerned, he felt that the Shannon Club harboured a grudge, commented Mr. Zuppicich. Had the complaint come from the majority of clubs, i then the association could have taken some no'tice of it, or if it had come from members of the union without the push from Shannon it would have been different. He had decided that he would make no further appointments, and that if the union felt it could carry them out better then they could do so. He did not want the association to feel

;nat ne couia nor "taKe n>, dug aie felt that the day. was coming when, f anyone wanted to take up :efereeing, then he would have to 'live in the bush." If he "vyas seen speaking to a member of a club in ihe street, he would be accused of ill sorts of things. The whole :hing had originated from the match between Athletic and Shannon. In regard to the letter forwarded oy the union from the Shannon Club questioning matters of fact, Mr. .Wiseley said that immediately the " letter had been read at the union's meeting, he had risen to a point of order and asked the president, Mr. A. Gillespie, to rule it out 0f order. He had pointed out that the rules stated that the sole judge of fact was the referee, and he had been supported by one member of the union, Mr. D. Oliver. Mr. Gillespie had over-ruled this and discussion had continued. Members would note that the Shannon Club made no mention of either the game or the referee In question in their letter. He had further pointed out to Mr. Gillespie that rule 12 of the Referees' Association stated that complaints against referees of the association for any misconduct or inefficiency had to be made in writing by the executive of the club. A guarantee of 19s had to be included. Shannon had not done this and Mr. Gillespie had still moved the motlon that the letter be forwarded to the association. Further discussion followed, members stating that there was a growing tendency in rugby for whisperings against the referees. Usually this came from spectators who were not interested in the club concerned, but it was extending to the clubs. It was incredible that referees should be accused, of bias when they went 011 to the field to do their job to the best of their ability, and once- on'the field were quite unprejudiced. At a meeting of the Horowhenua Rugby Union last night, Mr. R. Kingi was elected to the appointment Board of the Referees' Association, if this was acceptable to the association.