APPOINTING THE REFEREES

Chronicle (Levin), 22 April 1949, Page 4

APPOINTING THE REFEREES

Rugby Union and Association i Settle Difference A settlement has been reached between the Horowhenua , Rugby i Union and the- Horowhenua Rugby Referees' Association in the difference over the appointment of re-t: ferees. At a meeting on Wednesday night a deputation from the unjon met the association executive and, foUowihg this, Mr, F. D,. Chainey accepted a posilion on the appointment board in conjunction wiph the union delegate, Mr/ W. Anderson. At the meeting on Wednesday night, the president and secretary of the union, Messrs R. L. Robinson and J. E. Fullarton, appealed to the executive of the association to give the scheme a trial fpr one year. The» management committee felt fchat it was unable to alter a direccion from a special meeting without jalling another special meeting, :,a:id Mr. Robinson. The resolution had been passed and his committee had no power to over-ride it. If the association relinquishe'd the appointment of referees, then the. uriiori would have to set up i s own appointment board and classification committee. 'It wanted nCither of these things and the latter would probably cause an open breach between the two bodies, he edHe felt that these _ two matters were part Of the association's rights and ' privileges,.;: continued Mr. Robinson.'. -By doing what was asked the association -would retain these rights and it - could always have the balance of .power on the appointment board by nomina.ing two, delegates, He did not wa'nt a repetition of the bre.ach which had occurred between the. two bodies last year, emphasised the speaker, adding that if the scheme did not work then at the, end of the year representations couad be made to the management committee and something could be done about it. Mr. Fullarton endorsed Mr, Robinson's remarks with particular reference to the possibiihy of giving the scheme a trial for a year. During the discussion which :followed, Mr. C. E. Wiseley pointed out that at the specfal meeting of Ihe union the motion had been passed and it had gone through without any discussion. The referees' delegates had- been asked to speak to the motion, but not having been ofhcially adviSed that the . matter was to be diseilssed, were without directions from their C'keCiitiye: He said- that the reMr'efeS "had decitied to give the uiiioii's scheme a trial for 12 months. bUt ; h'one of tW^'jeietees normriated woulcl acce'jit office .on the-^appofht-ment board.-" - ',;1 s Asked to" ;what he would attribute'the lack of respohse, the president, Mr. J. A. Zuppicich) 'Said that none of the referees wanted to act on the board as it was :at present •constituted. The association was well a ware ithat it • could/; Upset.. ■ the scheme by putting two oi its memb'ers' on the board. However, -he felt that by so doing it, would be • dodging or walking. round. 'the -issue . He thought that a three-man board would have been . acceptable - tn the union because it only want-

ed representation, remarked Mr. Robinson. His obj ection to the scheme was that the union appointee had to be a member of a club and the re-* ferees had been asked to sever all club connections, commented Mr. L. G. Sayer. If the appointee could be an outsider, then he would be quite happy. It would be very difficult to get a person who was not a member pf a club yet stiil a member of the union, said Mr. Robinson. He thought that much of the trouble had arisen from the players themselves, for they had not been educated to accept referees. The clubs in the union did not seem to be educated to this particular point eithef, he added. The time would come when any referee coul.d be appointed to any game, and the players would accept him. " i The deputation then left the meeting and the executive discussed the matter. A very awkward position had been arrived at, if the matter was looked at from the union's point of view, said Mr. Zuppicich. The referees now had to decide one way or the other. However, they should consider their own association and -themselves also, he said. Following the discussions between the association's executive and the union representatives a full meetijig of association members was held, at which the position was explained to them and the executive recommended that nominations be again called for. When nominations were called for, Mr. Zuppicich and Mr. Wiseley were nominated, but both declined. Mr. Chainey accepted nomination and remarked that he was prepared to "give it a trial under protest."