RUGBY LAW.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1598, 15 November 1912, Page 7

RUGBY LAW.

■' ' -.- ■-■'-■ ,-.;,// '» '. ■■ ■ A DOMINION CONFERENCE, LOCAL CONTROL PROPOSED., ; DEFEATED BY SMALL MAJORITY. THE. SECESSION "BO^Y." ■•'■' A resolution-' with a supremely important bearing- upon ■. of Rugby football in this Dominion was discussed . at a special general meeting pf tHe ( coiin--; cil of the New Zealand.Rugby Union, held an the 'Chamber of Commerce last evening, Mr. G. i'. C, Camptell-presiding. ■ About forty delegates attended! qnd most of tli« ! Rugby Unions throughout the-Do-minion were rmresente'di The' fullvto'xt sf' the resolntioils on the order paper wero published in The Dominion on , Tuesday last. , The whole of the resolutions emanated from the' Cantei;bury,.K\igby Union. Thej principal discussion'of the "evening Hsntred upon a proposal that tho Ne-wiZea-larxl Tj'iiion should-.apply: to the 'English Unioiii for power to make- alteration?-to ' : the rules'of the game upon own ini-. tiative. This proposal was defeated, after .. it had been debated for.:nearly'two., hours, by the narrow margin of six votes'.''.-Sub- . sequently an hour was spent in discussing: . proposed amendments to the.. rules v and other matters. ; / ,■"■;-'■:; ' The Shadow of the Nbrthern Uijion. ■ 'Ou behalf of the Canterbury Union, Mr. - G. Mason moved: . : ; ..: .-'- ' ."That the New' Zealand Eugby Foot- '•'- ' tell Union be rwiuested. to .instruot'; ... the. secretary to. make an, immediate: ■ application,-.to the,- English,*. Jlugby'. -■ Union'-for .authority to make such'' . -alterations and amendments' to ■ the';. Tules. of'the game-as;lnay, from.'tiineV.'-'' . to time, be .foriiid'necessary-to, or-ad-' yisable ah tha. interests.' of 'tho game •- in th|s'sDonjinion'.flf.-A' :C-r:;>- :/:' -,'< -y'i ;< :. Supp6'rting.hr'9 ; liv6tibnVMr. ; 'Mason said that: Caiiter,b'u'ry ? -'li'ad r ffailed- 1 theVmeeting at that tiiife^beciiuse^mb'tioils -passed 'ac the vHome in ,the off-ssasonjiiiviheyeae«anyc-sijiotion ;- passed. now wmidf ifrappro'yed: at/Home, ' como into operitioh'.incst season;- ; At---l'' ; pre'yi6\js -the.'.opinion that itiHva's.'irrong>r6thdt'-'altDrati6ns'. -qf ■ trivial■iniportanfeshpuld.have to..be. sent to Eng|and''-foi - fapproval." be-' ' fore the meeting aimed-at/Securing some measure, of-local government, for, :New.Zealand. He was sorry to say-that Canterbury was up against .the' -.Northern Union game.--.Hp:.was out— and, his ca\leagues. wereVwith hiqi-rto., protect tho Rugby Union amateur; game. But when he found that.certain.modifications of the rules were required to .keep the game clean, he ,was,;out to fight- for- these modifications.. A majority of players in' Canterbury.had'deliverad this, ultimatum'i That u,pless y tlie, rules were alte'red-.to:some-extent, they would be found/ploying tile , Northern (Jnion'.gaiiie next season.';.'; '•. ,; ' A delegate: Let them go! '■.;''//"■■ Mr.t Ma.s 3 ! l said t|iat some'of them might is allowed to gp, biit hail' 6aid applied also to boys who were ;leaving the , schools, : Tho : motion asjeid that I the New ZealandUhion l>e giveh authority-to' ma.ke' such Valteratipn? as were liecessary in tho interests' of tho ' game in the Dominion. ■/ /.. : , >~ A "Disastrous" Policy. !.-■ Mr.F. J. Olsen (Auckland) said that he would second and support the resolution, undei'standihg that iit did. not pro- /.. ppsft to niter'tho rules of 'professionalism; but only the .laws of: the game. His union considered .'that a body-like tho New. Zealand Union should have power to alter ■ the laws of the.game so as to suit local conditions. The Auckland Union -was , not afraid'of'the Northern'-Union game. In response to: suggestipns,. Mr,- AFason eubstituted the word "laws" for "rules" in his resolution, so as to make it clear that its adoption would involve no al- j • tera'tion- of the rules relating:.to professionalism. -'..-". .;....;■:/■...■ ,-■ .. Mr. TR. T. Bailey,' (Hawlse's' Bay).; sup-', . ported the resolution. He said.-that it was very,pleasant.to find that the.bigger unions were conjing rouiid to the view pre-. vipusly'nphei'd only b'y'tlie's'inaller-umonsf The policy of "let the players go" had re-;' suited ■' 'disastrously, / particularly ■ in Hawke's Baj'. Unless tho-rules were altered, : Rugby football .would soon .bo a ihing of the pa,st. (La\igliter.) - Mr. Bailey Kaid that it was all very well for the . Wellington delegate, to laugh. -Those unions■wliich had grounds mortgaged-— MjyP-erry: To someone .else'! •.'-.■■ >■ Prepared to Cut the Painter. , Mr. Bailey said that :,tha' unions that had groundn could hold oiit for a .time against.the.League game, but in the end these unions Hvoiild come to the same position as those which were less fortuiiatdy placed, Hia union did not wish to cut the painter from England, , but they were prepared to dp so if tho English Uijipn declined to sanction necessary alterations ; ■ in the laws. .'.. ■'". '■ ■■'■ ... -.iMr, X. R. Meredith (Wellington) :said | that the resolution was:the thin end of the' wedge, Some of the resolutions to be moved that eveiiinp by Cantorbury involved the adopt! , ' hojus bolus; .of Northern Union >'' If (ho Canterbury . Tesqlutions were 0n"....-.! it voiild be the . beginning of a policy "'. diif <:;■■: which would lend the Bhsilj.v i i;:in "ovontually. ■ into the arms of llw Xi i''•htu Union. The. . Canterbury Union i .;:- ;■•• ii**-iiti.v in a.con? dition of "funk." ii; should take courage from ihe '-xampla of., New South. AValcs, whi-ii hail sulTared from the attack of the Wi-hcri! (,')ii»n for a but . was mnv loooiering its fitr-ength, and had.vet rid of a", very, uri-.desirable.elemei\ta:iion:,'-;l its players. Mr. Olson said .linil.. his union would •not onnscnt to cut the painter;' ■'• ■A delegate.: Won't ilip .Ki's-lish Union follow;-us? (Lauijl'.tc-f.i -•..:."' ~ Canterbury in a "Blue Punk." :, M r : W' Parry..(Wo'liriKiou): supported mestand taken by Mr. JKvoiiith. Ho de- ■ srecated any tinfe-ing nidi the rules. And contended .tlit't 'Viv' /'.inland had worn/for only one. ifonihr.ll game. It 5111 st -plify iEngby.' ,ontli:.!l .■<)■; ■ Northern imioniii-utiwasdtJ;'! dnty.'ni :t|ie Rugby Union , . to-;^t'ght! r fh"e- Niirthorn Union, and not compromis'i *i'rh )n* cr.emv" This was' tho;time-- .tosstat firm- mid nght tho e ? e . ra 'T- ; ' 9 n,v , terl> " r,v Wl,sill ft-'cortdition of blue.funkf.over:th« IVorihern Union;Wellingipn ,apprccir.tr..! Mit dangers'ol ; the Northern Unir.ll :nvii=io,i, but/-was' not prepared to toi<itn\'j> ■ Mr. Olsen: Why tiva:; in 1 he Northern ■ thKKing hat !^M "•»'<» . 'A tleloffat-a: Mason menhnned it. ■ Mr. Ma?ou oh]cotcil H,st ; !e vofevewes *hich were bm, S mvh. h. the northern nmop-wre out of „,!,-,■. irit the charroan rule;l. npijis!- hj I!: , Ah-.-Mason'-pro-tested iigainst the rn'iiii,'. ' 'T Mr. Perry said that the tendency nowadays w.is to pi-nvido a spectaclo "for the , public instead at-a gam? for players, In his opinion it was better to hrive '0(10 mediocre players than. 500 "stars," Mr. Dobson (West Coast) agreed with •Mr. Perry. Ho,said that tho meeting that evening was a fine advertisement for the Northern Union. . . - . Mr. A.. Harris (Obigo) supported the resolution. He denied that fear of tlio Northern Union wa* the solo reason for bringing the resolution forivarp. 1' 1 Threatened Isolation. . Dr. M'Evcdy (Auckland) said that ho Jiad been given n free hand, and would the resolution'on the ground that •;ho game could not be maintained if New {Zealand dropped into a' position--.of isola:ion. Men who had to work during the . week and played for recreation could not j play a game like Northern Union. Faults • at present,visib'c in the game woro not due to tho laws, but to the referees and players. Adoption of. the proposed alterations would lead to a drift away from tho English Union. . ■ Mr. Hoare (Canterbury) deprecated tho attacks mado on his union, and s'a'd that tho tendency during the discussion had beon to drift away from the actual resolution. Canterbury was not in a "blue tnnk" about the Northern Union-game. It wanted to retain its players and. to place football upon a proper footing. . Mr. 'E. Wylio (South Canterbury) said that the effect of adopting the resolutions 'would fce (0 introduce a hybrid game, and folate New Zealand. -.».:' Mr. W. Drake, another Sputh Canterbury delegate, said' that his union, in '"signing the requisition calling tho meet-' ingj hail in mind that tho New Zealand .Union had no nower to reinstate bus-

pended Northern Union players. He supported tho roMutipii\ ' Our Football Legislators. Mr. M. J. Crombio (Wellington) said that he was entirely Opposed to the motion. It had only been seconded, on the understanding; that it 'did. not propqse to alter the rules relating to professionalism, and yet the lust speaker had supported it on the ground that professional players ought to be reinstated. What local conditions existed in New Zealand that made- different rules necessary than obtained in England? The'/movement., far the alteration o v tile laws of football '.was largely duo to swelled head. Ho was not prepared' to admit that this, country pos,sfes?d fpothall legislators equal to those pf England. The English rules bore evi-. denea.of careful preparation. ~mV- delegate: Why so much case-law, then?/ , ;■■■■:.■■: • ■:..'■ "■-Mr." Crom>i6 said that case-law wnsisted only of interpretations. He went on to", argue that when • a 'regular interchango, of visits had been arranged with Australia,' England, and America, football would oMa,in a greater prominence-than ■.it had ever-mined, in\ the past, lootball tours- abroad a splendid advertise-, inent for New Zealand,: and why should thi& benefit ba sacrificed? The proposed alterations, "if,-adopted, wouldinaugurate a drift that would end/in making football .as epheriie'ral as "ping-pong.. fcew Zealand'now Had a game that hnd stood, the test of"tiin.e;-a.gi\mo,for the players as well as. thd'sp'ectft'tors. It commanded.' 'attention in all-parts of tho' inghsh■.epeakiag world, and.it; would be a huge sanction-'a .movement that ■might.-lead -to the.extinction of such a s:awo. ■;'.'■:.;■. '.:. •■■-.» ■•: ; :-' ~' ■' ; ■ .■: '/. XSlap in the Face, , , - Dr.' Crawford'(Southland) thE. 'resolution; ' He advpoated such a n,iodificatic«v of the laws.,of pvqfesnmal--is'pu'aVwould enable a tnan to be icanstatod' after standing down for'a term of year,s, -Gvombie had referred to the glpriqua trait blazed by the- All Blacfo,' When .was there to be another tour'of this/kind,? • '■■'' ~'■■ A delegate! ■Never!'..." '■■':'•■. ■„ ■ . J)r,Crawford contended, that the New Zealand Union had,.received' a slap \n the face* fronvtho English /Omon. .-..- Mr. Galbra,ith: It was; .thr International Board that turned us. down.... ■ Mr. Hislop (Hawke's Bay) 'supported•the resolution. Ho contended that 'Players wanted,the change. "./ .-: .. / ./; ~. ', ' An Appeal r >Drop,.Sentinient! / Mr. W- Hardhainsaid'thdt players did. not want the alterations 1 .proposed. Jsey Zealand should stioK'to the international game. The rules were"?)! right, and, the players "were'all right if they, ployed iu the iipfht spirit, '■/:;■■'■, •'.".-• V ■'■Mγ. $. wilsQii (Canterbury) maintained that players .did ■want .the. game/altered to suit local conditions; He appealed to. delegates .to; drop s.entiirieiit, .':'. .' • . : A delegate; "M 7 e will!<. ~!■',. Mr. A. Dey(Qtago) said that h? rtul not think' there was a doubt-that, footballers did want, some slight alteration in _thc ■ game. Conditions, here .were totally different'to those in' England:' New Zealand ■had shown,.Englaniiibw'tp.play the game, and it should bo'able to show Eiißl.fiid hpw to legislate/. It was Iqnply. up st tho top, but "New ZealaiitV'shbuM-b? prepared to .be lonely for tlie sake of .being at the °Mr. N: Galb'raith'said; tlirtt: he-{cared some 'hidden nieanW-unu>rlay,.:thsv re-, 'solution: He w'otjld like \p ast'thei-.Canr torbury 'delegates what':Wpuld.happen- if the English Ufiipn said,; .''Nα ,, ? : --';'■■'.'' i"A Canterbury- delegate C/Pliat will. come afterwards. . ' : ■','"'.: • ' My. , Qalbraith this reply convinced - him that.' the- resolution: was the, thin-end of. tho wedge, ;•'■.. .''• ; ..'.' -. A delegate :.Popr old wedge!.-,-'. ' • Mr. Gnlbraith. siiid -thaf he: felt -sure that those who ha(l .brought, forward: tl\-3 resolution' were .prepared, to scceilo frpu\ England. He was in accord with those, who held'that this'resolution wpuld not have bean introduced -if •' the/Northern Union had not gone .to Canterbury.: The ■Auckland. Union hail . fought Northarn Union, find Ttugby Football "there was iii:a stronger position'than ever. :. . / Mr. Olsan Eaid.'that., the • Aiiclvlnnd ':Union , was not (ifvaiil'.pf.rNoftbwn'. Union; and did.not.favour secession.'.■'■■,' '. ' ~.' Mr.. G.a-lj>rai|li iaid'thnt Ho'one. hnd told the,-meeting, what was.;wrong with Hre , present, game;-/ Players were satis- , fi-Vtl with. Rugby football.. If Northern Union rules were introduced"men'would have to give up .work and: play football. Mr. Hoaro said that so -for as'ho knew the Canterbury Union did not favour secession. Personally, ha was absolutely Opposed tp secession.' . -. ' An Unconstitutional Motion. ' The chairman said that.it was his cUity to point ; out that.the motion was unconstitutional. Before it could be acted upon it would:be. necessary, to briiig down an amendment jto.'the ..constitution. "•.': . Mr,' -Alas6n., ; in reply,/said that Union had noted the bbjection' raised.';'by the .chairman, but considered that. tho. English: Unioni bad power to alter any rule/He complained that delegates-had discussed.all the mo- , tions on the order paper under cover ef the first resolution. : . The pha.irnian pointed out that .delegates had not discussed the, prpposed detail alterations in (lib rules. ■■'■ ■ ' „ - ; ' Mr. Mason, sajd that a "bogy" of secession, had-been raised.' Before doing so, speakers should have waited until Canterbury brought forward a proposal .' to secede. Ilistcad.thp delegates-had raised "bogys" to suit, their pwu ends.'. Ail th(it..C{interbi|ry. asked for was that New Zealand 'should have power to deal locally with trivial alterations to Hie laws, The Motion Nenatjved.. On a : , division the motion- was negatived by 3* votes..to 28. PpUowing ' are, ■ (lei taite;-* ■'■.•.,', ■ .'-. ■■' "•' ■■■■•■.■■','• . ■■ : . Eor.' Against. ■'.: Auckland' .., .'. i I■•'1 ■•' South Auckland — 5 Poverty Bay „.,... -r- \] Bay of Plenty ,„.:..,..„- — . i - Hawke's Bay ..,,. 5 — '.' Bush Districts ~....;„... 1 .— Taranaki ~.....,..„..,,..,—. - ; 4 Wanganui ~,.....';.'..'„',.',._ — i Manawatu ~. ..,.' —•.'.'-. .— . Wairarapa ~......, '-r- 2 : Wellington.'.,,,, — i' : A'elson- i — . 8 Alarlborough ;,.,.,'„„„. — — Buller .\,'...,i......'..' — -1 West Coast , , 2 Canterbury: ■. ; 5 >-> ■ South Canterbury ~„„•. 2 1 Otago • 5 — Southland '.'....... 5 *- . ■ Totals' .......;.... 28 34 Mr. Olsen: It is a Wellington victory!, • An Alleged Volte Face, ' Mi , . MasQh said that hewasveV.v miich surprised at the result of the division. Had the delegates voted in acoprdanco with letters from their unions which ho had in his possession they would have carried the motion. If Canterbury had not had an affirmation from the Moretawea of these unions that they would support the resolution they would uot have been there that night at all. ' - v The ohajrmitn said that these remarks were quite irrtgular. ' Mr. Mason said that he had a right to explain to delegates why they had been brought* thete. Tho chairman: You have no, right to dictate to delegates what they shall do. in this room, , • Mr. Crombie: Ho is apologising to delegates for bringing them here Mr. Mason: Quite s>, I was apologising to delegates for bringing'them here under a misapprehension. The chairman: No need to apologise, the delegates were glad to come. Mr. Maspu said that lie would not proceed further with tho resolutions of which Canterbury had. given notice. Proposed Alterations. ■Air. 01.-en then moved that a knoclt-on should not be penalised unless in the judgment of the referee it was deliberate. This was negatived <on the voices. It was agreed that provision bo made that a player may recover, a knock-on by catching the ball before it reaches the ground. . . , ' A proposal that a player should bo penalised if, not being in a scrummage, ho crosssd an imnginary line drawn through the back rank of' his own_ side of the scrummage and parallel with the goalline, wae carried by 40 votes to 23. It was agreed on the voices: "That in line-out play the advantage rule be strictly applied. . It was agreed that the New Zealand Union should pay the expenses of one deleeate from «ewh. of the outsido unions,