RUGBY REFEREES

Dominion, Volume 7, Issue 2191, 2 July 1914, Page 9

RUGBY REFEREES

SERIOUS POSITION

"BORDERINC ON DISSOLUTION."

The important question of the appointment of referees was discussed at . the meeting of the Wellington ' Rugby r Union; which was held last night. Mr. . E. 0. Hales presided at tho meeting, j and there were present, also, Messrs. W. Perry, E. Little, 11. Buck, E. A. Dawson, G. Howe, A. E.. Wilson, W. Horn if*, W. Hardham, A. C. Kitto, and D. Weir. Tho referees' matter was introduced by a deputation from the Wellington Referees' Association, consisting of Messrs." D, M'Kenzie, Sievers, and Fordyce, and the question was stated to bo~so serious that tho Referees' Association was bordering on dissolution. Mr. M'Kenssie stated at tho outset that the referees' representative (Mr. Siovers) had withdrawn from the Appointment Board. Mr. Siovers then said that his reason • for withdrawing was that he found it ' impossible to obtain redress for some members of tlio Referees' Association. Some half dozen referees got tho ohiof matches, and ho saw it waa no. uso arguing further on the Appointment Board, so he got out: There were men - on the association who had served for from ten' to twelye years, and had "never seen No. 1. ground yet," . and there were others who came from other parts of New' Zealand with good records who were passed over. Thoro wero qualified referees who had never been givon a trial to show what they could do on the principal • ground. There had been difficulty in tho past - few months in getting referees. Surely, out of seventeen or eighteen referees, more than six we're worthy of "an appointment on No. 1 ground 1 He wish- • cd to see if something' could not be done to improve tho position. The referees had not been fairly treated, and somo of them desired to take drastic measures at Monday night's meet- : ing,. but they were counselled to send this deputation to tho union before taking action. If somo of thorn did as they now felt inclined, they would go out of football for all time. The union might form another Referees' As- . sociation, but it would have to treat it differently to the manner in which it had treated the piesent association.. ■. Mr. M'Kenzie, who remarked that the Wellington Referees' Associations had been in existence, for twenty-five years,' said that the hssociation claimed - that when referees were classified as Bcniors the Appointment Board should not differentiate between them. Somo mombers of tlio association who never saw a principal match (a match on No. 1 ground) would lose their interest in tho game.. ,Th© present system was contrary to the best interests of Rugby in, the city. /The association suggested .as a remedy which should be given a trial that the..union';.should withdraw

its. member of • the Appointment Board ', (Mr. D. Woir), and .substitute for him another,representative, and.tho association should withdraw' their representative- (Mr,. Sievers), and. appoint some- . ono else. . Mr. AV. Perry: There have only been . seven matches on No. 1 Athletic Park . this season! ' How could seventeen referees all.have had a game each? The deputationists replied that one •referee had been appointed twice. Mr. Perry. Then, that is what wo havo to consider—tno right of the Appointment Board to twice choose one referee for No. 1 match. 5 Mrv SiaMi)s:f(Yesofi>rtf( r In roply'/to-3&. ■ A/. E.j Dawson, Mr.

.Sievers said that it was' tho personnel i : of tho board which 'the association ob- '• jectc'd'to.. .;Mr. Sievers■ added.'that ho 'had been called an annoyance. Ho ■ did not wish to ho an; annoyance any longer, and he was done with the game. Mr. W. Hardha'ni: Do you say, honestly and conscientiously,' that you would appoint; any-or every man on that list of sevent-en or eighteen men to take a match on No. 1 ground? • Mr. M'Kenzie: Yes, absolutely. Mr.'Hardham: 'Well, I don't, think much of your judgment. ~-' Subsequently, Mr. Hardham voluntarily withdrew this remark. JKr. Litjtle said tho test applied by the association to classify a referee was inadequate, inasmuch as one of the chief tests for a referee was to undergo the strain of a match before a big crowd. He added that there were some referees whom the players would not have on ' any account. Mr. M'Kenzie: Which i 3 the most dissatisfied team ? The losing team. You know that, Mr.-Little. Mr. Little: You are making a very low estimate of the sportsmanship of the player's. • Mr. Dawson observed that the Referees' Association appeared to'bo a Socialistic body. _ i Mr. M'Kenzie: That is exactly what we are—a body of Socialists, all wishing to bo placed on an even footing. Mr. Dawson: Wouldn't you like to get on a little by your own brains? •Mr. M'Kenzie said that the present - system did not permit of that Mr. Sievers expressed tho opinion that Mr. Weir (tho union's representative on tho hoard) might say something. Mr. Weir, however maintained silence. .' The deputation then withdrew,, and the union proceeded to:discuss the aues- . tion. ... Mr. E. Little! said that the appointment of referees to tho chief matches must remain solely a question of merit, and not be decided by rotation. Mr. Hardham was of opinion that a good proportion of tho senior referees were not suitablo men to control the big matches. He was strongly opposed to tho association's suggestion. Several members expressed the opinion that the union had treated tho asso-ciation-very well thi3 season —had conceded sevoral things they had asked for. Others expressed satisfaction with Mr. Weir's work on the board. On tho motion of Mr. Perry, the union unanimously resolved: "The union should inform the Referees' Association that it regrets that it cannot accede to tho suggestion that it should ask its present , representative to withdraw from tho Appointment Board."