THE RUGBY GAME

Dominion, Volume 15, Issue 75, 21 December 1921, Page 7

THE RUGBY GAME

AN AMENDED RULE OPPOSED BY WELLINGTON UNION The provisional sanction of the English Rugby Union for the Auckland Rugby Union to play the amended rule regarding kicking the ball into touch has now been received by tho New Zealand union. A copy of the English union s letter was before the Management Committee of the Wellington union last evening, and members were not at all favourable to tho innovation. The New Zealand Rugby Union wrote stating that the following was the *ext of a letter received from the English union, under date October 10, in rep y to a letter sent following on instructions given at tho annual meeting:—"My committee lias given most careful consideration to the application of your union for leave to vary the existing rules by adding the following clause to rule 1dealing with kicking the ball into touch as follows'When it pitches in touch from a kick (other than a penalty kick) within twenty-five yards of tho kickers goal line the opposite side shall brin„ it out, as in the rule, at a spot opposite tho spot where the kicker was when he kicked the ball.’ The is ot opinion that this proposed alteration requires most careful consideration. I hey are prepared to give the matter the fu - est attention during the coming season, and if they approve, with or without modification, will lay the matter before the International Board. In the meantime as they are desirous 'of mee.ing tho wishes of the New Zealand union wherever it is at all possible without detriment to the main principles of our game, tho committee, as a concession, offer no objection to games being played within this alteration. In so doing the committee in no way bind themselves to the adoption of the amendment or otherwise, or the actual wording of it as submitted, and definitely restrict the concession to the present application. The New Zealand union pointed our. that tho rule could only bo played in the Auckland provincial district. The chairman (Mr. J. Prendcville) said that he thought the New Zealand union had gone further than the de egates intended in regard to this rule. The rules agreed to by the Sydney con ference were never considered seriatim bv tho various unions, and the New Zealand union had apparently /acted on tho decision of an informal meeting or the chairmen of uniorts. The matter had not been nut before unions in a proper way, and tho Wellington union should consider before the next annual meeting of the New Zealand union the advisability of bringing forward a motion to rescind any resolution approving of this rule. Tn 1919. when the matter was to have been considered, tho majority of unions could not get a meeting, as it twas called at an (inconvenient time. They did not reply by a certain date, hndi it was taken for Vrantml that they apnroved. Towards the eno of 1920 an informal meeting of chairmen was held and • the New Zealand union considered their decisions as an official declaration. . , , . ~ . Mr. J. N. Millard pointed out that the word "except” seemed to have been left out at the beginning of rule It should rend "Except when it pitches into touch,” etc. Other members agreed that that seemed to be an omission. The opinion was expressed that many unions had changed their views regarding tljo Auckland amendment since 1920. Though no definite decision was come to,, it is regarded as certain that the chairman’s suggestion to niscuss the matter more fully, with a view to getting the Resolution, approving of the rule rescinded, will be acted upon.