RANFURLY SHIELD

Evening Star, Issue 22443, 14 September 1936, Page 8

RANFURLY SHIELD

HAWKE’S BAY ACCEPTS OTAGO'S DECISION MATCH DEFINITELY CANCELLED At its meeting last Wednesday night the Hawke’s Bay Rugby Union decided to accept without protest the refusal of the Otago Rugby Union to play the Bay on Wednesday, September 30, for the Ranfurly Shield. A telegram from the Otago Union stated“ Regret unable accept challenge match, Ranfurly Shield, September 30, owing to 40-hour weekipreventing a number of our players from obtaining the necessary leave to play Wednesday.” Dated September 4, the following letter was received from the secretary of the New Zealand Rugby Union: —“My committee has noted your challenge to the Otago Rugby Union to play for the Ranfurly Shield on September 13. In your letter you use the term ‘ special challenge,’ but as this is a match in the cxdinary course of your tour, and so arranged at the annual general meeting, it cannot be treated as a special challenge match.”

A motion by Mr W. L, Dunn, that the matter be dealt with in committee, lapsed for want of a seconder. “ This matter has already received sufficient publicity,” said Mr Dunn, in giving his, reason for the motion.

“ We were not touring this year, and we waited until well down in the list, with the result that when we applied for a shield match all the Saturdays had gone,” Mr Nome said. “We distinctly asked Otago if they would like a challenge from Hawke’s Bay, and they replied that they would. We accepted a Wednesday date merely to preserve our right of challenge, and we pointed out at the time that there might be an alteration, " We never confirmed September 23 as the date for the match, and we ultimately asked that the date be altered to September 30. Otago now say that September 30 is after the last Saturday in September, and, according to the Ranfurly Shield rules, they are unable to play the match. They a,re perfectly within their rights.” Mr B. Tweedie; That is not the reason they give for refusing Hawke’s Bay’s challenge. ' . . Mr Nome: No; they say that it is not possible to obtain leave for players. “ I have yet to learn that Hawke’s Bay did that,” Mr Nome went on, “ The Otago people, good business people that they are, will surely let players off for a Ranfurly Shield match. Otago is the one union in New Zealand that told us that we were commercialising the shield when wo had it,” he said. “It was also stated that the shield should be dropped in Cook Strait. Members will recall that. You can’t tell me _ that there is not something else in this refusal.”

Mr Nome added that he thought Hawke’s Bay could not do otherwise than accept the decision in regard to the match. “ But I don’t like the inference made by Otago in previous years and their attitude now,” he continued. “ While we were a minor union we were always friendly with Otago, but when we attained major status they would not recognise us as such. They have treated us in that manner since. We have never adopted this attitude ourselves, and we did not expect it from Otago, but that has been their attitude towards this union for some years past. No matter what Hawke’s Bay Las brought lip at New Zealand Union meetings it has never had the support of Otago.” “I am both disappointed and surprised at Otago’s attitude,” said Mr Tweedie. “ The only grounds 1 can see for the decision is that Otago' have played too many matches, but they were aware of the position when the fixtures were made and they accepted our match. For them to forward the excuse now that their players cannot obtain leave is a bad lookout for next year, when they go on a fortnight’s tour. However, 1 don’t see that we can do anything in the-matter.”

Mr Nome: No, we'must accept the decision. I don’t think we should offer any objection. It is going to put us in an unfortunate position if we protest at ail. Mr A. # D. Lynch: We must look upon it in a friendly way, and not push for a fixture. which would be a “ grudge match. Mr Norrie: I can only assume that Otago have learned the value of holding the shield the same as we and other unions did.

A motion was carried accepting the Otago Union’s decision. The New Zealand Rugby Onion, on the other hand, is to be informed that it was in error in stating that Hawke’s Bay’s match with Otago was not a special one. SUPPORT FOR OTAGO. A Christchurch paper, the ‘ StarSun,’ gives its views as follow: “Despite the arguments and insinuations of Hawke’s Bay officials, the Otago Rugby Union has the full support of the New Zealand Union and most provincial unions in limiting the number of “ special ” mid-week Ranfurly Shield matches. These extra fixtures too often savour of rank pothunting, and tend to damage the game as an amateur code. it is Hawke’s Bay’s turn to tour south next season. If they curb their impatience they will be welcome then—not as pot-hunters, but as sportsmen.”