NOT AVAILABLE

Gisborne Herald, Volume LXVI, Issue 20006, 3 August 1939, Page 4

NOT AVAILABLE

WAIROA RUGBY PLAYERS INCLUSION IN H.B. TEAM WANTED FOR BARRY CUP ACTION CAUSES STIR (Special to the Herald.) 1 WAIROA, this day. Allegations that Wairoa Rugby players were deprived of the' opportunity of playing in the Hawke’s Bay representative team because they were required for a Barry Cup match were made, at a meeting of t.he management committee of the Wairoa County Rugby Sub-Union on Tuesday evening. Members of the sub-union were very critical of the attitude it was alleged had been adopted. The question was raised in a letter receivpct from the Athletic Football Club stating that it understood certain members ox the ciuh were required for the Hawke’s Bay touring team and the club wished to enter an emphatic protest against certain actions ox the sub-unions selector. The letter added that Mr. C. McLean, ol the Hawke’s Bay Rugby Union, had informed the club that he had approached the Wairoa selector, Mr. u Hall, on Sunday regarding certain Wairoa players for the tour of the Hawke’s Bay team and Mr. Hall had informed him on his own initiative that none of the players was available. The club, continued the letter, considered that the selector had considerably overstepped his- rights as selector in refusing this opportunity for the club’s players, and furthermore that he had taken away from their players ah Opportunity, for which they, as followers of football, had fought for years. Following on their severe castigation of Hawke’s Bay, for overlooking their players in the past, added the letter, this represented a complete turn of faith and regardless of the injury such an action did to the sub-union the blbw to the players was -sufficiently severe to sicken them. * The letter concluded-by again protesting and -stated that it trusted that the matter would receive sufficient attention and airing by the sub-union to in some way raise the players concerned- from the ignominious and unsatisfactory position in Which they had been placed.

Selectors" Explanation Referring to the letter, the selector, Mr. C. Hall, stated 'that 'the Athletic clu'b' was not aw'are- of the tfue facts. T-he .position was that he had* received a telephone communication from the Hawke’s Bay selector, Mr. N. A. McKenzie, stating that ’of he -did not require two of the -players, H. Bra’dy and J. Brownlie,. for .the Barry Cup match, they would -most likely toe i included in the -Hawke'S Bay team. Mr. Hall'stated that he-thought the tour was to be made a-week later. “It is -much more important to get two players in the Hawkers Bay team than to keep the Barry Gup.” stated Mr. F. Ollivier. ' • The treasurer to -the sub-union, Mr. H. S. Nightingale, said that he agreed with Mr. Ollivier. When players were given a chance, ptoviskm should be made for them to take the opportunity. In ’his opinion they could lose the 'Barry Cup and then later send a team away in an endeavour to recapture it. The acting-chairman, Mr. G. M. O’Malley, expressed the view -that the Hawke’s Bay selector was at fault in communicating with Mr. Hall. It was a selector’s duty to choose a team, and then if some of the players were not available, all right. It was hardly right for cn-e selector to ask another selector if certain players Were necessary for a Barry Cup -game, and because of that not select them to play for Hawke’s Bay. “Mr. McKenzie would' not take them if he wanted them for the Barry Cup match,” said Mr. Hall,' who added'that the players might have an opportunity to play for Hawke’s Bay in the next fixture. “I feel that itflno.se players have been deprived- of -a chance which -they will not get again,” said 1 Mr. Nightingale. ”1 personally think it was unfair to those -players. We have ho claim over them.” Mr. Nightingale expressed the opinion that the sub-union, should not worship the Barry Cup and put it On a pedestal. Aim of Sub-Union “We should not sacrifice players for the Barry Cup,” he concluded. .Mr. O'Malley stated that he did not think any individual had the right to decide whethef ,a player should go- on tour. The selector should select his players and -the players had the right to go or not. The participation of players in Hawke’s Bay representative Rugby was the sub-union’s aim. After : considerable discitssibn jtlie sub-union decided /to forward a letter to Mr. McKenzie pointing out that it was under a misunderstanding that he Was informed that certain Wairoa players were no,i available for the Hawke’s Bay team aild that the sub-union would not stand m the way of any player who had been given an opportunity to play for Hawke’s Bay. , It was decided also to reply to the Athletic club stating that it was under a misunderstanding that information was given that Wairoa players were not available for the Hawke’s Bay tour, and pointing out that tjlie WairOa -■ selector was • not aware of the forthcoming tour, but if he had known all the facts he would have agreed to the players going.