ATHLETICS.

Hokitika Guardian, 5 August 1931, Page 3

ATHLETICS.

CRITICISM OF N.Z

BY AMERICAN LEAGUE

(By Telegraph—Per Press Association)

WELLINGTON, Aug. 4

Dissatisfaction with their treatment and the conditions of amateur athletics in New Zealand, was expressed by the three American University athletes, Kiser, Rothert and Simpson, who toured the Dominion under the auspices of the New Zealand Amateur Ahtletic Association. On return to San Francisco on May 14th, the team went to C. G. Krogness, New Zealand Association’s representative in America, and ventilated their grievances. One impression they received was that the co-operation which should exist between the local centres was absent, and the development of amateur athletics was under a heavy handicap by the lack of harmony. The athletes complain that the tour was held a,t towns which were so small that a fair income from the attendances was impossible. In a number of towns, the accommodation they • received' was third and fourth best. They felt the Association was giving them as little as it could, hut still maintaining a good appearance itself. The athletes said that they wore well treated regarding expenses, with few exceptions. One was the question of clothing expenses. Clothing, deteriorated rapidly on the trip. They understood they would get 50 dollars apiece at the con. elusion of the trip to meet this expense, but at the end of the tour, the request was refused. They stated that Mr Tracey. Secretary of the New Zealand Council, gave them £1 to last them for the four last days of tlie tour, with two towns still to visit, and about 700 and 800 miles to travel.

A REPLY. The N.Z.A.A. Association’s reply, prepared by Mr R. W. MeVilley, states: The tour was arranged to give the visitors as much leisure as possible, and of seeing things in which they were interested It is difficult to understand how the tour could he described as too strenuous. The Association’s object in arranging meetings in the smaller towns was primarily to give a fillip to athletics in the localities where professionalism had ruled. No complaints had been made about the accommodation during the tour. Tlie requests for clothing expenses were declined solely on the ground that it might endanger the status of the visitors.” The Association felt a deep obligation to the visitors, all of whom were kept in kindly remembrance. but could not express, regret that the team discovered so many shortcomings during the brief sojourn. The letter concludes: "Very probably., if.w.e were seriously looking for tlie cause of the captious destructive criticism, the use of a microscope might bo unneces ary before making the discovery.” >'