A TENNIS PROTEST.

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume XXXVI, Issue 4838, 5 June 1925, Page 3

A TENNIS PROTEST.

PLAINS CHAMPIONSHIP FINALS.

REFEREE'S RULING UPHELD.

A meeting of .the Hauraki Plains Tennis Association was held at Ngatea on Tuesday, Mr B. Frecklington ' presiding over Messrs J. N. Anderson, M. O’Conner, L. Williams, R. Penny, C. Seott, G. Sexton, and A. R. Vowles, secretary.

A protest was received from the Patetonga Club in connection with the ladies doubles championship final on the following grounds: The infringement of the rule when the lineumpire left his position without the game umpire’s permission. That’ when Mrs Hunter touched the het she was penalised, though her opponent had previously struck the net with tsuch force that it had to be raised four inches and the umpire had allower this breach to pass without a penalty.

It was decided to hear the appeal, despite the fact that the match had been played over a month previously.

Mr G G iinor said that in the meantime his club had written to Auckland for a ruling.

In-regard to the first clause of the protest, Mr Vowles pointed out that there was no provision in the rules ef the N.Z. Tennis Association for linesmen, and no mention of these officials in the rules.. The custom of umpires appointing linesmne to assist t hem had grown up, and naturally the umpire would accept the word of his appointee in most catses, but he had the right to over-rule the linesmen.- lu~ the absence of a rule on the matter there could be no infringement. • ’

The matter was discussed at length, and Mr Scott pointed 0111 that the linesman ha,d"left his position because he had been so much abused by one of the Patetonga spectators. In fact he had appealed to the umpire to stop the play until this spectator had quietened down.

In regard to the second clause, Mr Vowles pointed out the rule which stated that the .referee’s decision was final.

Explaining the two cases complained of, Mr Vowles said • that in one case the ball had come over the net and bounced, and the player had run from the back of the court to return the ball over the net, but her momentum had carried her forward so that her body touched .the net. The contention was that there was no fault,’ as the ball was out. of play of the striker, because her opponent had played the ball before she touched the net. Tn the other case the ball and the net had been hit practically simultaneously. In any case, there was no over-ruling the referee. After much discussion it was decided, on the motion of Mr Anderson, seconded by Mr Frecklingten, that the decision of the referee be upheld and the protest dismissed.

Mr B. Fre'cklington gave notice of motion that all protests must be lodged with the secretary-within 48 hours.