Foxton Sub-Union.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XXVIII, Issue 3706, 30 August 1906, Page 3

Foxton Sub-Union.

dealing with disputes AND COMPLAINTS.

players suspended

The Sub-Jnion met at Laing’s Family Hotel last evening, and Mr A. Davis (vice-president) was elected to the chair. The meeting decided that the minutes of Foxton Executive of 1905 season did not govern the Foxton Sub-Union 1906.

Then Mr Austin arrived, and took the chair, and business proceeded, there being present ; Messrs A. Davis, Good, J. Jillett, F. Wiiibley, A. Shadbolt, J. Starch, J. Thompson, R. Newth, J. Frew, and E. Sutherland (secretary). The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed. Re the verbal complaint received by secretary as to the conduct of a recent travelling team, after inquiry it was found the Albion players were not responsible for others travelling by train. A vote of thanks was passed to Mr O. Austin for having conveyed an injured player by motor from Sandon to Bulls recently, to the doctor. MCLFAN-DUFFY AFFAIR. Next the Albion pretest was dealt with. * Mr Whibley (Albions) produced a letter from the secretary of the Petone Club, from which it appeared }he man in dispute was not the W. McLean' that was suspended, but the letter inferred a player of that name had played for Petone in one or other of the junior classes. Members seemed in a fog how to deal with the case. _ However, after much discussion, it was decided to test the protest on the 14 days residential grounds. Mr Phew moved, and Mr F. Whibley seconded, “That Awahou lose the match on the grounds that the player in question had not been in the district the required number of days.” As an amendment, Mr J. Jillett moved, and Mr A. Davis seconded, “That Albion F.C. have failed to bring sufficient evidence forward and that the protest be not entertained.”

Voting was equal, and the chairman announced it would take about two days to consider the matter properly, after which he would give his casting vote. It was moved that the final, ii any. between Sandon and Albions, be played at Foxton. Voting was again "equal, and the chairman once more reserved his decision. LAST SATURDAY’S TROUBLE. Mr Newth (a Huia player) left the room, while the matter of Huia team leaving the field was being considered. Mr Sutherland (referee) gave evidence that, towards the close of the gameand when Awahou were; distance of Huia’s gold \ie, the ball was being thrown in from the line-out by Awahou. Evidently some of the Huia team thought the ball was thrown forward, for there was an appeal, and some waited for the whistle. Did not think there was an infringement, but thought the ball hit Jeffries chest from the throw-in and naturally went in the direction of the goal-line. Awahou members went on with the game and scored a try which I allowed. After the thrown-in, the croWencroached slightly on the line near the corner where try was scored, but I don’t think there was any material infringement. When I announced the try, there was some slight hooting, but I could not single out any offender. The next thing I knew was that Huia team, with exception of three, had either left or were leaving the field. Question as to remarks made by players, witness said he could not shunj. Puti’s conduct, who made abusive reference when retiring, and this in full hearing of spectators. Others may have made like remarks, but did not hear them. Had occasion to warn two Huia players during the game, and this fact together with the knowledge that Awahou had them penned on their line most of the second spell, were the only reasons he could give for Huia leaving the field. D. Tatana (Huia’s captain) had accused him of being bought, but if th\at could possibly have been, the Union would understand that two previous decisions given in favour of Huia, must have been reversed by a man who was bought by Awahou. I refer to a goal by Huia and alleged try by Awahou—both very close incidents. Did not wish to press the case strongly against offenders, but Union'must certainly respect their referees dignity. Mr Newth (a Huia player) did not know why Huia’s left the field, as he was not there then, having left previously because he thought ball had been thrown forward 6ft, and then knocked on

twice and a try scored. Did noc try to stop ball, as lie thought whittle would go, but it did not go. Did not think it a fair decision So left the field. Did not know why Hum team leu. Was dissatisfied with referee’s decisions. Did not, think the goal awarded Hula was a goal. ■ In answer to question: - , put by different members, witness uid not think that referee was squared, but that Mr Sutherland nderccd : uuiiie Awahoti s were ~atwi ball thrown in ; blamed. special, ms more than anyone el- e ; thought Muia had best of first spell, ana Awabou best of second ; if anything, I think the nuerye’s uecisions were in favour ofHuta. Mr Frew thought this one oi the biggest slurs that has ever been cast on a referee. No doubt referees make mistakes ; they cannot see everything. The whole trouble on Saturday seemed to be that Awabou were pressing hi nu and when the try was given Huia’s were beaten. They baa no right to leave the field. If anything, I think the reitree’s decisions were in favour ot Huia. After slight deliberation, it was deckled “that the captain ( D. Tatana) and J. Pnti be disqualiucd till the end of 1907, and the rest 0. the team, with the exception 0 J. Bowe, J. Dunn and E. Saviiic(who remained on field), be suspended for three months. Votes of thanks to the chair and to Mr Laing for use of room concluded the meeting.