FOOTBALL AND BETTING

Manawatu Herald, Volume XLIII, Issue 2309, 30 July 1921, Page 3

FOOTBALL AND BETTING

OTAKI CHARGE ENQUIRED

INTO,

A special medium oi’ the Horowhenua Referees’ Association was held on Thursday evening, the members present being: Messrs J. W. Procter, W. Thomson, AT. Winiata, K. Rose and V. Higgins (secretary). Ir Thomson,yvas voted to the chair. The chairman stated that the meeting had been called for the purpose of going into the charge ngaiust an Otaki referee, Mr Parker, of alleged betting. Two gentlemen, Messrs Tahiwi and Baker, had come to Levin after a recent match between the two Otaki teams, and laid the matter before the secretary of the Association. The secretary had consulted the members of the Association, and it was decided that until such lime as the matter could be. dealt with it was thought advisable to ask Mr Parker to stand down. Since then Mr Parker had sent a denial to the charge, and made a request that he lie brought face to face with his accusers, and that was why the meeting was called that night.

Mr Tahiwi stated that on July Dili, Otaki and Old Boys met. The referee originally appointed for the match was Mr Freeman. At about 13.30 word came that Mr Freeman was not available, He (the. speaker) then rang up the secretary of (he Union, and lie said he did not know who was referee, but thought that Mr Parker was appointed. The speaker then called his club —the Otaki Club —together, and they decided to object to Mr Parker, as they heard it alleged Unit he had a wager on the match, and was hacking the Old Boys. However, the game was played, and Mr Parker refereed.

Mr Tnhwi said, as a spectator of the match, it was the most disorderly game he had ever seen. First of all a try was scored .17 yards behind the goal line, and il was allowed.

The chairman slated that the speaker mu-'I confine himself to the point as to whether Mr Parker had

Ihe wager,

Mr Tahiwi staled that when he came up to Levin to lay the charge he had mentioned that Mr'Tustin was the man Mr Parker was alleged to have had the bet with, and he also named the stakeholder. Both these gentlemen were present. Unfortunately two other witnesses had been unable to attend.

Mr Baker said he had heard that

there was betting on the match in * question, and that Mr Parker had had a bet with Mr Tustin. The speaker said he held no position under the Union.

Mr Tustin was called in, and in reply to the question as-to whether he had a wager with Mr Parker,

said he believed Oh' Parker had written to the Association mentioning his (the speaker’s) name. He n-ked that that letter be read. The secretary said that was no! so, Mr Parker had rung up, but had m>t written.

Mr Tustin stated that on the Friday before the match a bet was made with Mr Parker, but was cried ~|f before the match next day, when Mr Parker found he had been appointed referee.

The stakeholder slated that on the Saturday morning Mr Parker rang up and stated that as he wain referee the match he asked thnl the bet be called off, and the money was returned.

Mr Parker stated that the hot made with Mr Tustin was a sporting bet, and when he learned that he had been appointed referee he immediately cried the bet - off. He made the bet without having any idea that he was going to he appointed as referee. It was hi ; s first appointment as referee.

Tn reply to the choir, Mr Tahiwi said he did not know that Mr Parker had cried the bet off previous to (he match. .

The matter was then considered by the Association, which came to the conclusion that Messrs Tahiwi and Baker were justified in their aelion, but (bought that Mr Parker had done (he right thin" in calling his bet off when he found lie was appointed referee. Mr Parker had only recently been nominated as a referee, and probably thought his services would not be required in that capacity, but he must take the inquiry as a warning that the Association was determined to deal with cases of the kind. As he had shown good faith in withdrawing from the transaction, the referee was exonerated.