HOROWHENUA REP. FIXTURES.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XLIV, Issue 2454, 15 July 1922, Page 4

HOROWHENUA REP. FIXTURES.

.TO BE PLAYED IN DISTRICT CENTRES. DECISipN OF CLUB DELEGATES. A special general meeting of delegates of football b clubs in the Horowhenua district was held in Levin on Tuesday, by requisition of the Foxton and Shannon clubs, to consider the localities in which home representative matches shall be played. There was a large attendance of delegates, the following clubs being erpresented: Shannon, Foxton, Otaki, Otaki Old Boys, Paraparaumu, Te Horo, Hui Mai, Kuku, Wanderers, Rovers, Weraroa and the Boys Training' Farm. Mr E. J. Nash (president of the Horowhenua Rugby Union) presided. Mr Whibley said the meeting had been convened by Foxton and Shannon to decide what steps should be taken to combat the motion passed by the Union that all rep. matches shall be played in Levin. The clubs north and south considered the motion passed would kill football in the Horowhenua district. It was not a fair thing that people- in the outside districts should have to) come to Levin to see a rep. match; A rep. match was a good thing for the town in which it was played, and they should be distributed. The idea that a bigger gate could be got in Levin than anywhere else wawrong, as last yeaj- Shannon provided a better gate than was ever taken elsewhere. The Horowhenua Union also proposed that rep. players had to assemble in Levin at their own expense prior to a game. That was not right. Mr Whibley then moved .-'“That it be a direction to the Management Committee that home rep. matches be played in the four chief centres of the district — Otaki, Shannon, Levin, and Foxton —in turn, and, further, that as tln%e matches have been played in Levin this the Wairarapa match be played at Foxton, the Wanganui match at Shannon, and'either the South Canterbury or Taranaki match, whichever is played first, be played at Otaki.” Mr'Mason, in seconding, said it seemed the main idea of playing in Levin was the gate, but that was not everything. He took it that the management committee was out ft) further the interests of the game. He had witnessd the rep. game in Levin, and considered the Union would get just as big gates in any of the other three centres.

Mr Carmichael did not agree with Vome of the statements made by Mr Whibley. Only two Levin men were in the last rep. team. - The position was, the Union could not afford to pay the expense of all the outside men coming to Levin. In years gone by players selected for rep. honours would travel anywhere to represent their Union. He referred to the various grounds. Foxton, for instance, had no dead-ball-line. A voice: The best ground in the Union.

Mr Carmichael said lie had no doubt the gates at Foxton, Shannon or elsewhere would be as good as Levin, but there would be more expense in playing on those grounds as none were as central. They had to consider, also, those who donated trophies. *Both the Bebbington Shield and Championship Cup were given by Levin supporters. Mr Williams (Foxton) stated that when rep. matches were played away from Levin, the local gates were left unattended and nothing was collected. That was bad management. r Mr Robinson (Foxton) : It is not only Levin that gives trophies. Mr Coley of Foxton, gave a cup. He supported the statement of want of attention at the gates at the Levin grounds. Mr Moynihan considered the main point was the unequal distribution of rep. games. In the old days of the Union there used to be home and home matches at Manakau and Levin, and occasionally at Otaki. He had asked last year for a rep. game in and it was a financial success. Levin .was a very nice place, hut not the metropolis of New Zealand. Finance was not everything, and in any case if another rep. game was played at Shannon he was sure it would not be a financial loss.

Mr W. Bevan (Hui Mai) asked why a rep. game was not put on for Manakau. For years Hui Mai had been the backbone of this district. He considered, however, that the rep. matches should he played in the centre, which was Levin. Mr W. Hannan considered a lot had been made of the >n-te at Shan-, non. A rep. game had been played at Foxton, but nothing was said about that.

Mr Carmichael: £lO 13s was the gate. •**»»..

Mr Whibley: It was the most unimportant match that has been played in this district for years. Mr Hannan said it .seemed to him that' Mr Whibley was wanting to get the rep. matches played in Foxton and Shannon. Why leave Manakau out. He thought the Management Committee quite justified in looking at'matters from a financial point of view, and as for players having to pay their way to Levin, teams had gone away as far as Taranaki in past years and paid their own expenses. Levin was the natural centre, and it was better and more-con-venient to-'pla.f r rep. matches there. .As far as the grounds were concerned, the Shannon ground was not a good wet-day .ground. Foxton was a good wet-day ground, but had not the conveniences that were in Levin. He referred to the statement by Mr Whibley at a Union meeting that if Foxton was not given a rep, game

it would withdraw from the Union. That was hardly the right spirit, and he characterised Mr Whibley’s statement as bluff. Mr Crystall, Levin, (Wanderers) considered none of the speakers for the motion had considered the interests of the public. (Hear, hear.) They could not expect people to travel great distances to sec rep. games. Levin centre and the games should be played there for the convenience of players and spectators. The Paraparaumu delegate said the people in his district would appreciate a game near to them, hut did not know how it would affect the Union financially. Mr J. Bebbington (Wanderers) said the representatives on the Management Committee expressed thh opinions of the clubs they represented. It seemed to him that the thought behind Mr Whibley’s motion was against Levin and nothing more. yir Whibley raised the point of- the Shannon grounds topping the poll as regards the takings. Did they really eclipse Levin? Another speaker said the Levin grounds were badly managed. Why was that not raised at the Union meetings? Tn any case Levin must he better than Shannon when ii could nearly touch Shannon and yet lose money hv had management at I lie gates. Mr W. Thomson (Levin) said Mr Whibley was wrong in saying the resolution was to play all matches in Levin in the future and contended that the motion only referred to the present season. He reminded the. meeting that last year the Union came out very badly financially and it was decided to do all possible this season to improve the finances. When Mr Whibley raised the question first he did not ask for a match for Shannon, but Foxton only. Now it was Shannon and Foxton. Mr Whibley questioned the statement.

Mr Thomson said Mr Whibley could not gel away from the fact and his action is saving Foxton would pull out if it did not get a game was not the action they would expect from supporters of the Union and game. The motion was a bogey raised by Mr’ Whihlcv. The Union was doing a wise thing in snhilising its finances this year and nhiving the rep. matches in Levin for this season. Mr Brimstone (Shannon) asked what were the receipts of the Wednesday rep. match with Rangitikei hi Levin. Mr Carmichael: £l4 2s 7d. The chairman explained that onlv ■np rep. match had been nlavod so far in Levin this season. The Rob'drrgton Shield matches were nlavod More because of the conditions under which the Shield was given

The motion was put and the voting was even —15 votes for rind against. An Otaki delegate then stated a Te Horo representative had not vot’d as he had arrived late and had >ot put in his proxy. Mr Wilson (Otaki ) explained 'hat a break-down in the ear had mused the late arrival -if the delegate. It was no fault of his own. The chairman said he ..would ae•ept the proxy and allow the delente In vote. On a division the motion was earled hv 17 to 14.

A schoolboy who attacked his leacher and punched her, slapped her face, ]»ulled her hair down, kicked the skin oil her logsJrand made her faint, was summoned at Canterbury. The boy, .John Amos (!)) was one of 50 children in a mixed school at Hogth left in charge of Miss Harris when the headmistress was away. Miss Harris had no power to use the cane, hut tried to eject the boy for misbehaviour. Then he attacked her. The Bench bound over the father as.surety for"his son’s good behaviour, and advised him to administer corporal punishment, which the Bench had no power- to order.