RUGBY FOOTBALL

New Zealand Times, Volume XLVI, Issue 10617, 16 June 1920, Page 8

RUGBY FOOTBALL

MEETING OF EXECUTIVE INQUIRIES INTO ALLEGED OFFENCES. \ __ . A meeting of the Wellington Rugby Union executive was held last evening. .There were prevent: Meusra. W. Hornig (chairman), W. W. Cook, A. H. Griffiths, J. Prendeville, JD. Perry, G. Jackson, IV. Donovan, H. Buck, and J. N. Millard.

■A report by Mr H. McGirr, the referee in the third-grade fixture between Petone and ’ Varsity that he had occasion to caution several members of each team, and to order Morrison, a Petone player, off the field for the use of bad language, came up for discussion. The player in question appeared before the meeting of the union last week, when the accusation was denied. The captain of the team and . the referee attended last night, and the former denied having been cautioned. Mr McGirr said that he spoke to each captain and the players on more than one occasion. In all his experience ho had not heard such language on a football field. Mr Donovan said that a deputation had come in from Petone. representing the club in order to glean some information regarding the ordering off the field of players for misconduct.

■The , chairman . and other members expressed the opinion that the committee could not hear any evidence from the Petone Club members on the question, but would receive the deputation on general questions only. Mr Donovan said that the executive was not aware what the Petone Club was up against, and it was only through the strenuous efforts put forward by those interested in the tradition of the club and Rugby football that prevented many- players from “pulling out”' altogether. Mr J. Lynskey, the spokesman of the deputation, said that the Petone Club said that it was tho desire of the club that the case against Smillie, a member of the junior team, ordered off the field, be reopened. There was evidence that the player in question had been called a name by a touchline judge which’ should not be tolerated to be used by a playaror spetcator. In the circumstances, it must be admitted that the offender did not get all he deserved. A player had been i “put up” for life for using a similar word. It was a surprise to the Petone management committee to learn that Smillie had been ; sentenced by the committee,’ when it should, from all accounts, be the line-umpire who should have been dealt with. Smillie was a clean, honest player, but no man would permit another to call him out of his name. ' There was another aspect, and one which brought discredit on the club, and that was the report that appeared in the papers in regard to liquor being consumed on tho-football field. A report had been made to tho committee that liquor had been apparently handed round at halftime when the Petone third-class and ’Vareity teams met. To allow such a statement to be made without, _a shadow of proof was absolutely unfair to the club. Major W. Hardham, V.C., spoko in a similar strain, and pointed out that parents would not allow their boys to play football if there was any truth in the allegation that had been made. Bad language was used by members of aE teams. It was regrettable, and should be put down with a firm hand. Messrs W. Fraser, H. Ryder, and li. Price also addressed, the meeting, the latter stating that ho was a player in the third-class game where liquor was alleged to he consumed, and he denied that there was liquor, on the field or handed round during any part of the afternoon. ' , , Mr Fraser added that, the club had definite evidence, and the witnesses were prepared to go before any tribunal and swear that the word complained of had been -used. The chairman said that earnest consideration would ho given of the deputation’s remarks, and the committee did not accept responsibility tor what had appeared in the papers. After some considerable discussion the committee arrived at the following decision" That tho request of the deputation bo taken as an appeal under rule 43, and that the presidnt (Dr. Newman) be asked to appoint a special appeal committee to deal with the question of Smillie.” OTHER INQUIRIES. Mr H. Paton, the referee in the Wellington College-Athletic thirdclass game, reported a player for insulting language to him after the match. The offence was admitted by H. Hall, the player in question, and ho was “stood down” for pne playing Saturday. ~ _ . , The chairman, in thanking Mr Faton for attending, said that it was the object of. the executive to uphold referees and to make the sport as clean as possiblo. , _ T R. Brooks, who was ordered off tho field bv Mr T. Jones, the referee in tho third-olaas fixture which was .played at Miramar between Miramar and Marists, appeared in answer to a number of charges that wore made against him. Thesi, in short, were charging a player after the whistle had been sounded, kicking a player when on tho ground, obstructing a player deliberately, and questioning the ruling of the referee. As tho referee was unable to bo present, the matter was deferred till , tho next meeting of tho committee. During tho progress of the OrientalPctono junior match, played on Juno sth. The referee (Mr T. Jones) had occasion to re-port R. F. Parrant for general misconduct ami questioning tho decisions of tho referee. Parrant, who was captain of the Petono team, attended and absolutely denied- any misconduct beyond telling tho referee that he was the worst ho # had played under. It was tine, ho said, that tho Petone team got their backs up towards the end of tho game, otherwise their conduct could nob bo found fault with. It was decided to caution thq player. The opinion being that Parrant had done his best to uphold tho referee, but ho had offended in addressing the words he had to tho referee after tho game. Mr T. A. Fletcher, who referred the third-class match at Johnsonvillo between Johnsonvillo and Athletic teams, reported having ordered. R. Morgan, a Johnsqnville player, ofr tho ground for disputing tho ruling of tho referee. A letter was received from the chairman of the Johnsonvillo Club denouncing tho way the game was controlled and the decisions given by the referee. The offending player, who attended, said that ho had disputed tho referee’s decision on one occasion, and was aware since that he was wrong in doing

Mr Fletcher said that Morgan had spoken in the heat of the moment,, and . had since apologised, and tho apology had. been accepted in the spirit in ’ which it had been tendered, and What hurt him most were the remarks made by the spectators after tho match. It was decided to caution the player, and to ask the captain of the team to appear before the executive to explain the way he had controlled his team. ,