Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

That Football Complaint.

| TO THE EDITOR.] Sir,—ln my la.«t letter re the above I gave " Fair FiglUer " a case to answer namely, the Union's decision re United v. Te Keum match. Instead of justifying the position taken up by the Union (or perhaps I should say the ruling given by the chairman of the meeting at which this matter came up for decision) he offers a challenge which your correspondent Sid Smith lightly characterises e.s " school boyish." Perhaps it would have put the case more fairly if the speakers at the United Club's dinner had been more explicit in their remarks, and particularly the club captain as I understand he is also the club delegate to the Union, and was fully conversant with the whole matter. " Referring to memoranda taken at a general meeting of the United Club, when the delegates reported the Union's decision: I find that at that meeting : Mr Dean moved : '• That owing to no official notice of the match having been sent to the United Club, and seeing that Te Kemu travelled to Mercer instead of to Pokeno where the Club's playing ground is situated, also the fact that no referee had been appointed by the Union, or agreed upon between the different clubs according to adopted by-laws, this Union directs that the United v. Te Kemu match be played at the end season." This motion was seconded by Mr J. McGuire, who with Mr Graham (both Tuakau delegates) and Mr Geraghty (Onewhero) spoke in favour of it being carried. After allowing discussion for over an hour the chairman ruled that hti could not accept the motion, as it would stultify the Union. Hom" is that for procedure ? Mr Dean then moved : " That the question re the United v. Te Kemu match be dealt with by the Union, and not decid< d by the chair." Seconded by Mr Maurice Shaw. Mr Dean then asked the chairman to instruct the secretary to make an entry of his two motions in the minutes, and then informed the Union that his club would appeal against the decision. Previous to Mr Dean's second motion, the chairman decided without any motion from delegates that Te Kemu got the match by default. In the face of the above facts perhaps the United Club officials should have castigated the Union chairman, not the Union. For myself, Sir, I thiuk the chairman was wrong in deciding a question like this without taking a vote, and the Union very weak indeed to allow it to pass. Apologising for trespassing on your valuable space,—l am, etc., AJAX.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/PWT19131021.2.21

Bibliographic details

Pukekohe & Waiuku Times, Volume 2, Issue 138, 21 October 1913, Page 4

Word Count
431

That Football Complaint. Pukekohe & Waiuku Times, Volume 2, Issue 138, 21 October 1913, Page 4

That Football Complaint. Pukekohe & Waiuku Times, Volume 2, Issue 138, 21 October 1913, Page 4

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert