REFEREE UPHELD

Rotorua Morning Post, Volume 2, Issue 563, 21 June 1933, Page 6

REFEREE UPHELD

Our Own Correspondent)

breeze with . player EVENTFUL MATCH DISCUSSED BY RUGBY SUBUNION LINE UMPIRE'S DISPLACEMENT

(From

Opotiki, Tuesday. Events during the course of. the O.M.P. v. Old Boys game on Saturday, came under review at the meeting of the Opotiki Rugby Sub-Union held on Monday night, when-consid-erable discussion centred round the action of the referee; Mr. Mclntosh, in displacing the line umpire and depriving him of his flag, and -later in ordering off Maunsell, an O.M.P. player for allegedly using insulting language to him. The matter came up for discussion when a letter was received from the O.M.P. club stating that it was dissatisfied with Mr. Mclntosh refereeing and requesting that the match be replayed. Mr Edwards said that he considered that the trouble had arisen through the action of the referee in over-rul-ing the line umpire. He thought that in this case the referee had been wrong, and that the line umpire's decision had been correct. After Mr. Mclntosh deprived the line umpire of his flag,. O.M.P. supporters had hooted the referee, and after this it had appeared to members of the O.M.P. team that their players had been unduly penalised. The team had been so dissatisfied that they had not desired to resume the game after half- ■ time, and had only done so under protest. Argued the Point Mr. Mansill said that he thought the referee had sounded his whistle . and ruled the ball out of touch, but the line umpire had argued the point, with the result that the referee had taken his flag away from him. Mr. Butterworth said that he had questioned a number of spectators and they had all agreed that the ball was not out.

It was reealled by Mr. Edwards that on a previous occasion Mr. Mclntosh had over-ruled this particular line umpire. Other members pointed out that there had been previous trouble with this line umpire last season. The chairman said that in his opinion the referee deserved sympathy on every occasion, unless the evidence was very strongly against him, as his was a most difficult and arduous position. "Lost His Head" Mr. Butterworth expressed the opinion that the referee had rather lost his head on this occasion. Mr. Morris and Mr. Mansill, however, disagreed, contending that the referee had been perfectly fair. After further discussion, ttie secretary telephoned Mr. Mclntosh, who later in the evening attended the meeting. Referee's Evidence In reply to members of the union, Mr. Mclntosh said that in his opinion the line umpire had been too slow. The difference of opinion had arisen in regard to the rule as to whether a tackled player, failing across the line, was out or not. Mr. Mclntosh also alleged that three of the O.M.P. players had been under the influence of liquor when they went on the field. He considered that the player ordered off nad been under the influence of liquor, otherwise he would not have spoken as he had done. During the interval he had heard someone call out to him, and had walked across to the line, where a slight argument had ensued between himself and Maunsell, during which Maunsell had attempted to strike him. Delegate Blamed After the game, however, the player had apologdsed and offered to shake hands. In his opinion, the club delegate, Mr. Edwards, was largely to blame for advising (the O.M.P. team not to resume play tafter half time. He denied that he had been heated when he had taken the flag away from •the line umpire. He felt that if he was given an opportunity to explain .some of.the rules to the O.M.P. team, aj great deal of the trouble would be obviated (and they would be better friends. The chairman expressed the opinion that on the evidence submitted the actions of the referee had been perfectly fair. Mr. Mclntosh, in reply, said that the Referees' Association was very dissatisfied with the present position, and felt that if it continued they would not carry on. He was of the ■opinion that it was largely caused by the barrackdng of the spectators. Several members concurred with this opinion and said that the hooting and noise made by the spectators was most undesirable.' Referee Upheld The chairman then moved that the referee's action be upheld and that no action ihe taken in regard to the request to replay the game.- This was seconded by Mr. Mansill, but Mr. Butterworth, seconded by Mr. Edwards, moved as an amendment that the matter be adjourned and again discus&ed next Thursday. • Mr. Mclntosh said that if the amendment was earried, no referees would turn out next Saturday. On being put to the vote the amendment was lost and the motion earried, Messrs Butterworth and Edwards being the only dissentients. With regard to Maunsell, the player ordered off, Mr. Mclntosh asked that the union adopt a lenient view of his case in view of the fact; that he had apologised for his behaviour. He had never previously had trouble with him. Mr. O'Sullivan suggested that in view of this request, Maunsell should be severely repriimanded and told that if he used similar language again he would not be allowed to play. Mr. Edwards, however, contended that the player should be heard, and it was finally decided to hold a meeting on the ground nexrb Saturday. Messrs. iW'oods, Butterworth and Jephson were appointed a sub-committee to deal with the matter.