LIFE DISQUALIFICATION.

Shannon News, 30 May 1924, Page 3

LIFE DISQUALIFICATION.

+ —— - - FOOTBALLER’S -APPLICATION FOR REIN-STATEMIiNT. REFUSED BY HUGBY UNION. At Tuesday’s meeting of the lloruwhenuu Rugby Union a letter was received ii'oni H. McDonald, ol Shauiion, who asked for reinstatement ii'um his liie suspension wuicn hud been imposed because .of an assault on a referee at .'Shannon.

Mr Hu-rdie explained that his club lia-u taken up tne question, being sure that this player had borne more than his share oi the trouble. McDonald bad in the police ease pleaded guilty of obscene, language -and not guilty oi assault.. lie was nevertheless convicted of assault and lined. He could bring witnesses to prove that after the match the referee in question hud admitted that- McDonald had not struck him.

McDonald, who waited on tlie Union, bore out Mr Hardie’s statement. In answer to the chairman he denied that he hud struck tlie referee, but admitted that, utter the match, he had to be prevented from attacking him.

Tiie secretary read from tire evidence given af the enquiry, intu tlie ease, made by the Union, where tlie referee gave' evidence thaj, he had said that McDonald had not struck him first. McDonald in response denied' striking tlie referee at all. :

The secretary stated that the point was that there was a lot oi feeling Vver the mated and .some heckling irom tiie line.

McDonald m further evidence admit led that Jie had been ordered off the held for obscene language but bad afterwards been allowed lo go buck «and play. He had gone Buck uf his •Own accord after the trouble with the relercc was over and was not asked return to the game by the releiee. He adnu.tjed tlia.f this "a.inutmiti'd to ( a 'defiance ul the referee, but the referee had not. objected to his return.

The secretary stated that tiie mutter was one which hud been thrashed Out pretty thoroughly by the .Union and by the Magistrate's Court, both of which had decided against McDonald. He did not consider that the mutter, could be re-opened. Mr llardie stated that tne Shannon Club could bring evidence lo show 'that McDonald was not the man who had struck tlie referee. They- "'ere prepared to bring this before the Union which could then consider it.

Mr Hutchings stated that the referee had made a statement (hat McDonald hud struck 'him. 'lf this was so, they could not get over this very well.

At this stage j|. was proposed and seconded that the Union uphold the 'action of the Union in suspending McDonald.

The secretary stated that a shannon resident had stated openly that he was the man who had struck the referee. If this was so why hud not the Shannon spectators who were now prepared to give evidence in McDonald’s favour come forward in the Court and given this evidence. The motion was then pm and carried.