REFEREE AND PLAYER.

Shannon News, 18 July 1924, Page 2

REFEREE AND PLAYER.

FOXTON INCIDENT RErOPENED. The incident in which! H. Jacob is alleged to have threatened to pull the nose of the referee, after the poxtonWanderers watch in Foxton, some weeks ago, was re-opened on Tuesday night’s meeting of the Horowhenua Union, as the result of a letter received from the New Zealand Rugby Union, enclosing a communication to that body from Mr W. D. Neville, the referee in'question, and a file of newspaper clipping bearing on the incident. They wrote that .they had been appealed to by (Mr Neville, who had supplied the ' clippings and given his version of the incident, claiming that he.had not received fair treatment by the HorQwhenua Union, which had refused to meet him in the matter of expenses of himself and witnesses. The N.Z.R.U. a?ked for an lexplanataon of the ipcident. .

Mr Riminer moved that the latter be received. He, the speaker, was positive -that no coiomumcation had oeen rceived from Mr Neville as to expen!ses. The only intimation of this was a remark made by the referee to the president of the union (Mr E. Nash) as he' had been leaving the field. It was only a few weeks before this when Mr Neville had cited a representative pf the Rugby Union, on which occasion he had not ‘asked for expenses. It seemed 1 to the speaker, that Mr Neville had known that his case was unsound and had taken this way of getting out of the mess his hastiness had got him into. A referee was a 'man who above everything should be capable of controlling men, and not always be up against somebody, either a player or spectator. Mr Hutchings stated that previous to this complaint, every time Mr Neville came to Devin he had come free in Mr Austin’s car, so that it had not cost him anything. He, the speaker, had known Jacob for a long time, and had also known Mr Neville, who had gone out of his way considerably to referee in matches. He'had been informed in Foxton that three credible witnesses had offered to come over at their own expense and give testimony for Mr Neville in this case. It was not right to decry him too much, u. consideration o.f this fact.

Mr Rimmer asked leave to withdraw his previous motion, which had been made under the impression that the communication had come from Mr Neville, and to substitute the following: “That this Union has considered the verbal statement of the referee made to the president regarding bringing over witnesses and expenses therefor, and his latter forwarded to the Union, also the letter received from the N.Z. Rugby Union, and considers that it is impossible to proceed with the matter further as Mr Neville’s statements are inconsistent, and that a copy of his letter to the Union be forwarded to the N.Z. Rugby Union.—Carried.