FOXTON'S FOOTBALL FIASCO.

Shannon News, 19 August 1927, Page 1

FOXTON'S FOOTBALL FIASCO.

LOSS OF A REP. FIXTURE. CHAMBER OF COMMERCE PROTEST CONSIDERED. REASONS TO BE STATED FOR CHANGE OF VENUE. The change of venue for the Beb- | bington Shield match, Horowhenua v. j Oroua, which was played at Levin last I Saturday owing to the Foxton grounds ! being unsuitable, was not allowed to pass without a protest on the part of the river-port. It came in the form I of a letter from the Foxton Chamber j of Commerce to the Horowhenua Rugby i District Council, and gave rise to an i interesting discussion at the meeting of I the latter body last night. The result i was that it was decided to reply to the i Chamber setting out the reasons for j the change. It is hoped that this course j will calm the feeling which has been j aroused across the river, and possibly prevent the footballers in that portion of the district from being persuaded to take the extreme course of merging with the Manawatu body. Only one of the three Foxton delegates —namely, Mr W. Neville—was present at last night's meeting. The secretary of the Foxton Chamber (Mr R. Hornblow) wrote as follows: "At the last meeting of my Chamber, the matter Of the change ot venue of the Bebbington Shield match was discussed, and dissatisfaction was expressed with the action of the local delegates in sanctioning the playing of this match in Levin after it had been advertised to be played locally. My Chamber also wishes to state that in its opinion Easton Park would have been quite suitable for the match, and had business people been consulted, there is little doubt that assistance would have been forthcoming in connection with the preliminary arrangements for the game." Mr "Wrigley moved and Mr Anderson seconded, that the letter be received. The chairman said he did not think the Council should let the Foxton delegates shoulder the blame for the shifting of the match. They seemed to be getting all the hits while the Council were being let off scot-free. It was stated in the Manawatu Herald that the Council were not to blame, but that the, Foxton delegates were. This meeting should not allow the matter to pass without letting the Foxton people know that the Council were quite in accord with the delegates. Mr Neville (Foxton) mentioned, at the previous meeting, that he asked for assistance from the players, and they absolutely refused to give it. Mr Richards: I think we should answer the letter from the Chamber and explain the situation. We don't want to fall out with the Foxton public. It was only through bad luck, I think, that we did not get the match. Mr Rimmer: The reason was clear enough as to why they did not get the match. The delegates felt that it was impossible for them to give the time and money to put the grounds in order. They had approached different people in Foxton, I understand, and they coukl not get any assistance whatever. There has been no part of the Union previously but what has been prepared to give what assistance it possibly could in order to get a game. I don't know that the Chamber have a grievance at all. Had that game been played in Foxton, the cost of preparing that ground would have been borne by the delegates, and I don't think that the Chamber are a sportsmanlike body. They may want to get the benefit of any sports held in Foxton, but they want them at the expense of the sport ing bodies. The Chamber have shown that they are not prepared at any time to get the games there. We should have liked to fulfil our pledge. It was on the recommendation of the delegate from Foxton, and on that only, that avc decided to take that game from Foxton to Levin. It was very much against the grain of the Foxton delegates and of the Council, and I do not think that if there is any blame it is attributable to the delegates, but to the business peoole of Foxton. Mr Richards: I still think we. should answer that letter.

Mr Wriglcy: I think that if the letter is received it will be quite sufficient, seeing that the Chamber was so late in bringing the matter up. Mr Neville: We had the offer of two matches, and they knew why we lost the first one. If they were so anxious to get a second match, it was their business to c'ome forward, and not oars to beg and pray of them if they wanted this sport. The chairman said he was not in favour of entering into correspondence with the Chamber of Commerce or any other business concern in connection with football; but he was in favour of the motion that the letter be received. He thought that the Council should make some public, statement in the Foxton paper. Mr Wriglcy: I think the matter should be dropped. They had thenopportunity, and refused to take any action at all.

The Chairman: The Foxton people, reading the report of that meeting, must be under a wrong impression as to why the match was shifted to Levin, and we should try to put them in the right. Mr Joyce: I think Mr Rimmer's statement covers it fairly fully. Mr Neville: The public of Foxton do blame the delegates. They think we came here with the intention of shifting the match. _ They don >t know the ins and outs of it.

Mr Richards: The Chamber thirk that

the ground is in good order to play on. They don't seem to understand the position about the fence and goal-posts being wanted. Mr Rimmer: They think if they had a crowd in Foxton, everybody would be anxious to spend a bob or two.

The Chairman: I am quite in agreement with Mr Rimmer, and I think the rest of the Council are. Mr Richards: I .think it will be courtesy on our part to answer the letter. 1 move that we answer them, explaining the situation as to the ground not being in order and there being no fences up, and that it was found impossible to play the game with credit to the Union and the public as well.

Mr Wrigley: Why did they not move when they had their opportunity? They could have carried the match out if they had cared to go into it.

Mr Anderson: An explanation with rdga<rd to their delegates would be right. Mr Wrigby: Who are you going to make the explanation to?

Mr Richards: I think the Foxton Chamber of Commerce do not understand the position. The public of Foxton may think the same as the Chamber, thus putting the Council in a false position. The Chairman: No doubt the public of Foxton have been led to a wrong opinion in regard to the shifting of that match. If the Council thinks the publishing of th« report of this meeting sufficient, well and good.

Mr Neville seconded Mr Richards's amendment that an answer be. sent to the Chamber stating the grounds on which the Council shifted the match.

Mr Neville stated that a meeting was going to be called to consider the question of Foxton's reverting to the Manawatu Union. If this Council's position were explained, it should settle the movement. The people in Foxton seemed to have hold of the wrong end of the stick, and the action which he suggested would clean the matter right up. Feeling was running very high there, but he thought that what he urged would put a stop to it. Mr Rimmer said he did not mind supporting this course if it would assist the delegates and if it was the wish of the Foxton delegates. Mr Neville: I am strongly against their going into Manawatu, and I think this will streng-Hicn our hands at the meeting. The amendmer'; was carried without dissent, the motiru being withdrawn.