A RUGBY PUZZLE.

Shannon News, 7 September 1928, Page 4

A RUGBY PUZZLE.

junior' championship still UNDECIDED.

, Jiur MAI TO APPEAL TO N.Z.R.U

A protest to the New Zealand Rugby Union is the course decided, on by the 1-lui Mai Football Club, Manakau, as the ■ result of the Horowhenua District Council’s ruling concerning the replayed final for the junior championship, the trophy for which is the Rowlands Cup. The outcome of the competition was very unusual. The final stage of the contest was nominally reached on Saturday, August 11th, when, at Levin, Hui Mai and Miranui met to play-off, but, obtained a draw. On the following Saturday the teams re-played the match at Levin, and the result was, again a draw, but a short extra spell was played, and the game was closed when Hui Mai scored a try ' and .were declared by the referee to be the winners. > The matter Avas investigated at the next meeting of the District Council’s management eommittee, and evidence Avas giveii by the referee (Mr R. Sands), with Mr E. Bevan as & witness. It appeared from this that at half time, Mr W. Hannan, president of the Council, told Mr Sands that, in the event of a draw, tAVo 10minute spells were to be played. The referee called both teams, together and i explained' to them that they had to play tAVO 10-minute spells, but in the ‘ case of a score of any kind except a forCe-doAvn the game would finish; and both teams agreed to this. Mr Sands took the view that, as soon as the final score eventuated, the game was no longer a draAV, and Hui Mai Avere the winners as far as he Avas concerned. The President- contended, and was supported in the vieAv by a former ruling ' of the Council, that the proper procedure in such a case was for the teams to play lavo extra spells of ten minutes each; the alternative to such a course being that the teams would be bracketed as winners of the championship. After ' a discussion in the Council, it was resolved that the match be counted as a draAV, and that the secretary com- ' municate Avith the tAvo teams to ascertain whether they Avished to be brack- ' eted as or to re-play the match, i The chairman pointed out that, in all knock-out competitions, in the evnnt of a drawn game two extra spells of ten minutes each must be played. Replies to the Council’s communications were received at Tuesday’s meeting. Mr F. Picard, secretary of the Miranui club, Avrote on behalf of his comi mittee stating that they were quite agreeable to rerplay the junior final if the Hui Mai Club Avere also agreeable. If the latter did not wish for a re-play, then Miranui Avere quite satisfied Avith the arrangements that the Council had made., Mr C. Nees, secretary of the Hui Mai Club, wrote stating that the Coun- < cil’s finding, that the match against Miranui juniors was declared a draw, had been submitted to the team and its numerous supporters, Avith the following result: — r ‘ (1) Believing the win as declared .by the referee and approved

by the Miranui team to be a just win, under no circumstances whatsoever is / the Hui Mai Club prepared to re-play the game or to be bracketed as winners with Miranui; (2) rather than acquiesce in such injustice, this club prefers to submit the matter, to the N.Z. Rugby Union, as we fail to see under what rule your Union has seen fit to declare the match a drawn game." The writer added: “As to your in- ' quiry re Hui Mai's willingness to play Manawatu junior champions, this club is of the opinion that it is impossible to vConsider such proposition until the result of your Union's finding on the match in question is tested. I might , add that such an unexpected (and to cur supporters, groundless) finding is most strongly resented here in Manakau, and we regret to state that if the Union cannot see its way clear to either justify or reverse its decision, football in this area will lose much of the public support that we at all times so much require." Ten shillings was enclosed as protest fee. The chairman stated that the protest against the finding of the Council had to be made to the N.Z. Rugby Union, through the Council. The protest had been lodged with the Council's secretary within the time limit of seven days, but the accompanying fee of 10s was insufficient, as the proper fee was £1 Is. However, this Council did not wish to rule the protest out of order, . so if the correct fee was sent the protest would be allowed to go to the Union. The club could not make its protest to the Council, and could only reopen the case here by bringing fresh evidence. In one rospect the protest ' out of order, because i’t had not reached the rUnion in the seven days, but that was a matter for the Union to decide. The only thing to which the chairman took exception as far as the Council was concerned was the phrase in the Hui Mai letter, “Believing the win as declared by the referee and approved by the Miranui team to be a just win." This was not correct. The Miranui team said-they had not agreed ‘ to the condition laid down by the referee. According to the New Zealand laws of the game, a match must be played in two equal spells, and in departing from this principle the referee was out of order. The Council had now declared the match a draw on the first two spells. As the extra spells had been played contrary to the coridi- . tions laid down by the Council, this body did not recognise them, Mr E. M. Ryder remarked that the New Zealand Union had laid it down that matches were to be played in two equal spells, but the playing of any time after those spells was under district management, and this Council had a ruling that su<jh extra time was to consist of two ten-minute spells.