PROTEST AGAINST SUNDAY FOOTBALL.

Shannon News, 14 June 1929, Page 3

PROTEST AGAINST SUNDAY FOOTBALL.

BY SHANNON CLERGY. NOT UPHELD BY COUNcf. The following petition was received at the Shannon Borough Council meeting on Tuesday evening signed by the / local clergy:. “We, the undersigned wish to make, in the name of our respective church people, an emphatic protest against the practice of organised . football matches being held on Sundays in this town. Furthermore, we wish to draw your attention to the disgraceful behaviour of these - people in the Druids’ Hall on Sun- - ) day evening. It is hardly necessary for us to -say that such behaviour reflects on the'‘name and standing of the place. Wc further trust that you will heartily co-operate with us in having such practices stepped immediately.—We are dear sirs, Yours faithfully — A. J. Farnell (Church of England).' R. Williamson (Presbyterian Church). J. 11. Edmondson (Methodist Church consent by telephone). J. 11. Sinclair (Salvation Army for M. Blaikie).

Cr. Hyde thought the letter should be. referred to the Football Club.

Cr. Tliwaites said that, as the Domain was under the jurisdiction of the Council they shduld consider whether they would allow games to be played there on “We have put lights there for evening practice and the footballers should leave Sunday play alone,” -said Cr. Thwaites. He had received complaints about Sunday play and also that bad language was used. Constable Blaikie had spoken strongly on the matter of Sunday visitors from Palmerston North. The he had heard, was placed in front of those who entered ihe ground on Sunday, but that was only/ a side issue. The question was, , Should the Council permit Sunday, play when it gives offence to ratepayers? . Are the majority against it? He would move: “That Sunday organised matches be not allowed.”

In seconding the motion, Cr. Hyde said complaints had been made to him from the children’s point of view. “We cannot live for ourselves,” he said, “we must think of qtliers. It might be alright for lads to kick a •ball about, but organised matchesshould not be allowed.” Regarding misbehaviour at the Druids’ liall, the secretary of the Football Club had engaged it for a meeting and he understood they were only there, about an hour.

Cr. Curran, jun., said, that:so far as the hat was concerned, he had been present at - the Domain and did "not see any collection taken up. Several footballers had remarked that they should have taken up a collection. Iu the past, football matches had been held on the Domain on Sundays to raise money for the unemployed and the street games were played on that day and enjoyed by a big crowd of spectators. He had heard-no bad language. It was better for young people to (be there than knocking about the streets.

Cr. Anderson said the Domain was there for the people and they had the right to use it, although it was, under ’the jurisdiction of the Council. If bad language was used the police could deal with the offenders.

Cr. Curran, jun., “Why bar football being played in the town, when golf land tennis is allowed? Football is the

poor man’s game.” Cr. Downes: Both the previous speakers who referred to the hat being held out to those entering the ground were misinformed. It was not there when the people went in, but it was there when they came out.

Cr. Thwaites: My informant was the police. Cr. Downes said he lived nearby and bad language was seldom heard in the afternoon, but he could not say the same about, night play. Cr. Hook did not think objection would be taken to games in the Domain on Sunday among . our own people. It, was organised matches with outsiders which was objectionable. Cr. Anderson: If we . stop football on Sundays, we must ask golf and tennis players not to play bn Sundays. The Mayor said he agreed wither. Hook that it was probably organised matches that were objected to. The motion, on being put to the meeting, v 7 as lost, only the mover and seconder supporting it.