SOCCER DISPUTE

Sun (Auckland), Volume II, Issue 384, 19 June 1928, Page 11

SOCCER DISPUTE

THISTLE HOLDS OUT OLIVE BRANCH but with a condition By a substantial majority a largely-attended meeting of friends and supporters of the Thistle Football Club decided last evening that, subject to the withdrawal of the sxpreasion, “malcontents” and -undesirables,” there should be a reconciliation with the Auckland Football Association. The chairman, Mr. J. W. F. Dickson, patron of the club, said that the motion meant that the olive branch was being held out in the interest of the game. A similar view was also expressed on behalf of the players by Mr. j 5. Carter, captain of the club’s senior teamMr. Dickson expressed astonishment at the large attendance, which, he said, *hoT*ed that the Thistle Club, in its present disagreement with the Auckiand Football Association, had the suj>port of many of the sporting public of Auckland. Reviewing the situation that had arisen, Mr. Dickson said that on the Tuesday evening, before there was any thought that Kay would be suspended, the clu bhad placed on record its disapproval of the poor class of referees allotted them, and particularly tfao referee in question. In doing so the club Tvas actuated only by the best interests of the game. “STAR CHAMBER METHODS’* ALLEGED The Auckland Football Association •referred Kay’s case to the judicial committee. at which meeting the Press was excluded. This, he thought, was quite wrong. Obviously no star chamber methods were wanted. It was a case where the public should know what the circumstances were. At the meeting in question 18 witnesses were called and all were unanimous that the referee was wrong. “The Thistle Club met that evening,” said Mr. Dickson, “and, I suppose, feeling a bit h . under the collar, decided to withdraw. Personally I think I would have delayed a little, but you know what hot-headed Scotsmen are like.” REMARKS DENIED Refering to the remarks reported to have been made at the special meeting of the Management Committee, in which it was said that “the malcontents .should be classed as undesirables,’ Mr. Dickson said the Management Committee, through its secretary, now denied that the word “malcontents” was used. The question was whether they were prepared to accept the report of an impartial reporter or that of the secretary of the Auckland Football Association. “Personally he thought a reporter taking down a report of a meeting would set down fairly what happened.” Mr. Dickson said that he thought if the question had been referred to him at the commencement he could have brought about a reconciliation. The Thistle Club was of opinion that it had been deliberately affronted, and it was difficult for it to forget it. In view of the remarks passed, Mr. Marks, president, and Mr. Pickering, chairman of the club, had no desire to be associated again with the Auckland Football Association. Referring to the association’s repudiation that evening of the remarks reported to have been said at the meeting of the Management Committee, JVIr. Marks said that it was strange that although the report in question was published on Friday evening, it was not until that evening that the Management Committee had denied it. Mr. Dickson said the question before them now was to determine what attitude the club should take up. There were two courses open. The first was to go back unconditionally as a club or allow its players to transfer to other clubs, and the alternative was to form a new association. Personally he would not like to see the club take that course, and, in the interest of the game generally, he would prefer to see a reconciliation effected. He considered that could be done if teh association withdrew the offending remarks. OPENING THE DOOR Dr. McDougall, vice-president of the Thistle Club, said that even if it could be said that the Thistle Club had been precipitate in its action, the A.F.A. nad been more so. He would not like to see a new association formed, and thought a round-table conference would be the best way out of the difficulty. Mr. Howard said that even if they would be prepared to eat humble pie, the same trouble would occur again; at least, until there was a new Management Committee. Mr. Pickering said he was sorry the position had arisen, but at the same time he certainly did not appreciate the attitude taken up by Mr. Menzies. As far as he was concerned, he would never go back to that committee. _A motion was then moved by Mr. Danks, “That., subject to a withdrawal or the expressions ‘malcontents’ and undesirables,’ there should be a reconciliation. Mr. Dickson said in effect the club was opening the door and the onus would then rest with the Auckland Football Association. “The olive branch was being held out.” The motion was substantially carried, bl votes being recorded for it. A number of those present did not vote. POSITION OF KAY Mr. Kelly, a member of the Referees’ Association, voiced the opinion that if kay was ordered off as a result of an a pt aggravated by the action of an official of another club, the case should certainly be reopened. Mr. A. Bowie, another referee, said if the case was reopened he would give evidence that Kay did not swear at tne referee. He saw and heard what had happened, and was quite sure that h-ay did not swear. A further resolution, asking the Management Committee to reopen the Kay case, was carried unanimously. Asked what would be the attitude of the officers of the club in the event of * reconciliation. Mr. Pickering said he would put nothing in the way of it. « f ar as his future attitude as an official toward the Management Committee, he would have to give the questl°n serious consideration.