CORRESPONOENCE.

Temuka Leader, Issue 2195, 30 April 1891, Page 1

CORRESPONOENCE.

(We do not hold ourselves responsible for the opinions expressed by nr correspondents.)

FOOTBALL. TO THE EDITOR. 7 Sib, —With your kind permission I would like to draw the attention of Temuka footballers and the public generally to the report of the l emukaUnion match, as it appeared in ,your issue of even date. Prom the report one would be led to believe that the players were dissatisfied with the decisions of the referee. As captain of the Union Football Club permit me to state that we were thoroughly satisfied with the various decisions, and 1 think Mr Sterey will confirm this: “ that the Union never disputed one of his decisions.” Tour reporter complains of the referee not allowing tree kicks when men were down on the ball. How could be when men belonging to both sides were on it? Neither side endeavored to handle the ball, bat simply fell on it, the extremely rough: state of the ground being responsible for the “ Sacks on the Miller ” complained of. In every instance* where a man would not get off the ball or handled it Mr Storey gave a free 'kick against each player’s side, and he was quite right in declining to allow free kicks when men could no* get off. That Murdoch did wrong in advising the Union forwards to “scrag” no one will deny, but perhaps when the facts are known the public will not be severe on that player, a. 'Temuka forward after collaring his opponent coolly sat on him, and as the Union man could not get up an appea| was raised tor a free kick. Murdoch seeing the Temuka man’s action called out “ scrag that man,” for which advice he was reprimanded by his captain and the officials in charge of the game. The Union forwards are said tobsve “ bullocked ” during the game, j As the Union forwards average only lost2lb and their opponents fully a stone:more this remark needs little comment. Tour reporter evidently does not know the difference between ‘‘dribbling” and “ bullocking,” for while most of the South Canterbury teams can beat Temuka at the former, none can touch them at the latter style of play. —I am, etc., U, N. Macintosh, Captain Union Football Udb. Timaru, 25th April 1891* [We have expunged a personal attack on the person who is ; , supposed to have'reported the.match. ’Jjyeihave made enquiries and leani; from independent sources that our reporter was not nearly severe enough in his strictures. It was a “ jsraall boys’ ” game, and altogether unworthy* of men playing under Union rules. —En] THE GORSE NUISANCE. TO THE EDITOR. , Sib, — A word or two on this question may not be out of place now that we are on the eve of electing three members ®n the Geraldine B *ad Board. That the disgraceful state of some, of our roads through the spread of gorse is gradually becoming worse and worse is openly apparent to all observers, and unless some vigorous and decisive steps are taken by the membtrrs of the board as representatives of ihe ratepayers to repress the nuuomce the roads will simply become impassable. If the matter is allowed to drift much longer without remedy the ratepayers will have either to choose representatives who are determined io grapple with and abate the nuisance, or submit to taxation to remove it on behalf of a small minority whose neglect and indolence has created it What I would suggest is this—That the members of-our road board should instruct their overseer to prepare a list ef all persons who have allowed gorse to encroach upon the public roads, and empower him to at once commence proceedings compelling them to destroy and remove it. To do so would only be an act of duty on their part as our representatives, and an act of justice to the public using the roads and to those persons who habitually prevent gorse from encroaching upon the rdH| from their fences. And would he the most effectual of dealing with those persons persist in investing a portion of capital in propagating gorse detriment - of the public am, etc, G. I. Wheats ai^M