FOOTBALL

Waikato Times, Volume XXXIX, Issue 3132, 11 August 1892, Page 2

FOOTBALL

TO THE EDITOR. Sill,—The unprovoked and untruthful attick made upon me by your reporter "Goal Post" in Tuesday's issue of The Waikato Times must be my excuse for troubling yon with this letter. I hare always understood that it was the duty of a reporterjtt) Rive a fair arid clear description of whatever event he might be reporting, but in this instance " Goal Post" in his haste to show off his knowledge of the game has entirely omitted any description of the match to indulge himself in a criticism of the players, a criticism which not only shows to every footballer that his knowledge of the game is not so great as he himself imagines it to be, but also shows that he is utterly devoid of that good taste and kindly feeling which alone can make adverse criticism both acceptable and beneficial. This I will charitably attribute to his youth and inexperience, and trust that when he obtains a little more knowledge of the world he will lose that profound belief in his own infallibility which now animates him. Now for the part which immediately affects myself. " Goal Post 51 tirstt takes exception to my kicking at a rolling biill which he says is a most dangerous practice, but is forced to admit that I wan always successful. I submit Mr Editor, that my play which is ALWAYS successful cannot be very dangerous thotieh it may appear so to "Goal Post.." He next states speaking of me " His display at the end of the game was a disgrace to football, and, I think a severe reprimand from the Union would njt be out of place." What display does he mean? Why has he not slated what I did that was a disgrace to football? Had he done so I feel sure the verdict of your readers would have been the same as that of numerous spectators who witnessed the incident to which I suppose he alludes, viz., that I was in the right and the referee entirely in the wrong. I may also say that I court the fullest investigation of my conduct by the Union, feeling | sure that if a reprimanl is given it will not ! be 11 me, and that the Union will exonerate me from the unjust charges made by " Goal Post." I will briefly state the circumstances of the dispute in order that my brother footballers and the public may judge whether the word disgraceful can be fitly applied to me. After the match had concluded, it was agreed to continue the practice till dark, and during the play U. Kusabs brought the ball from the 25 flag, and had passed the goal line when I collared him.' A inaul-in-goal ensued, when Mr 0. Bowden, who hail been assisting the referee throughout the match, blew his vvhistlo and declared it was no try, as the ball had not touched the ground. Aftor this the referee (Mr Gwynne) came from half way up the Held and gave it as u try. I naturally protested, and asked hiin it lie had seen the ball touch the ground, as I considered it was impossible for him to have d>ne so, owing to the distance he was away. He replied that he had, in face of the fact that when Mr Bosvden blew the whistle Kusabs was on the ground on his back, I on the top of him, and the bull betwoen us, as can be testilied to by scores of disinterested spectators. I again stated if. was no try, and the match being left the ground, feeling hurt at the unjust decision. Had we been playing a match, I shonld certainly have bowed to tho decision uf the referee, however unjust, and continued the game ; but as the match was over, I felt justified in showing my Banse of the injustice by leaving the ground. I may also say that, according to tin) Rugby Union ruins, it was no try, even if the ball had touched the ground, as it was out of being more than 25 yards froui the goal-line, as I the distance was measured I'liinedjatelv , afi.'Tu\.r>:!-. Tro-,:ii:g th.-i " ■ t ! ' .iuKT, MlL*.ii.ijj .-vujjn.-t lOcn, 1893-.