RUGBY NOTES.

Sun (Christchurch), Volume I, Issue 84, 15 May 1914, Page 2

RUGBY NOTES.

NEW ZEALAND UNION'S REPORT.

In last Saturday's SUN-was published a reply by- Mr Edgar Wylie, lion, treasurer of the New Zealand Rugby Union, to my criticisms of the N.Z.R.U. managing committee's annual report and balance sheet. Mr Wylie.'s," reply'' merely gave some of the explanations of. certain financial matters which should have appeared in the. report, and did not state why those tions, had been As uriy c'riti6isins Were based on thfe fact that the explanations were omitted from -fhe report, I did. not bother '.to reply ; to .Mr Wylie, because it appeared to me to be obvious that -Mr Wylie had nOt ;really replied to the criticisms, but had merely come forward with belated explanations.

Tlie above paragraph is prompted by the-' fact that at the Canterbury Rugby Union's management committee's meeting, this week tlie president, Mr G. H. Mason, who, at the time, was also president of the N.Z.R.U., repeated Mr Wylie,'s explanation regarding the item of £145 2/2 which appears in the balance-sheet as due from the Californian Rugby Union. Mr Mason appeared to think that the explatnatioii giveh by Mr Wylie and himself is sufficient. But it is not. Both gentlemen went to the -trouble- of explaining that • the £145 2/2 was money advanced for getting.: and fifting' it out, bu£ tliey did not explain why the item did not appea'iv in the statement of expenditure as ifell as in the list of assets. In passing, I would point Out to Mr Wylie that. I,.didnot take exception to the item ;of £l9 7/8 for reception, etc., of the team on its. return, but merely alluded to it as one of the only two items regarding the tour which appear in the balancesheet. Nor did I base my criticism on a " mistaken idea that the »New Zealand Union participated in the profits of the Californian tour, if there were any. ' *

The basis of my criticisms was "the lack of information \ contained "in the report, and, as I have pointed out, Mr Wylie does not state why the explanations he has put forward were not included in the report. Therefore I had intended \to allow the '' reply" to stand by itself, satisfied no one who had read both could feel that Mr Wylie had replied propefly- ' But, while: I aan on the sub-: j.ect, I may point out that it is'remarkable that the N.Z.R.U, knows nothing-—-as Mr Wylie alleges-r-of the.-matter^ jof a New Zealand team being invited f-'-to yisit Great Britain. Over, a year ago | the international Board was preparing I to consider, the issue of such an invita : . tion. Later, after Mr W. W. Hill, Secretary of the New South Wales Union, 'had passed'through Wellington and had some discussion with officers of the N.Z.R.U., there appeared in a certain Sydney paper a 1 summarf of arrangements: for interchanges., of visits between New Zealand anil \Ajustralik, whwjh.jeference. iwas - also uiade to |he probability of a New Zealand teain Agoing to Great* Britain in 1914-15. | 'Ol - Mr Wylie x also states that the unions indebted to the N.Z.R.U. are meeting •their/ does pot say why there - "was "nothing'' in the balance-sheet to show tha ( t. , s The ffitjiy •way in which that could be ascertained from the balance-sheet is by comparing this year's balance-sheet with ljast years. ' while the liabilities of some unions to the Others have ;increais&a. But tliere is nothing in, the balance-sheet to that these payments to/and froEGL/ accumulated fund qmd nothing to show why "th'e v fijfld is slightly smaller riow-tl/an it was a .year ago.That is the point Wiylie has not met. ■ ; v 1 {

One more poiht. : I was" aware ' that the agreement; with, Australia, exchanges Of j visits was made years kgo. - fwas'/only/ Jia|fl^ir — the year to fe the reports the actual &&&£ for, visits yfeie decided .ujpdii. 1, -4''A.TjiG. I ( JtiNIOR NOTES..' ' v. OLD BpYS.; The clash between Merivale i(last year's winners)' and Old Boys in the Junior Grade, was very even andrhard fought. Merivale - had a good team, but Old Boys, wHile strong in the division/ Cookson, luiji|an4 thfe backs, theirl (lefeneethereby. F Kl Honours between opposiilg' forwards; : The whites Werf better -in scrum wbrk, but, ,Merival|. had morel tUish rwork. It was following up ;. tha| enabled Glassen:;tp?sc6re. both their \tries. Old-Soys werf .veryveojisistentin screwing the scrums,; but spoilt chances by Over-bagernessJ , /?' / The Mferivalte backs excelled in Ikicking. i jiardieyi-at full, was as safe as the proverbial ( ' sack> 1 ' and also found the line withi heart-breaking accijracy. The. handling! of the other backs' left much : to tie desired, wliile their pa'ssing was weak, and attack generally lacked enterprise. They have apparently set up a little tin god in their club room, and. his name is'cross-kick. He's alright, used judiciously, but gets a bit monotonous, and often defeats his own end/;; '. . The white backs were rather : poor in the first spell, Blickmore sticjcy fingers, ; | However, the second halfj had hiands, and thfelball away lit and passing! rushje's were started. ccnti e; a- fine gam 6/ runningbeautifully; straight. Smith, a last year School player, also played well. It should b.e-an interesting game when thetie teamis;, mfe(Bt in the ground, as Old Boys will be strengthened by the inclusion of Cookson, M'Callum, Down, and Owles, while Merivale gave enough showing to indifeate that they' may' prove "out; pf,sight."