ROUGH FOOTBALL.

Auckland Star, Volume XLI, Issue 165, 14 July 1910, Page 7

ROUGH FOOTBALL.

IS TOO MUCH MADE OF ITT I AUCKLAND AUTHORITIES PAUSE. Of late public attention has been, directed towards j£ha.t undesirable element which has entered into some sports, and notably football—rough play. For some weeks past cases of rough play have been dealt with, by the Management Committee of the A.R.U.,.but now that body, according, to views expressed a.t last night's meeting, are inclining to the belief that, perhaps, the matter- is being overdone. At all events that is the expressed opinion of a large number of members. As one speaker stated, the referees must be supported, but at: the same time, it was the duty of the, Committee to see that the interests of players were safeguarded. .

In the course of discussion, reference was made to the case an which a Ponsonby senior player was ordered off the field for kicking , a City player on the No. 1 ground on Saturday last. Mr. C. P. Stichbury said there were other incidents leading up to the affair. He protested that one team was being penalised ail through. . Mr. C. V. Langsford said he understood the whole thing was unpremeditated.

There- was desultory argument on the question of the two players being brought before the Committee, and -then •half-an-iiour was Veiled away until the Ponsonby plcyer put in an appearance. Having read the referee's report of the occurrence, the Committee called the referee (Mr. A. H. Freeman), who said that he did not think anything lead up to the incident wbieh caused him to order the Ponsonby player off the field. It was a deliberate kick, and when he ordered the man off, t-he latter went away quietly and made no protest. The City player who was kicked applied to him (th& referee) for protection, but at that moment he noticed the foul play, and immediately afterwards ordered the offending player off the field. ,He thought that the Pan-sonby-player used obscene language, but was not sure what the words were.

The Ponsonby player said the ball was three or four yards away. The City man kicked him, and he, on. the spur of the moment, retaliated. He denied using obscene language. Aβ in the majority of cases, the retaliator was caught. He could call witnesses to

bear out wha-t he said. The City man was not lying on the ground, for lie came through and kicked 'him. It all happened on the spur of the moment, and both of them, he thought, acted heatedly, and without thought. Mr. IT. Francis corroborated the statement of the player accused. He did not ■think the referee wae in a position to see what actually happened. Both men were on their feet.

The -witnesses withdrew, and the meeting went into committee to consider the question. •

The referee, recalled, said that the City man was on the ground. Hβ was in a. position to see all that happened. The Poiispnby player sicked the City •man, who immediately called out for protection. The ball was a long- way away from the two players. Otherwise the game -was played .in a, splendid spirit. He could not cay 'that bad language ■was used, Taut it sounded very muck lik;e it. , -

'Mr. TYonde 6aid that while' "no one thought more of clean football than he, he thought that the offence did not warrant drastic punishment. Mr. F. J. Ohlson said that the player 'having admitted the .offence, he should ■be dealt with accordingly. Provocation wae no excuse. Other players had been punished, and no exception should be made in this case. Mr. C. V. Langefo-rd said there must have been provocation, and be was inclined to make little of the affair. Mr. Froude moved: "That the matter be deferred for investigation until next meeting, the Ponsonby player to stand down in the meantime." ' Mr. Tilly seconded. By four votes to three, the motion wae carried, and it was further decided to ask the - City player to be in at-, .tendance to give evidence at the next meeting. A member of the Parnell fourth grade team was ordered off by tne referee, Mr. A. Pearson, in the match against City on July 2 for, in the terms of the report, deliberately kicking an opponent who was lying on the ground. The player was not present, and was suspended until he appears before the committee. The referee's report on the match stated that the play in general was of a standard that people would not care to watch, and the referee therefore suggested that members of the A.R.U. Committee should go round the outer grounds at Alexandra Park and assist some of the teams to play cleaner football than at present. ■