RUGBY RULES.

Auckland Star, Volume LXII, Issue 70, 24 March 1931, Page 10

RUGBY RULES.

ENGLISH ULTIMATUM.

AUCKLAND ATTITUDE.

FEAR OF ISOLATION.

i FREE HAND FOR DELEGATES,

It was decided by the annual meeting pi the Auckland Rugby Union delegates last night that its delegates to the New Zealand Rugby Union annual meeting be given a free hand in their vote on the question of the English Rugby Union's request to revert to the old rules, p,nd the discussion made it clear that there is no etrong feeling in Auckland for pressing the rules controversy to the point of secession from the English Rugby Union.

Mr. H. Frost stated that he was a Very disappointed man in that the English Rugby Union had withdrawn the dispensation permitting the playing of amended rules. He read the letter received from the English Rugby Union requesting that the fows be played a« laid down in the English Rugby Union handbook. Then he outlined the variations played in New Zealand which v--ould be affected, chief of which was the kick-to-touch rule. On the other hand, delegates decided to cease affiliation, no doubt the New Zealand Union would insist on one code throughout New Zealand without local variations. So far as Auckland was concerned in the matter of "variations' , last season Auckland was given a dispensation for twelve months only. Strong advocate ae he was for the amended rulee, he felt he could not urge secession, as he was sure that would result in the English Union ceasing to exchange visits with New Zealand. For that reason he favoured doing as, the English Rugby Union desired, and continuing to play ihe Auckland game as far as was- pos"sible under the old rules. The British team had, lie thought, demonstrated clearly that if the players desired it they could play a most attractive game under the old rules. New South Wales With England? In reply to a question, Mr. Frost Stated that he had not had a\ definite Statement from Australians to the intention of New South Wales. Reading between the lines, however, he was inclined to think that New South Wales would declare for playing the international rules..

Mr. E. V. Sutherland moved that the Auckland delegates to the N.Z.R.U. be given a free hand in voting. Mr. M. J. Sheahan recalled the Imtory of the N.Z.R.TJ., the standing out of the Otago and Canterbury Provinces, and the non-visit of touring N.S.W. teams to Otago, bringing about the eventual surrender of Otago. He felt that Auckland should do nothing to isolate itself. Mr. T. Aitkeneaid he felt the previous speakers were arguing against their own convictions. He traced the growth of the Auckland variations, and their effect in saving the Rugby game in Auckland. , It was only by the assistance of the Eugby public that the game had been brought back ta its present position, and he felt that the old unattractive game would not be relished by the public. Further, he felt that the international matches, so far as Britain w,ae concerned, had not tended to strengthen the bonds of friendship and that New Zealand was strong enough to "go on its own" with advantage to New Zealand football. Rugby was the people's game in New Zealand, and the position attained by the game should not be lightly abandoned. He urged Auckland to stand to their eonvictione and stick to their new rules, which had done so much for the game here.

Mr. Walker, who seconded the motion, stated that the game Auckland v. England showed very plainly that Rugby under the old rules could be made as open as any games played under the new rules. The matter could be controlled largely by the coaches. There are one or two petty matters, euch ae players leaving the field at half-time, which he felt were very trivial. England-Wales Game ''Miserable." Brother Calixtus congratulated Mr. Aitken on his fighting speech. It wae Ho use pretending that Auckland preferred the old rules. Eng-land played an open game here because they had to. Four years ago he saw England play Wales and it was a miserable game. The key to the position for New Zealand was -,vhat Australia intended to do, and [he thought that a conference with Australia should precede a decision on the matter. Mr. Billington said that New Zealand was not, in his opinion, behind Auckland, end he doubted if Auckland could conwince its own sub-unions.

Mr. Cleal said he felt dumbfounded !by the vie we expressed, by people who ihad previously expressed other views. Hk own opinion was favourable to the suggestion of Bro. Calixtus, and even if the rest of New Zealand were not jwith them they should not give in without a fight.- He moved that the delegates from the Auckland R.U. be instructed to propose that a conference •with Australia precede a decision in the matter.

Mr. Belcher argued that the quickest fway to get the amended, rules was to bow to the E.R.U. ultimatum and obtain representation, which would eventually •bring about the amended rules. He felt that was the view taken by Mr. Frost. Mr. Gray remarked that the conditions of 1917 and those of to-day were bo different that he felt acceptance for the moment of the English ultimatum (would not seriously affect the game. "Isolation Suicidal." Sir. A. Bayli&s was convinced that the ipSayers in Auckland to-day would continue to play the open game even under the old rules. He felt it would be Buicidal on Auckland's part to become isolated. Mr. Murdoch expressed the view that the delegates should be given a free hand, but that further strong represenItation should be made to the E.R.U. that [New Zealand desired a voice corresponding with ite strength and a conference jit 'which the "whole question of the fules be discussed.

Mr. A. A. Lucas and others supported Pie proposal to revert to the old rules, fend declared that the young players would play the same brand of bright football that they had been playing for several years pa&t.

The amendment to press for a conferjface with Australia wae lo6t, and the Baotion, that the Auckland delegates be t&aen. a. free hand at the annual mect-