DOMINION CONTROL

Auckland Star, Volume LXVIII, Issue 270, 13 November 1937, Page 21

DOMINION CONTROL

SYSTEM NOT ALTERED. I

DECISION OF N.Z. CONFERENCE

Possible changes in the methods of administering the affairs of the New Zealand Cricket Council were discussed by delegates at the biennial Dominion conference.

A proposal brought forward by the Otago Association was to the effect that "the management committee should consist of the president, a delegate from each of the Auckland, Wellington and Otago associations, one delegate'representing the minor associations of the North Island one delegate reprsenting the minor associations of he South Island, and five members resident in Christchurch." Under this committee, there would be an executive consisting of the five Christchurch members which would conduct all routine business—the full management committee to meet at least three times yearly and confirm the executive's actions.

No action was taken by the conference.

Mr. A. H. Allen (Otago) said the Otago Association felt that for many years very little information had reached district associations in between annual meetings of the council. His aosociation felt that the control of cricket required widening, and with clause 6 of the constitution amended as Otago suggested, he believed that they would have greater interest in the game. It was proposed that the management Committee, representative of the whole of New Zealand, should elect an executive, responsible to itself, and that the management committee should be responsible to the New Zealand Council as a whole.

Mr. A. M. Ongley (Manawatu) said that the proposal as outlined recalled to his mind what had been adopted fairly recently by the New Zealand Rugby Union in regard to its administration. He favoured the proposal except where it discriminated against minor associations. "Not Feasible." Mr. A. T. Donnelly, chairman of the New Zealand Management Committee, said that the Otago proposal for an enlarged management committee, would be an admirable one if the council had the money and if the men were available who had the time to spare, but, in his opinion, the proposal was not feasible. As long as cricket was an amateur game, it was impossible to run it. on different lines. In the international sphere, most of the negotiations were confidential, and information could not be given out until they were completed. In that direction and elsewhere decisions had to be made on the spot. If officials in other centres had to be consulted, the committee would never get through its work. The volume of that work had grown enormously in , recent vears.

In camera, Mr. Donnelly gave details of the committee's work, especially when tours were being arranged. These were supplemented by the president (Mr. A. Sims).

Mr. C. Bell (Wellington) supported Mr. Donnelly's remark*.

Mr. D. E. Wanklyn said that the management committee acted only as an executive to carry out the wishes and commands of delegates. He could not see that the Otago proposal would make for more efficient working. Mr. \V. G. Miller (Auckland) said that they ought to be pleased that Mr. Allen had brought the matter up, for it had enabled delegates to hear the management committee's side of the case and understand it, as well as appreciate the enormous volume of work the committee did.

Replying, Mr Allen said he was moving no motion, but he believed that the discussion would do good. Otago appreciated the yeoman service Mr. Donnelly and others had given to cricket, but yet Otago and others felt that the present constitution could not stand for ever. That was the reason for bringing up the proposal for discussion only.