RUGBY FOOTBALL.

Auckland Star, Volume LXIX, Issue 128, 2 June 1938, Page 26

RUGBY FOOTBALL.

PUNISHING PLAYERS.

"ORDERED OFF" CASES.

METHOD OF INQUIRY UNHELD.

The complaint of the Manukau Club in regard to the hearing by the judicial committee of cases of misconduct on the field and suggestions lor altering the procedure were discussed further by the management committee of the Auckland Rugby Union last night. The Manukau recommendations were made last week.

Consideration of their letter was held over until last night pending advice from the New Zealand Kugby Football Union on the procedure laid down in general for dealing with an ordering-off case. The governing body's reply was to the effect that there was no definite rule, but it was usual for the evidence to be heard in the presence of the ordered-otf player and referee, and for the case to be fully discussed after these two had retired. It was not usual to allow a player to call evidence (except in mitigation of seutence). The referee states what he saw ifS a question of fact, and the player should then have an opportunity to discuss hie side of the case.

A discussion followed the reading of Manukau's complaint and the message from national headquarters, and eventually upon the motion of Mr. S. A. Cleal (deputy-chairman), a motion to the following effect was carried, with Mr. O. S. Harvey's the only dissentient voice: — "Ariainpr out of the Manukau Club's letter the judicial committee be advised to conduct the inquiries in accordance with the procedure outlined in the New Zealand Kugby Football Union's letter; otherwise the Auckland executive could see no reason why the constitution of the judicial committee should be altered."

The general tenor of the conversation was that there uiunt have lx>en good reason when, eleven years ago, it was decided to set up a judicial committee of independent men for the express purpose of eliminating club bins.

On the question of publicity. Mr. J. J. Herrick summed up the position thus:— "There was nothing to show that undue publicity was given to . ordering-off cases. Naturally its value depended upon the importance of the player orderedoff, and. if he made 'news' it was really his own fault. Such a man should 'play the game' and show a better example. In the recent cases, which had caused the present discussion, neither the union nor the judicial committee nor the Press was to blame. Mr. A. J. Billiugton stressed the necessity of the referee's report covering only the offence for which a player was ordered off.

Mr. J. Sweeney stilted that there was a general Instruction for only the briefest of reports to be made. The same speaker undertook, In order to meet on objection by Mr. O. S. Harvey, to advise referees that in all ordering-oflf cases players before leaving the field shall be informed of the offences for which they are sent off.

Mr. Harvey made it clear tliat he would have adopted a similar attitude had the recent players concerned belonged to any other club. lie was concerned only with the question of principle, an* disclaimed any bias in his protests. His attitude was that the Auckland IJugby Football Union executive represented the players, and ehould not shelter behind the judicial committee. Although the executive did not ( hear the evidence there was no reason I why it ehould not be taken down and l>e available to the. union if, as circumstances might occasionally warrant, members thought a case should be reviewed and I the judicial committee's recommendation referred back for further consideration.