Football Government.

Press, Volume XLIV, Issue 19400, 28 August 1928, Page 6

Football Government.

Far moral people than the Rogby Unions suspect will heartily support* the opinions expressed by Mr Charles R. Clark in the letter from him which we print' to-day. Pe complains that tiio New Zealand Rogby Union and the Canterbury Rugby Union have each injesed; within the past few days, an excellent opportunity to show the public that the government of Rugby football is wise and thoughtful. In the first case, unusually and improperly high charges were made for admission to the ground and stands when the inter-Island match was played. One result of this, Mr Clark sayß, was that many people had to stay away who would have attended bad the charges been .reasonable, and he thinks that the New Zealand Union, which is "a «non-proprietary concern in very "affluent oiroumstances," ought to have ! remembered, and been generous to, the regular football public: the people who ! attend regularly when club matches are in progress.. It is certainly not in the old tradition of Rugby football in this country that the New Zealand Union should seize what seemed to be a fine opportunity to swell its already well-filled coffers. Mr Clark's second complaint is of the refusal of the Canterbury Rugby Union to allow the Rugby' League the use of Lancaster Park last Saturday; The Union's attitude is described by our correspondent as patently "childish"; one may dislike the League game and be loyal to Bngby, and still go further than Mr Clark, and say that the Union's attitude vrar. patently unsporting. These two incidents are certainly displeasing; to i&U those who «re old enough to'.compare the sports of this generation with those of the and thoy are by no means the first or only incidents which suggest that titie old-fashioned, fairminded sportsmanship of the past is iiot much in fashion with the present, day controllers of Rugby football. There is far more "government" in football to-day than there was thirty years ago, when the game was as good

as it is now, and more enjoyable and less commercialised. The modern controllers of the sport are as good, individually, as tbe members of the oldtime executives of the Unions, but their standards are not the same. "The gate ".has become of the first importance, and there has come into being a thing that the last generation never heard of and could not have understood—ft thing which we can describe as "football politics." The old spirit still persists, however, in spits of the wandering away of the Unions from the older standards. For example, the inclination of some Unions to treat foul play very leniently and to belittle the authority of the referee has caused much disapproval. Another wholesome sign is the disfavour with which many people look upon the gladiatorial combats for the Shield. Rugby football is so good a game that it ought to,be governed in a generous and sportsmanlike spirit, and its pre-sent-day governors would strengthen its position if they could understand and adopt the point of view of the old-time athletes and sports-body executives whom our correspondent represents.