RUGBY FOOTBALL BROADCASTING

Press, Volume LXIX, Issue 20937, 18 August 1933, Page 4

RUGBY FOOTBALL BROADCASTING

lit*: SDiToa of th;: ?aa.-;.. ' Sir,—Mr McPhail has released tile j brief statement that broadcasting is a . matter of "policy/' Well, if spending ; £SO on secret broadcasting to the Sanatorium, when the Broadcasting Company would do it for nothing, is an example of the union's ''policy," it must bo a mighty queer one. It is all the more queer when it is realised that the union is cue of the strongest financially in New Zealand. It- does not want to broadcast unless the company pays for it. It does not require any cheap advertisement: it is so independent. It will be very interesting to see if the union can adhere to this miserly policy. A well-known Wellington Rugby writer states that the League code if booming in New Zealand, and maybe, some day the Canterbury Rugby Union may be glad of a little cheap advertisement. Incidentally, it gets quite a lot now from its broadcasting company. In the past many of us have been able to travel to Lancaster Park, but times are hard at present. As an old supporter who has stood on "the bank" in all sorts of weather, I bitterly resent the policy of the Canterbury Rugby (Jnion. Presumably Mr McPhail and his co-members will have free grandstand seats. When I can afford to travel I shall think twice about it. I am sorry for those enthusiasts who are confined to hospital and sick-beds. Might I suggest that they tune in 2YA. Once you get to know Kilby and his men, it gets very interesting. Personally, I know far more about individual Wellington player.-; than about our local boys; and Wellington is probably the strongest team in New Zealand at present.— Yours, etc., WAY BACK. Waiau, August 17, 10.'i3. TO THE JLDtIOS, OF IKS FR®3!. Sir, —I have read with much interest the many letters in your paper with reference to the broadcasting of Ranfurly Shield matches. The different writers have been very outspoken on this matter, and rightly so, too; but every one of them has failed to put forth the main and most important argument in support of the broadcast. Why should the many supporters of Rugby in Southland who have had to remain at home be deprived of a running description of Saturday's match just because of a principle? (spelt with £ s. d. at the end). The Rugby Union at the beginning of the season offered the broadcasting rights for a certain price. Cannot some kind person come forward and pay the ransom money so we can get Mr Allardyce up on the roof of the grandstand. The spire on the top of the stand looks lonely without him up there. . . Personally, I think it is lack of SDortsmanshin on the part of the union in not allowing the broadcast—with a good amount of pig-headedness thrown in. Disgustedly I sign myself. —Yours, etc., ONE OF THE MUGS WHO PAY. August 17, 1933.