OMISSION OF CYCLIST

Press, Volume LXXIV, Issue 22304, 19 January 1938, Page 10

OMISSION OF CYCLIST

EMPIRE GAMES TEAM SELECTION OFFICIALS REPLY TO COMPLAINT That neither E. G. L. Hughes nor the Auckland Amateur Cycling Centre had any ground for complaint about the omission of the former from the New Zealand cycling team for the Empire Games was contended yesterday by both Mr C. D. Doyle, vice-president of the New Zealand Amateur Cycling Association, and by Mr K. Hill, one of the two selectors of the New Zealand cycling team. Both said it was clearly understood that the team was to be chosen after two sets of trials, and the selection made after the first series was only provisional, and subject to revision after the second series ithe New Zealand championships), at Christchurch on January 7 and 8. Hughes’s performances on the latter occasion did not warrant his inclusion in the team. Mr Doyle, who was a member of the council when the conditions for the trials were formulated, said that it had been clearly laid down that the selection was to be made on the results of two trials and no alteration to that plan had ever been made. That the Auckland Centre was thoroughly convesaut with the conditions was shown by-a paragraph in its own official programme for the first series of trials, said Mr Doyle. This paragraph read as follows; — “The second New Zealand trials will be held at Christchurch on January 8. 1938, after which the track riders to represent the Dominion at the British Empire Games at Sydney next February will be announced.” The programme of events for the New Zealand championships, sent to all centres, also made it quite clear that these championships were to be the final trials in accordance with the conditions laid down by the association. Selector’s Comment Mr Hill, one of the two selectors of the cycling team, said that Hughes’s inclusion was, in the first place, only tentative, and, like that of the other nominees, was subject to revision after the second trials at ChristchOrch on January 7 and 8. At the second trials his performance did ribt warrant his inclusion. “It is quite impossible,” said Mr Hill, “that he could have bene notified on November 17. as the message from Auckland says, that he was a member of the team, as the team was not nominated until after the first trials at Auckland on December 4. It was probably on December 17 that he received the circular letter from Mr H. Amos, secretary of the New Zealand Olympic and British Empire Games Association. “He should have been advised at the same time that his selection was only tentative, and was subject to the showing he put up at the New Zealand championships in Christchurch.” said Mr Hill. “It is really the fault of my co-selector, Mr P. N. Robinson, of Wellington, that Hughes has suffered this last-minute disappointment, as Mr Robinson should have submitted our nominations subject to the proviso that the nominations were liable to revision after the tests at Christchurch This he failed to do, although I think most of the riders knew that such was the case. “Hoped for Improvement” “It is not as if Hughes were an outstanding rider,” Mr Hill added. “He is only in the second class, and has never held a New Zealand title. He did moderately well in the Auckland trials and we hoped he would show improvement at Christchurch, but he did not. and. when the team was definitely decided upon, at Wellington last Wednesday, he was dropped. "The suggestion that he should be reinstated at the cost of omitting G. R. Giles, of Canterbury, is absurd, for I consider Giles our Number 1 man. If any one of the New Zealand cyclists wins anything it will be Giles. Certainly ho did not do well at the Auckland trials, because he was out of training, but he subsequently got back to form, and at the Christchurch trials cleaned up everything. “That Hughes would pay his own expenses has no bearing on the question.” Mr Hill concluded. “T. Roe, of Wellington, and M. Byrnes, of Auckland. both every bit as good as Hughes, would willingly pay their own expenses. Nor can the Auckland Centre complain that Auckland has not a fair representation in the team, as four Auckland riders, R. T. Taylor and A, G. Patrick on the track, and J. Brown and R. S. Triner on the road, are going. The number of riders sent is. of course, limited by the fact that only three competitors are allowed in each event, and Giles and Ulmer will be riding in each.” CASE FOR INCLUSION STATED RESOLUTIONS OF AUCKLAND * CENTRE AUCKLAND. January 18, The following resolutions are to be forwarded to the New Zealand Amateur Cycling Association, Wellington, as a result of a special meeting of the Auckland Centre to-night, held to discuss the exclusion of E. L. G. Hughes from the Empire Games team;—“ That this centre considers that both your association through its resolution passed at a meeting on December 13. and the Olympic and British Empire Games Association, by its official notification to Hughes of his selection, are bound by their own commitments to send Hughes to the Games as a representative of the Dominion in one, at least, of the cycling events. “That this.centre would like to draw the attention of your association and the Olympic and Empire Games Association to the fact that Hughes is the only rider to have won one of the trials whose selection is under dispute. All other trials winners were selected by your association. “That this centre docs not desire that any of the other selected riders should be deleted from the team in order that Hughes may be included, for this centre has paid the required guarantee mentioned by your association in its resolution at the meeting on December 13. “That this centre considers Hughes's performances warrant his inclusion in the team. He won the longest trial, the 100 miles road race, *at Christchurch on October 16. In track trials on December 4 he covered the kilometre in Imin 16 l-ssec, gaining third place, and finished third in the 10miles, which A. G. Patrick won in 20min 46 2-sseC. “That this centre strongly urges your association immediately to get into touch with the Olympic and British Empire Games Association advising it that Hughes must under the extenuating circumstances be ihcluded in the team for the Games.” OTAGO CENTRE’S CRITICISM DUNEDIN, January 18. At the monthly meeting of the Otago centre of the New Zealand Amateur Athletic Association to-night, strong criticism of the lack of interest shown by some members of the Dominion Council, by their absence from the special meeting held to select the Empire Games team, was expressed by several speakers, who voiced the opinion that the selection had .ot given general satisfaction. Disapproval was also expressed at the council’s action in failing to select a marathon runner. It was decided that the secretary write to the Otago delegates on the council, asking them to furnish a report on the discussion that took place during the selection of the team.