CRICKET WITH BEER

Press, Volume LXXXI, Issue 24624, 21 July 1945, Page 6

CRICKET WITH BEER

PERMANENT LICENCES SUGGESTED DIFFICULTIES SEEN “There are difficulties in this,” commented the chairman of the Royal Commission on Licensing (Mr Justice Smith) yesterday afternoon, after Mr D. E. Wanklyn, chairman of the management committee of the New Zealand Cricket Council, had been crossexamined on a proposal that permanent licences should be granted for the sale of liquor on grounds at Christchurch, Auckland, Wellington, and Dunedin during major cricket matches, in which play lasted from 11 a.m. to 6 p.m. Mr Wanklyn said the suggestion was that the licences for the various grounds should be vested in and controlled by the authorities in charge of the grounds, or be attached to the grounds, and that profits derived should be devoted to the maintenance and improvement of the grounds. Grounds, he said, were much more expensive to maintain for cricket than for football. Section 82 of the Licensing Act, 1908, made provision for a person holding a publican’s licence to sell liquor on cricket grounds, but so .far as he knew that r.uthority had not been availed of by any body controlling a cricket ground, the objections appearing to be the impermanence of the authority, the uncertainty arising when dealing with different individuals from time to ume, and the absence of control by authorities controlling the grounds. “The suggestion would bring New Zealand into line with England and Australia, and it is believed, South Africa,” said Mr Wanklyn, who gave evidence that at cricket grounds overseas he had not seen anything that was the least objectionable. Beer in Dressing Rooms “In New Zealand, it is the custom in major matches to make a certain amount of bottled beer available in dressing rooms for those players who want it,” said Mr Wanklyn. “As far as the players are concerned, in my experience, this has never been abused, but it is difficult, if not impossible, to keep the friends of players out of those rooms. It is from these friends that has come whatever trouble there has been in the past. If liquor were available to players when they required it in a suitable part of the pavilion, and it was controlled by the authority running the game, this nuisance, such as it is, would disappear.” Mr R. Hardie Boys (for the New Zealand Alliance): Do you suggest there is any public agitation?— The suggestion came spontaneously from two major associations, Auckland and Canterbury. ~ , Under cross-examination, Mr Wanklyn raid that in Wellington an hotel was across the road from the cricket ground and Christchurch spectators had to walk only 200 yards to an hotel. . Mr Boys: So this is a question of money as far as the Cricket Council is mainly concerned? —Not entirely. To the Rev. J. T. Macky (a member of the commission) Mr Wanklyn said that the proposal was that the facility should be available, not right through the cricket season, but only for major games, which lasted till 6 p.m. each day. Mr Macky: Is it that you want the associations to make money instead of the licensees?—To be fair, there is something in that. Replying to questions by Mr P. Malthus (another member), Mr Wanklyn admitted that he had seen bottles thrown away or dropped at football and cricket matches. If the suggestion wele adopted, no liquor in containers would be sold on the grounds. “Would this improve the game?” asked Mr G. W. Hutchison. Earlier in the day the commission, he said, had been informed that alcohol reduced mental precision and physical output. Would liquor on cricket grounds make for fewer runs? Mr Wanklyn gave his opinion that cricket players were usually abstemious, but that after batting or fielding they liked a drink which was not sweet, and had a small glass beer. The chairman raised the question whether the principle of social amenities would not also apply to football, tennis, basketball, and hockey. On the question of time, tennis would have to be included. He finally remarked that there were difficulties in the suggestions.