JUDGES’ DECISION INDICATOR

Press, Volume LXXXIV, Issue 25607, 23 September 1948, Page 6

JUDGES’ DECISION INDICATOR

CANTERBURY’S SYSTEM QUESTIONED

“The Press” Special Service DUNEDIN, Sept. 22. The action of the Canterbury Boxing Association in installing, against the advice of the national council, an electrical system of making known to audiences the individual decisions of judges, was condemned by the council in a report placed before the annual meeting of the New Zealand Boxing Association to-day. The operation of the system was in contravention of the rules of the association, the council alleged.

For many years the voting of the judges had been kept secret, said Mr F. Simpson, speaking for the council. The desirability of this had been affirmed at several conferences. When the controlling body expressed disapproval of the Canterbury Association’s action in installing the new apparatus the reply it received opposed anC defied its advice.

“Perhaps the rules are not clear-cut on such a position, but when Canterbury refused our request to tarry and obtain a ruling from this conference the council felt it had been discourteously treated," said Mr Simpson. A denial that the Canterbury Association had committed a breach of rules was made by its secretary (Mr»F. Allen). Mr Allen maintained that the council had acted unconstitutionally in the manner of its direction to his association. The council had power to invoke provisions that would oVer-ride rules in such an instance, but it had not done” so.

“My association feels,” said Mr Allen, ‘that when the council failed to use the rules provided it opened itself to defiance. We have not broken any rules. You cannot read into a rule something that is not there.”

Discourtesy Alleged The council had extraordinary powers, replied Mr Simpson, but it had not thought the matter of sufficient importance to invoke them. Its objection lay in Canterbury’s discourtesy in not waiting for Lhe conference's decision. The action might not have been against the rules, but it was against the spirit of the conference.

"If the council thinks there has been discourtesy, we regret that, but nothing else,” said Mr S. W. Bettie, president of Jhe Canterbury Association. "Our only wrong act was our failure to make the electric lights on our System larger." Mr C. Neville, of Greymouth, moved that the Canterbury Association be reprimanded for its discourteous action in defying the council’s instructions.

Mr Bettie; We have not broken any rule. : will be disgraceful if you pass this

Canterbury’s attitude was supported by Mr L. Stewart, of Hutt Valley, and after further discussion the president (Mr R. S. Glendining) interposed: “I feel that the Canterbury Association knows the feeling of the meeting,” he said. “If the mover and seconder would withdraw the motion the (council would say, ’Naughty boys, don’t do it again.’ ”

The resolution was withdrawn amid applause.