BOWLS CHRISTCHURCH TOURNEY

Press, Volume XC, Issue 27499, 5 November 1954, Page 8

BOWLS CHRISTCHURCH TOURNEY

DISPUTE WITH N:Z. COUNCIL REASON FOR REJECTION OF CENTRE’S PLAN The Christchurch Bowling Centre will discuss at a meeting on Monday evening the refusal of the administration committee of the New Zealand Bowling Council to allow the centre to extend its annual Christmas fours tournament with open singles and open pairs competitions. The centre’s first application, which was rejected recently, was for the pairs and singles competitions to be held from January 1 to January 7. Now a second application for the competitions to be held from January 7 has also been refused. About 4000 bowlers in Christchurch and some from other centres will be uncertain about their .plans for bowling over the Christmas and New Year holidays. The centre last year held open sin'gles and pairs competitions on four Saturdays in January. It was proposed this year to hold these events through the week with the usual Christmas tournament fpurs from December 27 to December 31, with the singles and pairs continuing in the next week. The New Zealand championship tournament will begin on December 29 in Wellington, and it was this conflict of dates that caused the first Christchurch application to be refused. After a discussion at the centre’s last meeting, the second application was made. ,

The secretary of the New Zealand Bowling Association (Mr R. S. M. Sinclair) said in Dunedip last evening that an emergency committee meeting had been held to consider the Christchurch centre’s application for the holding of a tournament in late December and early January. It had been decided that permission could not be granted, as the association’s rules clearly protected the Dominion championships from competition. The duty of the committee was to uphold the status quo. If Christchurch were permitted to hold a tournamentwt the same time as the Dominion championships, other centres would want to follow suit, said Mr Sinclair.

‘‘Last year the New Zealand championships were in Christchurch. Therefore the Christchurch centre could not have held its tournament on the same dates. There would surely be no hardship if Christchurch reverted to its old dates for its tournament,” said Mr Sinclair. “It is unfortunate that this controversy should arise, but the duty of the committee is perfectly clear.”