Size Of Senior Rugby Grade Is Vital Issue

Press, Volume CIII, Issue 30395, 20 March 1964, Page 13

Size Of Senior Rugby Grade Is Vital Issue

IBv Our Rugby Correspondent)

u ne *Pe c tedly, the proposal by the management comi C f ult^ ur y Rugby Union that the promotionr egation rules should be abolished has been defeated.

What was surprising was the degree of opposition to the proposal. Aot only by the junior clubs, the ones most affected • i J I chan^e ’ also by several senior clubs whose delegates ''°uld have supported the motion when originally it was passed by the management committee.

The cause of its downfall undoubtedly was that its proposers offered no alternative to a promotion-relegation match, except that the management committee would have the discretion to allow on application a junior team into senior Rugby—if it was up to standard.

That rather tenuous argument was rebutted forcefully by one delegate who-aaid that Lincoln College had twice applied for senior status and each time had been refused—and Lincoln was a senior team not a junior team. The president (Mr J. O.

Hattersley) perhaps unwittingly gave the opposition some ammunition when he said that the committee had used its power to admit teams when it invited three into the senior grade in 1929.

An interval of 35 years scarcely suggested that the management committee had been over generous in its use of its discretion.

Promotion-relegation matches no doubt have their faults, but if the senior Rugby competition is to remain a vital continuing force there must be some provision for new teams to enter when they

reach a desired standard, which really only can be proved by match play, not by a committee considering in abstract if a team has reached that standard.

But if the promotion-rele-gation discussion was the main point of the annual meeting on Wednesday there was the feeling that it was only a preliminary sparring to the main club Rugby matter—the number of teams in the senior grade. . There were oblique references to this at the meeting but it was not made the sub-' ject of a discussion. At next Tuesd

lay’s meeting the management committee will discuss the previous committee's decision that the competition should consist of 12 teams, thus excluding Sydenham. Under its discretionary rule, the committee has power to decode the entries in .any grade and thus could invite Sydenham hack into senior Rugby; but that would mean 13 teams.

To avoid a bye another team would have to be “invited.” On present playing strength that would be another University team but in previous years the management committee has been steadfastly against two University teams in the senior grade. No Other Club

But if Sydenham was included, which would be a well-received decision, then another club should come l up and there is no other club than University B up to senior standard at present. If it does decide to invite Sydenham to stay in the senior grade the management committee might well have the same feelings as General P. H. Sheridan who once said: “If I owned Texas and hell, I would rent out Texas and live in hell.”

The management committee has Sydenham and University instead. Which club, or clubs, will be rented out will be decided on Tuesday.