Dissatisfaction With Rowing Time Trials

Press, Volume CVI, Issue 31153, 1 September 1966, Page 16

Dissatisfaction With Rowing Time Trials

Mr B. R. Walker, president of the Canterbury Rowing Association, said last evening that time trials held in Auckland to select a New Zealand crew to go to the world rowing championships at Bled, Jugoslavia, had caused widespread dissatisfaction and disruption in rowing circles.

A letter from the Union Rowing Club asked for clarification of the trials and the subsequent “questionable” action against a Canterbury oarsman, R. Sather ley, who gained selection and was then dropped from the crew shortly before it left New Zealand.

The letter said decisive steps must be taken to halt what could be a detrimental effect on club rowing and raised the following points.— (1) It was intimated that there would be “open” time trials. From the information gained the trials were not open. There were no reports on the initial fitness tests of individuals and no reports of time trials with the exception of one held over 1000 metres only.

In discussing this point members agreed that there had been no dissatisfaction with the time trials held in Canterbury to select a crew for Australia. They had hoped these trials would have set the pattern for the future. (2) It was reported in a northern newspaper that Canterbury had not raised any

l finance towards sending the crew to Bled. This was not I correct. It was originally j stated in Auckland that finance was available but this was not so. Early in July some raffle books were sent from the Auckland association to the Union club. These were sold and returned. No other requests for money were made by Auckland or the New Zealand rowing; council. (3) Before Satherley transfered to Auckland for training he was assured he would go overseas. Just before the crew left he was dismissed. Inquiries found that the only reason was lack of finance. Mr E. Lindstrom said the association had £3OO in its overseas travelling fund. The association had not been directly approached for money. “We have never failed to raise our share." said Mr Walker. “Any lack of finance can be laid at the council's door.” “Made Scape Goat” Mr R. J. Shaw said that Satherley had been told he would be a travelling member of the crew. Mr Walker said Satherley had been used as a sort of sop to Canterbury and New Zealand so that it could be said that a truly representative crew had been selected.

When the pinch came he was dropped. No approach for finance had been made to his club by the council.

“Satherley has been made a scape goat. As the association nominated him. we must see that justice is done,” said Mr W. Richards. Mr Shaw said two officials had gone with the crew, one |at the expense of an active oarsman. As well as Satherley’s disappointment there was the expense he had been put to—for nothing. (4) Why was the coach for the crew named before the council made the official appointment?

One member said it was obvious that the coach, Mr R. Porter, had been selected back in June when the trials were held. Yet the council went through the motions of calling for nominations. The association agreed to send a copy of the letter to the council, with a covering letter saying it backed up the Union club.