Change Of Rugby Draw Challenged

Press, Volume CVIII, Issue 31662, 24 April 1968, Page 19

Change Of Rugby Draw Challenged

“I do not intend to make any explanation,” said Mr J. Storey, when Mr J. K. Torrance asked at a meeting of the Canterbury Rugby Union management committee last evening why the senior match set down for Anzac Day had been changed.

However, later in the discussion, although denying that any official approach had been made by clubs to the competitions committee, Mr Storey said that the sole reason why the Old Boys v. University A game had been changed to Linwood v. Marist was because Old Boys had told him that they had played in the game last season.

“That was the only reason the game was changed. It was not because of the reasons given in ‘The Press’,” he said.

Mr B. J. Drake asked: “Is there not a question of principle involved here?” “We must have faith in the competitions committee and back them up when they make a decision,” said Mr C. H. McPhail. Mr Drake said: “I still feel there is a principle involved here and it should be clarified. Some years ago when 1 was the referees’ representative on the committee, there was an occasion when the committee approved a draw and the referee for a game, but at the request of a single club changed the referee. “The minutes of a later meeting will show that it was decided the competitions committee should not act on the request of a single club with-

out the full committee’s approval.” Mr McPhail: “We are the clubs and we will not be managed by outside. We cannot afford to question the decision of the competitions committee.”

Mr D. B. Doake said all that was required was a simple explanation why the draw was changed. “It was all ballyhoo in the papers,” said Mr Storey. “No club protested: all the clubs involved would have played. There were circumstances we did not know at the time when we made the draw. Our decision was made on these, not on the points raised in ‘The Press.’

“No club officially protested, and it was only one member of the Linwood club (the coach) who complained.” Mr Drake: “Why then should this committee even bother to approve the draw? One of the justifications for having a weekly meeting was, I thought, that we had to approve the draw. It seems that

is not necessary. On Tuesday we approved University A v. Old Boys. Two days later we read in ‘The Press’ the game has been changed.” Mr McPhail said that in the past the union had allowed certain things to happen. Unless very strong reasons were advanced, the competitions committee should not be challenged. Mr Torrance, who had started the discussion, said he was quite satisfied with the explanation given by Mr Storey that Old Boys had played the year before and thus were relieved of the obligation of playing again. “I felt we were entitled to know why," he added. Mr Drake then moved that, in future, the competitions committee should ascertain the views of the clubs chosen to play on Anzac Day before the draw was published.

Mr R. W. Thomas: I cannot agree. We should make the decision. Mr Doake: We should not seek the agreement of clubs for a competition match. Mr Thomas said that the prime reason for the Anzac Day match was to provide an entertaining game for the public, and it was the responsibility of the committee to decide on that Mr Drake’s motion was defeated.