The Press THURSDAY. JANUARY 8. 1976 Conseqlienees of change in sports policy

Press, Volume CXVI, Issue 34045, 8 January 1976, Page 8

The Press THURSDAY. JANUARY 8. 1976 Conseqlienees of change in sports policy

When political opinions and policies here and abroad have an over-riding importance, sportsmen and their supporter- have to accept the effect of these policies on their sports. The idea may be offensive to them, just as a sports body's decision may upset others. The Government has begun its term with a blanket policy that it will not interfere with sports tours. This is distinct from the public statements of the late Mr Kirk before he became Prime Minister in 1972 A:th<iu_h he said he would not forbid a New Zealand tour by white South African Rugby players. Mr Kirk was prepared to try to dissuade the New Zealand Rugby Union from accepting the tour because of its political implications Later he was persuaded partly by the opinions he was given on the threats to lav. and order, that the Government must forbid the tour He had other reasons for his objection to the tour and stated them plainly enough, these included New Zealand's reputation abroad Having to change Government policy because of the threat of violence was a bad thing. The other reasons were much more readilv acceptable, even if it was understood that Neu Zealand attitudes to apartheid were probablv being misconstrued overseas Many people abroad, for their own reasons, w ill always be deaf to the arguments of people whose views differ from their own on how to oppose anartheid On the question of sports tours and their effects on politics conflicting views are seldom resolved and are usually so strongly held that neither side accords the other's opinion any respect. This is a fact that all New Zealanders must take into account when assessing the decisions that NewZealand sportsmen are at present free to make for themselves. Much of the rest of the world will be indifferent to any argument put up by a NewZealand Government —unless it is agreeable. In this instance it is producing no argument Indifference to the opinion of a single sports body will be even greater. Just as Mr Kirk changed his mind, the present Government might change its mind if the best and greater interests of the whole country are seen clearly to be at stake In the meantime, the sports officials make up their own minds on what is best for their own sporting activities —though not necessarily best for anyone else’s. So the sportsmen must live with the consequences of each others decisions. Even allowing for the fact that their honestly-held intentions may be misunderstood or misrepresented by others here and abroad, the -Dorts administrators cannot conscientiously- ignore the repercussions of tours and visits that other people consider politically significant Of course, if this argument is taken to an extreme, every sport might be exposed to pressure from al! kinds of groups and individuals: the result would be a chaos of petty interference and no-one would feel free to act in what he believed to be his best interests. Sometimes, however, interests that are genuinely larger than those of individuals must be respected and both sportsmen and the Government must be prepared to acknowledge the need for such respect The Government offered New Zealanders a new policy on sports tours; it was accepted and probablywelcomed by most sports administrators. The circumstances in which the Softball Association and the Amateur Athletic Association find themselves this week demonstrate very w-ell the consequences of a new policy that extends a freedom to individuals Most people applaud the preservation and extension of personal freedoms; but thev must also recognise that responsibilities become heavier, and that the consequences—fairly or unfairly imposed—may be borne by others as well as themselves.