No more ‘afternoon tea parties’

Press, 20 April 1982, Page 36

No more ‘afternoon tea parties’

By

JOHN BROOKS

Canterbury moves to prevent a repetition of the disgraceful behaviour which punctuated this year’s Air New Zealand tennis circuit have borne fruit. The management committee of the New Zealand Lawn Tennis Association has decreed that the 1983 satellite circuit will be presided over by a director and a separate referee; this year one man filled both positions. Bad language, peevish acts such as the throwing of rackets and swatting of balls, and the final burst of ill temper at Auckland when Rocky Vazquez shoved Jeff Simpson to the ground formed a situation which

cried aloud for sterner control by the N.Z.L.T.A. The Canterbury association was plainly perturbed at what transpired in the circuit tournament at Wilding Park, and expressed its concern by letter to the national body. The Canterbury chairman, Mr Maurie Agar, followed this up with a personal appearance at a meeting of the national body’s executive council. Canterbury wanted to supply an experienced referee of its own at future tournaments, but the NZL.T.A. has achieved, the same end by splitting the director-referee post into two. The circuit director was

not able to fill the position of referee adequately because of all the demands made of him by the players, Mr Agar said. “We as an association didn’t have control because he was the offficial referee,” the Canterbury chairman said. “We felt that we should have some say in the running of the event to ensure that our usual standards were maintained.” Canterbury was anxious that measures of control should be applied consistently throughout the circuit. When a Christchurch official remonstrated with visiting players over objectionable utterances, the competitor retorted that there had been

no strictures on swearing at the three earlier tourna- i ments, and he did not intend to stop at that stage. i The absence of umpires j for many games ’ was a < source of trouble, Mr Agar ■ said. He admitted that the association would have great ■ difficulty in providing local umpires throughout a week, i but said the problem would I be eased if players themselves accepted umpiring duties. In one of the unseemly incidents at Wilding Park, four players argued for 23 < minutes over the score in their doubles match. Eventually the contest resumed after another player had been persuaded to mount the umpire’s chair.

The man in the hot seat this year was Mr Ivan Houghton, a member of the national administration. He described the doubles incident as "an afternoon tea party,” but, as circuit director and referee, he did not seem to realise that in the volatile Vazquez he was dealing with a human time bomb. That bomb went off in the subsequent tournament, in Auckland. The national body banned Vazquez from playing again in New Zealand. The minutes of the management committee referred to him with undeserved politeness as "Mr R. Vazquez,” and said his aggressive act “had attracted adverse media reports considerably damaging the

image of tennis in New Zealand ...” Obviously, stronger measures- should have applied from the outset of the circuit; then the image would have remained untarnished. Christchurch officials, accustomed to running tournaments fairly but firmly, were horrified at occurrences such as one player turning the air blue in front of two elderly women spectators and another wrecking his expensive racket in the dressing room. “Certainly, we would expect a higher standard of, control in this tournament,” Mr Agar said. “We did not want to appear to be condoning bad behavour.”