Rugby injunction

Press, 5 August 1985, Page 12

Rugby injunction

Sir,—Vernon Wilkinson says a court of law stopped the tour. By their stated “exquisite” elation, David Lange and Hart leaders obviously recognised that fact immediately the injunction was granted. Legally knowledgeable, they knew any reversal decision by a higher court after the rugby union at last had a chance to present its evidence, would come too late for the tour. Your correspondent asserts irresponsibility in those not convicted of any. Where, then, lies the real irresponsibility? With those who jubilantly approved the anticipated result of a judgment given on half-presented evidence? With the two plaintiffs who produced a voluminous mass of bound evidence, the astronomical cost of which they subsequently admitted they could not, by themselves, have paid? With black and white South Africans who decline to become victims of the savage barbarism practised on each other by the independent black African States? These questions are only a small part of the sad, far-reaching consequences of that court judgment.—Yours, etc., G. H. AGER. August 1, 1985.

Sir,—Apparently Vernon Wilkinson does not appreciate rugby players. Not long ago in answering a letter in which I made appreciative reference to Brian Lochore, he quoted “plain, simple” and “beer” — words I had not used or considered. Another perusal of my recent letter will show him that I made no attempt “to describe the antiapartheid movement.” Rather, like many keen sportsmen, I expressed deep disgust that the university had recalled the blues deservedly won by two outstanding players whose only crime was the winning of rugby’s highest award. I still contend that this quite unnecessary political move shows just how implacable, political and desperate the anti-apartheid movement can be.—Yours, etc., TED MULCOCK. August 1, 1985.