SPRINGBOK TOUR

Dominion, Volume 15, Issue 181, 28 April 1922, Page 6

SPRINGBOK TOUR

FINANCES QUESTIONED RIGHTS OF INDIVIDUAL UNIONS SPIRITED DISCUSSION The balance-sheet of the tour of the Springbok football team was submitted to the meeting of tho New Zealand Rugby Union yesterday, and caused a spirited discussion. The long-awaited balance-sheet of the Springbok football tour was. made available at the annual meeting of the New Zealand Rugby Football Union held yesterday afternoon at the Chamber of Commerce. The president of tho union, Mr. J. McLeod (Taranaki), was in the chair, and there were fiftyseven delegates present. The balance-sheet was as followsExpenditure. —Steamer fares, South African team, £4294 17s. lid. ; rail fares, South African team, £568 15s. ; outfitting, South African board, £685 Bs. Bd.; hotel and travelling expenses (South African team in New Zealand), £2202 Ils. Id.; managerial expenses, N Z R.U., £240 os. 7d.; selectors’ expenses, £149 17*.; hotel and travelling expenses (New Zealand team), £lOO4 19s. 5d.; outfitting New Zealand team, £245 9s. Bd.; referees’ expenses, £72 10s. 9d.; advertising, etc., £254 Is. 4d ; wages, cartage, medical, and general expenses, £514 12s. Id.; extra stands, etc., £360 . 25.: grant King Country representative team, £5O; net profit New Zealand tour, £'67o 17s. 2d. Total, £18,314 2s. Bd. Receipts.—Gate receipts as per analysis, £17.696 3s. 2d.; less deficit Bay of Plenty Union, £3l 14s. 3d.—-£17,164 8s lid. Sale of programmes, £649 13s. 9d. Total, £18,314 2s. Bd. The gate receipts, expenses,, and the net amount received by the union from the different matches were:—Wanganui, gross gate £977, expenses £460, net amount received by N.Z.It.U. £517; Taranaki, £lOl6, £607, £359 > Wairarapa, £B9O, £299, £591; Wellington, £2339, £524. £1815; West Coast, £4Ol, £l6l, £240 ; Canterbury, £1227, £394, £833; South Canterbury, £775, £294, £481; Southland, —; £9os; Otago and first Test, £3643, £1264. £2379; Manawatu, , £BB3; Auckland (£2049) and second’Tost, £4364, £2395, £4OlB ; Waikato, £789. £239 £550 ; Hawke’s Bay £842. £496, £346; Maori, £673, £417, £256; Nelson Combined, £503, £126, £377; third Test, £3807, £663, £3144. The total net gate receipts were £17.696. , , x . ; The balance-sheet showed that the total liabilities were £16,497. Th®? included profit for the year, £8246; accumulated fund as at April 1, 1921, £B6Ol. The assets included the following mortgages:—Southland, £l9OO ; Wellington, £750; Otago,. £500; Poverty Bav. £300: Wanganui, £2o0; Taranaki, £75: interest due on same, £Bl ■ Post Office inscribed stock, £5OO- G.P.O. Savings Bank. £10,995: War Loan certificates. £256 ; -National Bank, £187; deposit, fares French tour (recoverable), £500: Equitable Building Society, fixed' deposit. £81; North Auckland Rugby Union (N.S.W. tour), £9l. ' The revenue account showed that the principal items of receipt were:— South African tour, profit, £'67l; Now South Wales tour, profit, £709; North v. South Island, profit, £213; interest. £337 : Possibles v. Probables, profit, £B2 ; subscriptions from unions. £BB. Total, £9102. The chief items of expenditure were:—Schools’ grant, £310; secretary’s salary and bonus, £175; “rep.” caps. £56; bonus to treasurer, £35; loss on MoaScar Cup, £57. Allotting tho Expense. In reply to questions regarding. the travelling expenses, Mr. E. A. Little said that this amount (£2202) might appear to be large, but it was easily explained. For instance, the South Africans were in Wellington on two occasions; the expenses could not properly be charged to any particular union. . . Mr. R. J. Southgate (Wairarapa) said that the expenses of the Springbok visit to Taranaki were out of proportion to those at Wairarapa.) In future, the union should appoint an advance agent to go to each centre and supervise the expenditure. (Hear, henr.) . . The president: “We. in Taranaki,, had the expense of washing tho Springboks’ • olothes : their laundry hill was £50.” (Laughter.) He explained that tho expense was due to the +ime-tnblo having broken down. As the Taranaki Union was not sure what the views of +ne controlling body on the oues+ion of expense were thov nnde'-tnok. if the tour was not a success, that’ Taranaki would defray the expense of entertaining the visitors and of assembling the Taranaki team. 4 delegate oiiestioned the 'tom. “Cost of'refitting the South African tc’-m. £685.” The chairman of +h 0 VTnnngemont Committee (Mr. G. W S’tlo) : That was our agreement with them. At this stage a delegate remarked that what he was saying was not for publication.

"Nothing to Hide." Mr. H. H. S. White. COtago): We have no+hing to hide. This 's a. publie meeting, and we are perfectly justified in lotting the people know what wo are doing. There should he no hole-and-corner business with Rugbv. ('Hear, hear.l We are not concerned with th A delegates, but +ho whole of tho football •nublic of New Zealand wants the fullest details of this. The Management Comm’ifee should have nofliTng'To hide. Wo are not afraid of any criticism. (Apnlause.; Mr. Meredith (Ronthland) gave details of. the expenditure on the Snrino--boks at that centre. “The South Africans took nway both balls that we plnved with,” ho added, amid laughter. Mr. J. PrendeviHe (Wellington) complained of the delay in petting the balance-sheet ready. He said that the expenses at Taranaki, £657, and at Wanganui, £460, for a 24-hours’ stay, were too heavy. Tho expenses, tor two days in the Wairarapa were £3OO. The expenses of the two matches in Auckland were double those in Otago, and greater than thoso in Wellington. Mr. Little: The hotel expenses, while they were in Wellington for the third Test have not been charged to the Wellington Rugby Union; they have been included in "travelling and liotel expenses.” A Wellington Grievance. Some discussion took place in re»gard to the amounts credited to the unions on tho Springbolt matches. Mr. Prcndevillo remarked, i»i answer to questions, that the Wellington Union had been allowed 20 per cent., and 15 per cent, on the third Test match. The city union was entitled under the trust, to 25 per cent., and it had had to secure the approval of the trust to the reduction. Mr. Little said that, from the point of view of the Management Commit tee, the Wellington Union was entitled to charge the full 25 per cent., but had waived 5 per cent. Mr. Prendevillo said that the Wel-

lington Union should not be . treated differently from any other onion. Mr. Slade: What is wrong with the Wellington Union? I don’t know. A voice: You do. now. Mr. W. J. Hardham (Wellington): We, in Wellington, consider ourselves ouite capable of controlling the game here. We could not arrive at an agreement with the New Zealand Management Committee, as to what they needed. We. endeavoured to work in with them, but had ths greatest diffiJ' culty in working with them. On the occasion of the third test, temporary accommodation was erected, but the Wellington public secured no benefit from it,