LAWN TENNIS

Dominion, Volume 28, Issue 208, 31 May 1935, Page 12

LAWN TENNIS

Sending Players to Tour Australia N.Z. COUNCIL DISCUSSION Considerable discussion took place last night at the -quarterly meeting of the Council of the New Zealand Lawn Tennis Association on the question of whether Or not a team of tennis players should be sent to Australia next season. It was decided to defer the question until the next quax erly meeting in August. Air. T. G. Hickson, president of the N.Z.L.T.A., presided at the meeting. The proposals before the council were whether a team, or teams, should be sent to Australia, and, if so, whether it, or they, should consist of the leading younger players and be in the nature of an educational tour. The management committee estimated the maximum cost of sending a team of four men and four women, with a manager, at £450. “Some of our leading players have reached the stage.when they are not likely to last much longer,” said Air. A. G. Henderson, chairman of the management committee, "and therefore would not benefit from a tour of Australia.” He suggested that players selected should be restricted to 21 years of age so that they could take part in the junior championships in New South Wales, and also play against country and town teams. Standard Not High. Dr. A. E. Park was of the opinion that the standard of play in New Zealand wa-c not sufficiently high to warrant sending a team of four men or four women to Australia. From an educational view, it would be futile to send such a team. It would be very much better to send a team of promising young players. Professor AVileon asked whether the management committee had considered the question of getting a really good team from Australia. That might be of greater educational value to New Zealand than sending players over there. Tennis Parliament. Mr. N. A. Foden emphatically disapproved of a suggestion that the question of sending a team to Australia should be referred back to the separate associations. In his opinion that was a sign of weakness. Delegates were really members of a tennis parliament, and it seemed to him ridiculous that in any parliament members should be asked to refer any matter back to the associations. The separate associations would proceed, in their turn, to refer the matter to the clubs, and the clubs themselves would seek the opinions of individual members. He could think of no more ridiculous procedure than that. "I will'always be resolutely opposed to referring anything back‘to the associations from this council,” he continued, “unless it is of such vital constitutional importance that the opinions of the separate associations ought to be obtained. I know we have delegates here who are hamstrung by their associations and are afraid to act without instructions. That has been proved frequently. If any delegate is not competent to decide a question, after Jjearing the discussion, he is wasting our time and his own.” ‘‘A Washout.” Air. G. A. AVhite said the management committee wanted to get the views of delegates. “Throughout New Zealand there has been wide discussion about sending some of our players abroad. I think the experiment o-f sending our players to England and hoping and expecting they would come back has been "a washout.” It does not encourage us to send our leading players abroad in the, further expectation that they will come back. Once they get their teeth into English tennis, they stay if they can get a job to keop them there. I say, therefore. we should look to Australia. "The question is whether we should send our best players, but they are getting to the veteran stage. I am definitely against sending away four juniors just to play in Australia against other juniors. There may be something in sending aw-ay two senior players and two or three juniors. "So far as the women are concerned, we have had visits from women’s teams, and very good ones, too, but I don’t see a great deal of result. I think this is because we have always endeavoured to match them against the same New Z»aland women in order to make a match of it. None of our good younger girls had a game against them at all. New Zealand missed the bus in not sending away a New Zealand team to Australia last season, when the English women were there. There will never be sueh an occasion again for many years. “The idea now is to send a women’s team. Are they to be a mixture of older nlayers and younger ones: are they to be a team of older players only; or are they to be a team of juniors? Is the £450 going to break the association? AA'e have a large fund in hand. Aren’t we going to use it? AVc are getting no good by sending £lOO home to England just to keep our names on the tennis map in England.” “Out of all Proportion.” Air. AlcDuff said he agreed with every word that Air. AVhite had said. In his opinion £450 expenditure would be out of all proportion to the benefits New Zealand would receive from sending a team to Australia. On the other hand, sending two players in each of successive years, at a cost of £7O a year, would be something. and they would be getting value for money. In selecting the players consideration should be given to their likelihood of improvement and the length of time they were likely to remain in tennis. He stressed the value of bringing noted Australian players to New Zealand, and of sending approved junior players to Australia. Mr. W. P. AValker urged that only junior players should be sent. It was only by that means that the game would progress. Air. AA T . J. Melody thought the two best junior players.shoultl be sent if and when the New 'Zealand Davis Cup players went over to Australia. Air. Harrison, of Auckland, said that his association felt that the junior players in New Zealand still had a lot to learn before it would be worth while sending them to Australia. To spend £450 on sending a team to Australia was. in the chairman’s opinion. most unwise. He mentioned that Alan Stedman and E. D. Andrews would shortly be returning to New Zealand, and Auckland was very anxious to see tor itself how much Stedman had improved. It was decided to defer discussion until next quarterly meeting.