Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

WORDING OF RUGBY RULES

“Too Much Semi-Lawyer Parlance” COMPLAINT BY REFEREES A complaint that there were many points confusing to referees to be found in New Zealand rules and laws of Rugby, was made at the annual conference of the New Zealand Rugby Referee’s Association in Wellington on Saturday. A motion was carried recommending the executive that when the rule book was reprinted, the English rule book be copied. Mr. J. B. Finlayson (Auckland), said that there was too much "semi-lawyer parlance” in a number of the New Zealand rules. The language itself caused difficulty to referees and players alike. "There is the tendency of reading too much into the laws,” said Mr. J. H. Hardie (King Country). Mr. Finlavson replied that if Mr. Hardie could define "at or near the mark” without being absolutely specific and definite as to distance, as in the offside rule, he must, indeed, be a Rugby lawyer. Mr. Hardie said that the definition of the term had been defined at last conference as being within a few yards either way. Mr. H. J. McKenzie (Wairarapa), in moving the motion, said that if it were carried it would result in the simplification of rules. Mr. G. Bradley (Wellington) said that when the New Zealand book was last printed the English book was handed to the printer to copy, and both Messrs. E. S. Hylton and J. A. Wilson stated the book was word for word out of the English book. Mr. McKenzie said there were a lot of little "new tricks” in the New Zealand book which were very confusing. There were too many notes in the book, too. The chairman, Mr. J. Dixon, said that the rules of the game were exactly the same in both books. At the back of the New Zealand book interpretations, which were the English or New Zealand Rugby Union interpretations, were printed. The motion was carried, aud in reply to a question, the chairman said that he interpreted the motion as affirming the printing of the New Zealand rule book according to the English book. It was decided to hold the next conference in Otago. Officers elected for the ensuing year were as follows: —

President: Mr. J. Francis (Wellington) ; senior vice-president: Mr. D. S. Marshall (Otago); executive: Messrs. D. McKenzie, G. E. Bradley, J. Francis, A. de Clifton, J. Moffitt, R. J. Paton, J. A. Wilson; bon. auditor, Mr. H. Bolton.

A vote of thanks was passed to Mr. Hylton for his services to the executive.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/DOM19370329.2.130

Bibliographic details

Dominion, Volume 30, Issue 155, 29 March 1937, Page 12

Word Count
418

WORDING OF RUGBY RULES Dominion, Volume 30, Issue 155, 29 March 1937, Page 12

WORDING OF RUGBY RULES Dominion, Volume 30, Issue 155, 29 March 1937, Page 12

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert