THE DAVIS CUP.
CANTERBURY'S HOSTILITY TO WELLINGTON. XO THE ED£M»B. Sir, — Canterbury's attitude of open hositility to the Management Committee of the New Zfeaiand Tennis Association is easily understood. It seconded the want of confidence motion proposed by and was badly beaten by a vote of about thirty-two to twelve, or if Auckland's three representatives were taken off the larger aad added to the smaller, it B till left twenty-nine to fifteen. Nominally, " that vote concerned the question of whether the committee was right or -wrong in treating the annu-ally-recurring "make of ball" as a matter of administration instead of policy. The decision of the association after the Provincial Associations had had a month to consider the question is a very substantial victory for the committee, and confirms the precedent practically recognised tor six years past, that the committee and not the association should annually fix the make of ball. This is commonsense, for where such details as quality, price of -balls, standing of manufacturers aaid their agents, and terms have to be carefully looked into, a small committee is- moie likely to conduct its enquiries and debates in a business-like way than the association, consisting of anywhere from twenty-five to thirty members meeting for one evening of two houra once in three months, and having in those two hours other important questions to discuss. The actual time expended by the committee upon this question involved several meetings, the collection of data, from clubs and associations as to the balls used • during the year, the interviewing of manufacturers' agents, and the personal trial of samples of the balls offered. How is it possible for these things to be attended to so well by the associations as by the committee V The ostensible reason given above and the action were right and proper if Canterbury honegtly thought the ball question was a matter of policy, but Canterbury seems to have chosen this course deliberately, and with the view of discrediting the committee's action in quite another' direction, and has succeeded with some in its efforts. Canterbury wants that Davis Cup, and the desire to have it played in Christchurch is laudable. Christchurch is the home of Anthony Wilding, and if other considerations had not to be taken into account, it would have been a graceful tribute to his remarkably fine tennis career to have played the Cup- in Christchurch. There is perhaps not a man in the Dominion who would have grudged such a tribute, but games on the "scale of a Davis Cup contest cannot be played without cost, and in deciding on a recommendation the first consideration in tho mind of the committee was the gate. An officer of the Australasian Association had unofficially stated what must have been ■plain to everyone that the question would be decided principally by the prospect of the support to be given, and on this ground it must be admitted that Wellington is the proper place to hold the contest. There are over 6000 affiliated players in the North Island to about 2500 in the South Island, and Wellington should certainly be added to the credit of the North Island. If finance had not been considered, the claims of Christchurch would still have been open to the objection Ijiat on broad grounds the interests of the whole of the tennis players and admirers of the game in the Dominion should be considered before the sentimental consideration relating to Mr. Wilding. If- it can be shown that the Wellington gate would be better than the Christchurch .gate, then it has (ipso facto) been proved that there would be more people to enjoy the match at Wellington than at Christchurch. If, however, neither the necessities of finance nor the convenience of patrons of the sport should have been considered, then the committee would properly on the ground of sentiment have selected Christchurch. I have said that Canterbury deliberately, and with the view of discrediting the committee in the Davis Cup controversy, supported Auckland's want of confidence motion about the ball, and have only to refer to a chain of coincidences to create au exceedingly strong presumption that Canterbury had set its heart on the Cup, and would have nothing else, and the public will therefore see the true bearing of tho ball controversy. It spells "Davis Cup" all through. Canterbury, as far back as February or perhaps sooner, had a Davis Cup Committee. The chairman of the Domain Board had officially inspected courts. The American or British players had been billetted with Mr. Wilding, senior. Hotelkeepers and boardinghousekeepers, it is said, were booking guests. Visitors to Sydney were charged with the duty of keeping Christchurch in. the foreground. It was rumoured that Wilding would play if Christchurch weie chosen, but if it were not that he would go wild-boar hunting with some princes he had dropped across. Christchurch papers had settled matters quite comfortably and had in contemplation a gala week of exceptional brilliancy so that the visitors would be duly impressed. For onoe, therefore, that over-riding incubus of .centralisation in Wellington would be zelegaled to its proper position as a mere committee, and would certainly never venture seriously to oppose the wishes of Cferistchurch. Let that committee- confine its work to the approval of programmes for country meetings and in urging 1 non-affiliated clubs to join the nearest association. Let it get its excitement by seeing that if they didn't join thair lnermbers were pievented from playing agaimrt affiliated players. Let it yeaily wade through a paltry thousand letters iaward, and a thousand outward, hoping tibereby in its small way to try and help. the sport. Let it measure its weakness for a year against the Auatialiau majority until it had barely succeed ed in obtaining from that association a p roper ly-eiefiiaed status in the management of the Davis Cup. Let it see to such a detail as that one in every three of the figtsts in defence of the Cup must he in New Zealand. Let the committee fight these insignificant battles, do those trifles, suffer the odium (if any !) arising through not pleasing everybody, but let it not offer a suggestion where the Cup should be pdayed. That privilege is clearly Canterbury's as Canterbury already had a Davis Cup Committee ! Now, it should be evident why the delegates from Canterbury joined hands with Mr. Eisher to try and discredit a committee which "will at the next meeting be aWe to justify its action and go even further and s\iow that no other course was open to if. The Management Committee has ne-v»i' fea.red to act on its own responsibility when the necessity arose, and' it will- beocjiuite prepared to meet the charges of wani>of jurisdiction, slimness, and treachery, .and perhaps worse, when the proper time comes. The general public will shave to wait a month for the committee's- side -of the controversy, hut it may rest assured that the committee has a defence worth listeniug to. Although I am a member of 'the Management Committee, this lettcrjis not in any way official oi- inspired. — I am, etc.. G. A. HURLEY. Wellington, 13th June, 1910.
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/EP19100613.2.8
Bibliographic details
Evening Post, Volume LXXIX, Issue 137, 13 June 1910, Page 2
Word Count
1,193THE DAVIS CUP. Evening Post, Volume LXXIX, Issue 137, 13 June 1910, Page 2
Using This Item
Stuff Ltd is the copyright owner for the Evening Post. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons BY-NC-SA 3.0 New Zealand licence. This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Stuff Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.