FOOTBALL CONTROL.

Evening Post, Volume LXXXIII, Issue 79, 2 April 1912, Page 4

FOOTBALL CONTROL.

REFEREES'^ ASSOCIATION. 1 "ITS RELATfON'TO' THE 'RUGBY , f : _ ; UN?ON. ' , \ THE ASSOOIATIdN TO BE A SUBORDINATE BODY. The Referees' Association met last evening in the V.M.C.A. About nine : teen members were present. Mr D. M'Kenzie presided. * ' !••• On- the motion of Mr. ,W,'J. .Mere-; dith; it was decided to diecues in open' meeting tho revised rules* submitted by the Rugby Union after a conference between tha association and thcunion. The chairman of the association (Mi*. D. M'Kenzie), referring to tl^e, . conferences, said the parties stuck right at 1 the first rule, which read as follows: — " The Wellington Rugby Union Referee*' Aespciation ehall be a body under the control and authority of the 'committee of the Wellington Football Union, and no regulation passed by the .association shall have any force until confirmed by that committee." Thip rule was a copy of the Otago Association's first rule. Practically all the other rules in the revised schedule! were agreed to. The whole bone of con-; t tent;on lay in tho rule abovg^gamed. A> drawback, »jiHd epeakeo* conraiigdt' -was : that it was possible that the fact of a| new committee being elected might; nullify all tha.t the,.oKl,4on}mittefi had! admitted^ , H^Jtbe- cbairmaajpasidone «o far as % active refereein|^ya^ concerned, but there were* a lot u pt young -men' coming on, .and it was for them to accept the decision of the Rugby Union or not. The alternative was tuat ..the referee^ should eet up association apart, from outside the Rugby Union. The rules, tl^e chairman thought, were very good rules indeed. A delegftto (Mr. CVd) roee, and asked if the association intended to do anything in regard to the reinaxks of Mr. D. Weir ai the union annual meeting. On the chairman replying in the negative, the delegate eaid " good night " curtly, and left. The chairman subsequently made- an explanation, which was not permitted for publication. Opinions on tho relations of the aseociation and the union were received from the Otago and Canterbury Rugby Unione. The secretary of the ' former . stated that the referees were appointed by the Referees' Association, while in the case of Canterbury the' appointment ' of referees was made by a ( sub-committee of the union called the' Competitions Committee. It was moved by Mr. Clinkard that this rule of tho .union ahoukl be aacepted. The mover did not see any

reason why the union should not give the association fair play.' '- When 'thev did not, there would be time to growf. Ho thought tho union members • wore eports, a-nd that tho aJsGocialion woald get every fair consideration. Tho motion waa seconded by Mr. Couzeiifi, who endorsed what tho mover had said. '- , . . , L , Mr. Meredith thought that tho aasortation exit. tod to assist tho Kugby, Union in putting oti and controlling football games. • He did not think ' the • union were acting in any other thtn- a> conciliatory manner The association .should be a- body subservient to t)ie novarninK body. ■ It was the- opinion of Mr. L. f;iever<> that the "mutual agreement" principle would eventually mean the annihilation of the association. The junior members would never liave an. opportunity of coming forward. The aesoclaAion should have the right to manage its own affaire. This "agreement" would result in a. threatening of the integrity and independence of the referees. Rugby was having a fai/ly hard fighb for ite existence at present, and if it was not well nia-naged in future, tie speaker was afraid that the game would get a setback. Mr. M'Kenzie pointed out that there was nothing 111 this paaticular rule -.vnich would prevent tho association from amending any new rule. The association was formed for the advancement of the game, and to assist all it could to educate the younger members in tho rules. He could assure members of the association that there was no antagonism from tba union towards tho association. The speaker thought that the association might accept the rule of the union and give it a twelve months' taial, a-nd ££ it were not satisfactory,' they should appeal to the union in some, way or other. ■ All the union wanted was toe appointments taken away from the Appointment Board, and given to the union. He claimed that the union should either appoint the referees or let the Referees Absociation do it. In reply Mr. Clinkard agreed that the rule might be given a trial for a twelve" month. The motion was declared carried by' nine votes to eight. Eventually all the rules as submitted were adopted. Mr. A. Nielson was elected to represent the association on the Appointment Board. APOLOGY DEMANDED FROM MR. ' WEIR. On the motion of Mr. Keys, seconded by Mr. Larway, it was decided: "That this association request^ an apology from Mr. D. Weir for the remarks he made at the annual meeting of the Rugby Union."