PAYMENT FOR PLAY

Evening Post, Volume XCVI, Issue 44, 20 August 1918, Page 3

PAYMENT FOR PLAY

RUGBY UNION AND PROFES

SIONALISM,

Some time ago, it will be remembered, various suggestions were made having for their object the brightening up and general advancement of the game of Rugby football, special reference being made to the reinstatement of players who had temporarily gone in for the League game. The; matter, brought up by Canterbury, was discussed at the last annual meeting of the New Zealand Union, and as a result certain representations were made to the English Union. To these the latter body did not send what was held by many to be a favourable reply, and the various unions were circularised asking for a further expression of opinion on the English Union's letter. When the Management Committee of the New Zealand Union met last night, Mr. G. H. Dixon presided, and others present were Dr. ]?. .T. M'Evedy, Messrs. B. A. Marris, E. Wylie, and G. A. Howe. It was stated that only two unions had sent replies, Canterbury and , Wellington, and their letters were road. The main point in the Canterbury letter was the emphasising of the difference in the conditions relating to professionalism in football in New Zealand and at Home. The English Union, it was pointed out, had given power here to reinstate League players up to 17 years of age, but exception was taken to the limit of age being fixed.

The Wellington Union's letter contended that any player who had played the League game should be allowed to again play Rugby, so long as he had not actually played for money or been paid for loss, of time.

The opinion of members at the meeting was that payment for playing was the very foundation of the League game. In view of the small attendance, further consideration of the matter was deferred until next meeting. The chair- 1 man, Dr. M'Evedy, and Mr. E. Wylie were appointed a sub-committee to draft a statement ■ for consideration of the committee later.