RUGBY PROFITS

Evening Post, Volume CXI, Issue 100, 30 April 1931, Page 4

RUGBY PROFITS

BRITISH TEAM'S TOUE

WELLINGTON'S PROPOSAL

REMIT DEFEATED

' It was rather anticipated that the Wellington Union's proposition for the division of, the net profit from the British team's lout- last season would not fin a general favour with delegates to the annual meeting of the New-Zea-r land Rugby Union yesterday, and such was the case. The remit was heavily defeated on the voices.

The full text of the Wellington Union's remit was that the net proceeds from tho British team's tour (nearly £22,000) be divided amongst all the affiliated unions and the Now Zealand- Union in accordance with a scheme of division to bo approved by the -delegates. ■ A remit on the same subject put forward byiliu Southland"Union was withdrawn after tho defeat of the Wellington motion. The Southland remit was: — "Where a union controls a Test game, 15 per cent, of net gate shall bo reVained by such union, the balance to go to the profit of the' tour. At the termination of tho tour half of-the net profits shall be divided amongst those unions not receiving a Test' gainCj the remaining half to be retaineil. by'the New Zealand "Rugby Football Union." PEO KATA DIVISION. . . In moving the Wellington- Union's motion, Mr. J. Prendeville, chairman of the Management Committee . of ■ the Wellington. Union, referred delegates to the somewhat elaborate scheme of division of the profits suggested by his union with a view to* a discussion of the pros and eons of the whole matter. The New Zealand Union, lie. said-, had been generous in remitting £1300 to <;he Australian unions, and il; appeared lo him that something should also be done for tho unions in the Dominion. The profit from tho British tour had been earned, throughout New Zealand, and in the opinion of iWe .Wellington Union the New Zealand Union, with an accumulated fund last year of £19,000, had in Its control an amount amply sufficient, to meet any tour that .might be undertaken. .The question now arose as to what should be done with the extra amount now in hand. It .'\vas> thought by the Wellington Union that tlia,t should be divided, up pro rata amongst the > variou's'iinions.''3Mie-Wel-lington Union's suggested '"SelienuP of division might not be perfect, but it .was. essential to have some salvome for submission to.' delegates. V.Tt -was considered that the -money should not be dealt with only in the manner that might be fixed by the Management G,ommit.tee; distributions, it' : was claimed, should be considered b,y the Coun-; •cil, of. the New- Zealit'iuV'Union. For tliat reason his "committee wrote to the New Zealand Union in October last asking that no distribution should be made out of the funds Until a completed, balance-sheet had;:beeli submitted and unions' arid the eoimcil had had an | opportunity of discussing any proposals the .Management Committee wished to ■jut-.forward. Needless to say, that re•:quest^fas,.not granted. ■

"". -v: "xp^NS.TO.TOIONS. •:!,; r^Mi1. Pfendeville then, went into the Wellington-Union's suggested scheme of dU-isibivin detail. It''appeared to ;hiin^thatXpW of the main objects of .every- unibiiv should bo to, acquire 'a fgrounibt grounds of its 6'wii, and it\the proiit'ftaS-divided it -would-/bo. a meails bx''assuring; that- there; would-;be some funds available .towards- that;' purpose. It might be said that in thisviespect;tlle Wellington Union "was.. fßi#tiaate, ibilt tlio Wellington. 'Union ludVits' difficulties and was ■by.no means out of the woods. T-he Wellington.Union still haft very, heavy mortgage liabilities, and _aitliough it was suggested that the union was getting an undue percentage from the receipts and an unfair proportion/of matches, he wished^ to point out that if the figures were added up the amount received by the ■Wellington Union was not as great as some unions had suggested. His' contention was that an; amount'of something like £20,00,0 was a very ample reserve for the New Zcalaua Union and the Management Committee to have control of, and ;;it was considered that the balance, should be divided up, under some approved .scheme among; the various unions. Spine .'unions,Lad'^peh granted loans already :by the. Management' Committee, ;and with all :due' defci'euee to the Manage■ment; Committee', ho. considered that it should have waited until tho annual meeting so that a policy could be formulated ;that-wouldOl^e been fair and equitable to'all :tho';unions. ■Mrv'-B; J. ,Smith (Bush Union) sec-.onded-tlie'adoption of the motion., ,; In reply to a question, Mr. S. B. Dean, chairman ,of . the Management Committee; said that with the addition of a loan, of £-1000 to Canterbury, loans which had been advancea or which :it had been- agreed to advance were as set out in the animal report. Mr. Preudeville 'a memory, he thought, must be very short. The policy of- the New Zealand Union was that funds should be advanced to unions for the purpose of improving grounds. That policy li.ad been rigidly ad'Tiefed to by the"Manage-1 mont Committee; ,■■,■;..':.-•-.r, Mr. H. Har.ris(Otago),'in,.opposing the motion, ssiid that the coiiimittcc of tlio Otago Union considered 'that 'the Management-Committee should' adminis^ ter ; the funds.. ~-"'.,■.•- .■■:■ ' NOT FEASIBLE p)fe^EiispNAßLE; Mr. 3)ean was"qiwte opposed to the-=~Wenmgtb^r.prpi)psition. He thought Eit-.>vas'neittier^Sea^ib]e nor a reasonalsi;e-;;t«i v e.Vr;lf.'^ii^'"^? Siven. away to un'i'biis'pi^mcalj'ithei'e would be no end of ..;&publeV*:.; : Hxi -wished to assure delegates that'the finances o£ the union were looked after very carefully by the Management Committee. Ho would be very sorry to see anyvariation of the present policy., \ < Mr. J: M'LeOd'(Taranaki) 'did not favour the motion, but ho said he considered that'there'should be some other, method of controlling the funds. In his opinion, there had, been unseemly haste on the part of the Management Committee in the distribution of the money this year. It was only a fair business proposition to wait until all the applications J[or loans had been received and then examine them and mafce allocations according to their value and good to tlio game. The money that hud been advanced to-unions had been granted too early and without duo consideration to the'claims of tiU the unions. He wished to-move a recommendation to the effect that the capital account in Hie future should be administered by an 'invest merit board of. five members. . The .'ehiiirma'n', (Dr; ■G. ...T. Adams) said that it would be necessary for My. M'Leod to give notice of motion, and Mi1. M'Leod''s suggestion was not accepted iis an amendment.■.'] Mr. CrowJeyrX-North Otago) said he thought tluit'sbiucthing:rb)J".t]to lines of the scheme put;forward-by ;'Mv. Pvcntlo-. •.yi'llo would bo'iVt the 'interests of football generally, iaithough-lie would not .go.sa v far as-Mi'. Prendovillc. GRANT TO SCHOOL FOOTBALL. ';' The! bpiniou: .was expressed by' Mr. G. Maddison (llau-kes Bay) that it would

be imprudent "to. disperse capital in the manner suggested. His view .was "that the' surplus income which would accrue from the profits of 'the British lour should be used towards 'giving greater assistance to school football in New Zealand. The grant for that purpose was wholly inadequate. Ho also suggested that the surplus income should be used in assisting, country arid, minor unions. Ho moved as an amendment to Iho motion a recommendation along ! thesp lines. ■■•-.■.'••.. Mr. Parker (Poverty Bay) seconded the amendment.

Mr. T. H. Langford (South Canterbury) supported the principle of the Wellington remit. '"I think," ho said, "that the' Management Committee has made a desperate mistake in lending this money out in such unseemly haste." ' ' .

At the suggestion of Mr. Harris^ it was decided 1o take.Mr. Mnddison's r&coininendation.'after the disposal, of the Wellington motion. After Mr. Prcndevillc had made -i brief reply, the motion was piit to th<e mooting and defeated on the voices Uy a bin1 majority. Mr. Dean said he thought, that tJie adoption of Mr. Maddison's recommendation would serve no good purpose. :

• Mr. Maddison said ho was quite prepared to withdraw his rcconimcndatijon on Mr. Dean's assurance that ihe« interests of minor unions would be safeguarded. : In view of the decisive opinion .expressed by delegates on the Wellington remit, Mr. Meredith (Southland) asked leave to withdraw the Southland remit. - ■ - ' .... GATE PERCENTAGES. , On the .motion of Mr.'A. E. MfMiail1 (.Canterbury) it was, decided- to reaommend to the Management . Cominijttce ' that in. the case of future tours '; all unions having nfatclics should receive a similar percentage, of receipts as rthat given, the "Wellington Union for the British tour—that is,'2o per cent, orf.theground takings and 'do. J.-.3 per ccn.l. of I the grandstand takings. . ■■•■..

.Slessrs. Silverslohe and Co. ivill sjcli by auction at their mart at 1.30 p.m. 'to'inoiTO'w . the-liiriiishirigs and furniture of an eighi-robrried house in Kilbirnio. . Ivingsway.'s, Ltd., 'auctioneers, sell; by auction to-morrow, at 1.30 pi.m., at their rooms, 78, Lambtori quay, hoiiisehold furniture, carpets, and poultry; There were -741,800 agricultural workers in Britain last year. This was 28*500, or' .nearly i per cent., Jess than 'in -1929.,