DEPRIVED OF CUP

Evening Star, Issue 19775, 27 January 1928, Page 7

DEPRIVED OF CUP

OTAGO AND CORNWELL CUP CONTEST Y.R.A. RULING TO BE OBTAINED With the exception of Mr G. T. Bewley, the delegate to the contest, the Otago Yacht and Motor Boat Association members were unanimous last night that Otago had been deprived of the Cornwell Cup by wrongful decisions of the Contest Sailing Committee. Air Bewley made a lengthy report to the association, and defended the committee’s actions. However, other members had their minds made up, and Mr Bewley had to undergo a strenuous cross-examination in defending the committee' and his own actions. Those present were Messrs J. T. Paul (president), H. Camp, A. D. Asher, E. T. Holler, T. Brooks, F. Goodwin, G. T. Bewley, O. Martin, and. T. Anderson (secretary). Mr Paul traversed the full arguments. Otago’s message of protest had been endorsed by the local authorities. He claimed that the Otago crew had won the cup after the fifth race by “ fair sailing, superior skill and speed.” It was Auckland’s bad luck to have been fouled, but that was fremiently the experience of yachtsmen. Rule 40 could not be applied to the circumstances, as the chairman of the Sailing Committee had made it quite clear that the Auckland boat was never in peril. Mr Paul said he had no doubts as to the feelings of the members of the association on the deprivation of the Otago crew of the cup. Rule 3 of the contest—“ Boats not to be interfered with ” —was so vague and so dangerous that it could mean anything. The rules of racing and yachting practice would support Otago’s protest, and the association would not be doing its duty unless a protest were made. After going over the rules and reports of the racing Mr Paul declared that the Otago crew had won by fair sailing and superior skill and speed. The chairman of the Sailing Committee had acted wrongly by arguing that Otago had won the race by other means. He complimented the crew on its sailing. Mr T. Anderson had three questions for Mr Bewley.

Were Auckland and Canterbury fighting for positions throughout the fifth race? Mr Bewley: No. The Canterbury skipper admitted to the committee that he took a risk in crossing the hows of the Auckland boat. Do you honestly think that in a fair and above-board race Auckland would have passed Otago? Mr Bewley: I would not say that. I have never said or thought that Auckland would have beaten Otago, hut Auckland had a good chance of winning the race ; and so had Canterbury. Mr s Camp: What about the other boats? Mr Bewley: They were so far hack that their chances were poor. Mr Camp; Otago was well back in some of the races, yet the crew won. Mr Anderson; What effect did the decision have on the feelings of our crew P

Mr Bewley;-The boys took the decision in a sporting spirit, and mode no complaints about resailing. Mr Anderson supported Mr Paul’s statements, declaring that there was not a rule on which the Sailing Committee could honorably base its decision. He moved that the Otago Association take the necessary procedure to have its protest vindicated. An interesting point was raised by Mr Martin. The president of the committee had wired that the decision was unanimous. AVas that so? asked Mr Martin. Mr Bewley; Not in the first place. Mr Lidgnrd opposed the decisions, and voted against it. He later told me he was in accord. To Mr Paul the delegate also admitted that Otago would have won if it had not had the misfortune to foul Hawke’s Bay. Mr Paul; ‘Well, does not the “superior speed and skill" clause hold there? Mr Bewley further stated that ho had realised'that the resail was an important thing for Otago. Air Paul: Then I suggest that your proper course was to have communicated immediately with the association. If you had done so J, on behalf of the members, would have ordered the boys to return homo. .. You say that you arc not conversant -with customs and practice of the sea. I admire yon for that admission, hut you should' have asked the committee to hold its decision in abeyance and wired your association for instructions. Air Bewley replied that he was still convinced that the Sailing Committee had made a sound decision, and the Y.11.A. jailing would be interesting.

Later the delegate stated that the Auckland boys had not wanted a resail. It had "been reported to him that the Aucklanders had said, “ Let Otago have it; we are satisfied.” The hoys had not made a request for a resail under rule 40 until some time after the race.

Mr Camp said the boys must have been prompted, for they would not have known what rule to make their protest under. It was clear that Auckland had rammed Canterbury. According to the rules, Auckland should have avoided the other boat and then protested against its not giving way. Auckland was liable to disqualification for not avoiding the collision. Mr Bcwley said neither the Auckland and Canterbury crews saw the other boat coming. Members said the issue was clear cut, and the following motions, moved by Mr Paul, were carried:— “That the Otago Yacht and Motor Boat Association, having carefully considered the action of the Sailing Committee, in deciding to resail the fifth race in the Cornwell Cup series of races, and all the rules and ordinary customs of the sea, together with the published defence of its actions by the Sailing Committee, is firmly of the opinion that such decision was contrary to the Yacht Racing Association rules and yacht racing practice, and therefore wrongly deprived the Otago crow' of the race and the honor of holding the cup. The association further resolves that the decision is of such importance as to warrant a case being stated for the opinion of the Y.R.A, (the highest authority in the yacht racing world), such case to be impartially prepared and agreed to by the Takapuna Boating Club and the Otago Yacht and Motor Boat Association.

“ That a copy of these resolutions Ire forwarded to the Takapuna Boating Club and the Auckland Yacht and Motor Boat Association.” Tiie. President said that the Otago Association and 'tho : Takapuna Club, should be able to act jointly in coming to a .decision in regard to forwarding the resolution to the Yacht Racing Association. ft was a fair statement of the position, and it was for the future betterment of yachting that a ruling should be .obtained from the, Yacht Racing Association. There was no reason why the decision of the Y.R.A., whatever it might be, should not he accepted by the Takapuna Club and the Otago Association.