NEW ZEALAND UNION

Evening Star, Issue 20780, 30 April 1931, Page 7

NEW ZEALAND UNION

PROFITS OF BRITISH TEAM’S VISIT [Per United Press Association.] WELLINGTON, April 29. At the annual meeting of the New Zealand Union this afternoon Mr J, Prendeville moved a remit on behalf of the Wellington Union to the effect mat the net proceeds from the tour of the British team should be divided among all the affiliated unions and the New Zealand Union, in accordance with a scheme of division to bo approved by the delegates. The mover said that the New Zealand Union had in its control an amount sufficient to finance any tour that might be undertaken. The question was what should be done with the extra money it had in hand. In October last the Wellington Union had written to the New Zealand Union asking that no payment should be made out of the funds Until a complete balance-sheet had been submitted to the unions, and had been discussed at the annual meeting. The request had not been granted. His suggestion was that from the gross “ gates ” of the matches the local charges should first be deducted, followed by a pro rata deduction of the total cost of the tour from each. Of the net result the New Zealand Union would then take for its accumulated fund 10 per cent., and the balance would be handed over to the respective affiliated unions, subject to certain considerations. The main object of all unions should bo to get grounds of their own.

In reply to a question, Mr Dean said the union was already committed to the sums that had been enumerated in the annual report in addition to the £4,000 to the Canterbury Union. It was anticipated that all the money would be paid over within a few weeks. Mr H. Harris (Otago) said he had been instructed by his union to oppose the Wellington remits. The Management Committee, he considered, was the proper body to look after the union’s funds. Mr Dean said he did not think the Wellington proposal was either reasonable or feasible. The Management Committee’s handling of the union’s money acted as a brake. It was handled for the benefit of the unions and football in general. Mr J. M'Leod (Taranaki), while opposing the remit, said he did not tnmk tho handling of so much money should be left in the hands of tho Management Committee. He suggested that perhaps a council should be elected for the sole purpose of handling the union’s finance. In his opinion, to, there had been too much hurry in paying out from the profits of the tour. The sum of £19,000 had already gone one. There were a number of applications not yet considered. Mr G. A. Maddison (Hawke’s Bay) also opposed tho remit, and suggested that more of the profits should go to school football. He presented a motion advocating that tho profits be invested and tho income devoted to school football and promoting the interests of the minor unions, but he withdrew it on receiving Mr Dean’s assurance that the minor unions would receive every consideration, as they had in the past. r . Tho Wellington remit was lost by an overwhelming majority. A . remit from the Southland Union dealing with tho same question was withdrawn. BROADCASTING OF MATCHES.

When tho question of tho broadcasting of matches was raised, Mr Doan pointed out that tho New Zealand Union was not greatly concerned, as it could only deal with matches under its own jurisdiction. Mr J. Crowley (North Otago) put forward a motion that broadcasting bo disallowed for interprovincial and overseas matches, as it was nob in tho best interests of football.

Mr H. Harris (Otago) said his union had practically decided not to broadcast matches this season, though that did not-apply to representative 'matches. He, personally, was not convinced that broadcasting was not in tho best interests of the game. Ho considered that people became interested in football as a result of wireless who. before perhaps had not been in tho habit of attending matches. In many cases it had been the means of increasing attendances. Last year, ho said, was an exceptional one, and it should not bo taken as a definite indication of what would happen this year. Perhaps tho best way of solving the difficulty was to draw up a modified scheme for broadcasting.

A motion from Mr G. Pownall (Wanganui) advocated that the Management Committee should bo recommended to disallow the broadcasting of all matches under its jurisdiction. Tho unions last year, he said, had had their finances seriously 'affected by wireless.

Another delegate contended that wireless increased the interest in Rugby. Mr A. E. M'Phail (Canterbury) said his union had decided against allowing broadcasting, mainly because of its effect on football in tho country.

Mr W. G. Lamb (Wairarapa) said ho thought the question was one that should be decided mainly by the four centres. Broadcasting did not affect their attendances, but it certainly did in the minor unions.

Mr Harris suggested that it should bo tried out for another year. Ho pointed out that the only tost match this year would probably be played at Auckland, and tho people of New Zealand should not he debarred of tho opportunity of listening. Mr Eglinton (Manawhenua) said his union thought the test match was the only one that should bo broadcast this year.

Eventually the meeting decided to leave the question to the Management Committee. SELECTORS’ EXPENSES.

Some of tho delegates questioned the amount of £599 14s appearing in tho balance-sheet as selectors’ expenses. In explanation, Mr E. MTCenzic (Wairarapa) said that so far as ho knew the amount was comprised of travelling expenses and out-of-pocket expenses of £1 a day. About sixweeks’ travelling had been involved.

With regard to the complaint that no selector Tiad seen the Wanganui and Taranaki representatives in action he mentioned that a selector had been detailed to go ho Taranaki, but at the last minute ho had been unable to do so. A motion was presented suggesting that for this year the number of selectors should be reduced, but was withdrawn when Mr Dean said he thought it probable that only two selectors from each island would be appointed by the Management Committee this year. UNION PERCENTAGES. A recommendation from Canterbury —“ That for future tours all unions holding matches should receive 20 per cent, of the ground takings and 33 1-3 per cent, of the grand stand takings ” was approved. OFFICE-BEARERS. The following officers were elected : Patron, Lord Bledisloo; president, Mr S. S. Dean; vice-presidents—Messrs L. J. Brake (North Auckland), J. Arneil (Auckland), G. S. Foster (Thames Valley), B. Chapman (Waikato), F. H. Wilkie (Bay of Plenty), E. H. Young (Taranaki), C. H. Warden (Wanganui), J. A. Colquhoim (Manawhenua), K. S. Williams (East Coast), A. S. Parker (Poverty Bay), G. A. Maddison (Hawke’s Bay), R. S. Smith (Bush Districts), C. A. Gray (Wairarapa), Dr P. F. M'Evedy (Wellington), C. H. Mills (Marlborough), B. 11, Bluett (Nelson), E. Taylor (Golden Bay-Motucka), A, G. Colvin (Puller), A. White (West Coast), A. M'Phail (Canterbury), J. O’Leary (South Canterbury), S. J. Styche (Otago), W. Robison (Southland), W. Copsey (King Country), W. H. Barney (Ashburton), J. Crowley (North Otago); treasurer, Mr H. Leith; Management Committee Messrs Dean, J. Roache, T. A. Fletcher, A. C. Kitto, E. S. Hylton, F. Glasgow, and W. J. Wallace; Appeal Council— Messrs J. Arneil, P. Mackie, J. I. Conlan; auditor, Mr A. G. Kembor.