Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

NO BEEFED SAILS

YACHTING STORM BREAKS WRANGLE WITH ASSOCIATION CONTINUES HISS SYNDICATE ATTITUDE " UNSPORTING " A storm which has been brewing in local yachting circles since last November finally broke in fury last night, when bitter verbal waves were dashed against the frail constitutional craft of the Otago Yacht and Motor Boat Association for its refusal to grant the owners of the speed boat Miss Syndicate a registration number, on the grounds . that they broke the pledge of -the New Zealand Yachting Council by racing in the Masport Cup event, which was not conducted by that authority. There were no reefed sails among those who fought out a three-hour course against the association, whose attitude was described by one person as “ childish,” by another as being “ a cloak to the real reasons, which savour of personal bias,” and by the whole crew, which comprised upward of 60 persons representing the six local clubs, as “ unsporting.”

Mr H. Camp (commodore of the Port Chalmers Club) briefly stated the purpose of the meeting, which had been called at the instigation of his club after clubs affiliated tq the association had been circularised.

The replies received from the various clubs were read, all except Broad Bay (which did not reply) and Ravensbourne being in favour of the meeting. Upon being appointed chairman, Mr W. J. Watson (Port Chalmers Club) said that the question had now come to border on controversial lines, and it was felt that it would not be in the interests of yachting if those desiring to express their opinions were not given an opportunity to do so publicly. He urged intending speakers to come stright to the point they wanted to stress and to steer clear of all personalities.

ATTITUDE OF PERSONAL BIAS. Deliberations asserted to be responsible for accentuating the matter were traced at length with the aid of correspondence and Press clippings by Mr Camp, who said that when the assertion last considered the matter on March 14 it decided to grant Miss Syndicate a number provided that her owners withdrew from the newlyformed New Zealand Power Boat Association (Auckland), and also withdrew the challenge for the Masport Cup. Association members gave as one reason for their attitude that the owners had broken the pledge ‘of the New Zealand Yachting Council by entering for tho race, which was not controlled by that body, but the speaker did not think the council would have been formed if there had been such a pledge, which he had failed to find. His club claimed that the association had not kept its promise- to meet all clubs and obtain their views (only three had been approached), and that the whole matter required complete elucidation. It was submitted that the association’s rules governed yachting on the Otago Harbour, not the council’s rules, and that therefore Miss Syndicate should have been granted a number without conditions. The association was there to assist the sport generally, but how many present would say that prohibiting a boat of tho outstanding qualities of Miss Syndicate was fostering tho sport? How many would say that those responsible fpr the position had given the owners of the boat (who had spent about £4OO on it) the support and encouragement they deserved? How many would say that they were giving the public, which, after all, round the necessary funds to send away competing crews, the encouragement and entertainment to which they were entitled ? ,

In view of the presence at the meeting of two association members, Mr F. Bewley asked if any sporting or constitutional reasons could be given by them for the refusal of the number. The association members said that they were present as yachtsmen, and not as representatives of the association. BOAT OWNERS’ VIEWS. Two of tho owners of Miss Syndicate described the difficulties with which they had been faced in their endeavour to have their boat registered. Mr S. Algie expressed the opinion that the association apparently held a grudge against the boat or its owners, despite the fact that it had been registered in the Vauxhall Club. Mr W. G. Hewitt said that when the question of breaking the pledge had been, suggested one of the association members had stated that while this might not be in the rules' it was implied, but the speaker had since disproved this statement. Mr Hewitt continued: “We were very disappointed that the association did not keep its promise to obtain tho views of all clubs. It fell down badly on its job. It visited three clubs, but not the one to which it should have gone first—Vauxhall. It should have gone right into the lion’s den and fought it out there, and there would have been no necessity for the subsequent squabble.” Mr G. Pistor (Otago Yacht and Motor Boat Club) felt confident that association members when voting on tho subject had been deciding a question that they knew nothing about, as few of them had ever read the rules. Mr Gebrge Geddes (Otago Yacht and Motor Boat Club) explained that all attempts to have the matter discussed at a general meeting of his club had been thwarted. He was of the opinion that no good grounds had been given by the association since the dispute arose, and that if it had the sport at heart it would have used every endeavour to get the boat away to Picton. if for no other reason than the honour of having Otago represented. Some said that there were rules and regulations to be conformed to, but there was something greater than this—the moral side of the question. Legal questions were sometimes right, but morally and absolutely wrong, and, therefore, the rules and regulations, which were not supposed to be mandatory, should have been given a wide and common-sense interpretation. For the sake of peace and harmony it was sometimes neces snry to put the rules- overboard, but this the association had failed to do in trying unsuccessfully to get around a difficult point. If this sort of thing persisted it would wreck any co-opera-tion they might hope'to have in the sport on the harbour. . Mr W. Sell (Vauxhall Club) said that there was no rule covering the point, and that therefore there should have been no comment on such a rule being elastic. . Mr Geddes: All the more reason why tho association should have left the matter alone, >’

“CLEAN SPORT” FOULED. “ Sailing is said to be the cleanest sport; it was until recently, but now it certainly is not, though I hope it will be in the future,” declared Mr H. Watson (Port Chalmers Club). He criticised the association’s action in connection with the racing at the South Island championship regatta, when the committee controlling that fixture was told that if it accepted an entry from Miss Syndicate the support of contestants of affiliated clubs would be withdrawn. Mr Watson contended that at a citizens’ regatta the association had no right to interfere with anyone who desired to enter his boat for a competition. Mr W. Riddell (North-east Harbour Club); If association delegates had been given definite instructions as to how to vote in the matter —and I take it all clubs did this —(loud replies of “ No!”) —the trouble would never have occurred. Press reports indicate that the association was unanimous in all its decisions, and by criticising the association you are consequently criticising your own delegates, who have apparently let you down. . So what do you intend to do about them? Voices: Sack them! “ The association’s attitude right through the piece has been very childish,” said Mr C, Pettitt (Vauxhall Club). “ Its-'responsibility _ finished when it refused to forward Miss Syndicate’s challenge for the Masport Cup. Thereafter it poked its nose in where it was not wanted and should never have been.”

Mr W. Rowlands (North-east Harbour Club) said that the association’s vote on the case had certainly been carried out before clubs had been consulted. He was disappointed that this meeting had been aclled, as an account of it would doubtless be telegraphed through the Press all over the Dominion, and the yachtsmen of Otago would be laughed at. Whatever the association had done was a reflection on the clubs, which appointed tlieir own delegates, who were supposed to act according to instructions. Mr Sell rose to a point of order, asking whether Mr Rowlands was speaking as an association member or as a member of the North-east Harbour Club.

Mr Rowlands; I was speaking as a boat owner.

Mr T. Anderson (Port Chalmers Club) said that he would like to have seen the matter settled amicably without this meeting, of whose deliberations he asked: “ Where will it get us?” Voices; Nowhere.

Mr H. Collett (Port Chalmers Club): It will take us somewhere all right; we shall see at the next election. Mr Anderson also contended that the whole yachting fraternity would be made a laughing stock. One man had been accused of leading another and hoodwinking the whole association. It would have been better to find the man at fault and deal with him. Voices; We can’t find him. He is not here. Mr Geddes said that men who had given good service to the sport had ruined their reputation through their action in this matter. Mr D. Jenkins (commodore of the North-east Harbour Club) agreed with previous speakers that the rules and regulations should have been put aside to deal with the matter. ONE OF THE MANY MOTIONS ACCEPTED. When no other speakers came forward a motion was asked for, whereupon Mr Geddes moved —“ That this meeting stand adjourned for a month to give the an opportunity of reviewing the question, after which another meeting of yachtsmen be held if required.” Mr S. Kennedy (Vauxhall Club) seconded. ' Mr Sell said that as the association was at present constituted it could not lawfully deal with any matter. A discussion ensued regarding the association’s refusal to admit delegates from the Vauxhall Club, appointed in place of those who had been “ sacked ” for their action in voting against the registration of Miss Syndicate. Sflme members claimed that they could not hope to get anywhere until the clubs’ annual meetings, when an, effective remedy would be devised. Mr Watson said that such a- move would allow those who hadbeen in error “to slip” out of office without taking the consequences of their mistake. Mr Watson moved as an amendment, which was seconded by Mr Collett—- “ That the clubs hold meetings and instruct their delegates to call a meeting of the association to pass a resolution that Miss Syndicate be granted a number unconditionally.” Both the amendment and the motion were defeated, after which Mr Camp moved-—" That this meeting of yachtsmen views with disfavour the unsporting attitude adopted by the association in refusing Miss Syndicate a number.'-' Mr Thorn seconded this motion, which was carried. A further motion by Mr P. C. Brown (North-east Harbour Club) to the effect that the matter be brought before tho annual meetings of the clubs was held to be unwarranted. ,

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ESD19350718.2.129

Bibliographic details

Evening Star, Issue 22084, 18 July 1935, Page 13

Word Count
1,844

NO BEEFED SAILS Evening Star, Issue 22084, 18 July 1935, Page 13

NO BEEFED SAILS Evening Star, Issue 22084, 18 July 1935, Page 13