FRIENDS AGAIN!

Greymouth Evening Star, 5 December 1928, Page 6

FRIENDS AGAIN!

WEST COAST CRICKETERS. RESIGNATIONS NOT ACCEPTED. The differences of opinion among members of the West Coast Cricket Association, which culminated in the resignation of three members of the Management Committee, Messrs A. H. Greenwood (Chairman), L. F. Casey (Treasurer), and T. Clarke (Secretary), were satisfactorily adjusted last evening, when the trouble was fully discussed. The outcome was a vote of confidence in the committee, and the withdrawal of the resignations. There was an attendance of seventeen at the meeting.

Mr Greenwood asked that another Chairman be appointed in view of his Mr T. Ryan moved, and Mr Cooper seconded, that Mr Greenwood take the chart for the meeting. Mi’ Greenwood declined, whereupon Mr B. Ryan pointed out that it seemed the general wish that he should remain in the chair. Mr Greenwood stated that, as his resignation had been handed in, he thought it would be fair to all concerned if someone else took the chair. Mr, Casey proposed that Mr Hunter preside, but the latter declined. Mr T. Ryan moved that Mr Patterson, as Vice-President, take the chair until the resignations were-dealt with Mr Mullins said there seemed to be some sort of a grievance, and Mr. Greenwood knew the ins and outs of the thing better than anyone else. That was why he did not wish to preside, replied Mr Greenwood. Mr Ryan’s resolution was. carried, and Mr Patterson took the chair, being given an assurance that it was only a temporary Capacity. Mr Casey presented the financial statement, showing £33 9/5 in the bank ahd 11/3 cash in hand, and this was approved. The only other business was the matter of the resignations. REASONS FOR RESIGNATION. Mr Hunter said that he would like a statement from the Chairman, secretary, and treasurer as to their reasons for resigning. “I will give my reasons,” agreed Mr Greenwood. “First, I would like to state that, a year ago last annual meeting, new rules were brought before the Association. Every club was represented at that annual meeting by delegates, and those rules were unanimously agreed to. The rules state that our annual meetings shall be held on certain dates, that clubs shall be notified of those meetings, and their delegates are sent to those meetings. The Management Committee is selected from delegates who attend the annual meeting. Every club was notified, in accordance with the rules, and, also in accordance with the rules, the Management Committee was selected from the delegates who were present. The Management Committee has carried on to the best of its ability, but does not seem to have given satisfaction.

“The chief bone of contention has arisen from the fact of both Saturday and Sunday cricket being in vogue for the senior competition,” continued Mr Greenwood. “This is not the first year it has been in vogue. The proposal in the first place that Saturday ciicket be made compulsory was made two years ago by Mr Cooper (Star captain), but unfortunately the Star Club said he acted without their approval in the matter. At the request of the Star and Cobden Clubs, a special meeting was called to deal with the matter, and it was made optional whether the clubs played on Saturday or Sunday, according to mutual agreement. United B. played on Saturday, and United A. on Sunday. That worked quite satisfactorily, clubs mostly getting equally good teams out on Saturdays as they did on Sundays. This year, no i mentio n was-made regarding Saturday or Sunday senior competition at the annual meeting, arjd according to cricket law, the existing state of affairs continued. Afterwards, the Star Club.said they could not play on Saturdays. One game went by default It was later suggested by myself that a compromise be effected, and that a game be played on Saturdays and Sundays, alternately. That was agreed to, by the Star delegate. “Later, the Star secretary, who is a member of the Management Committee, withdrew the Star juniors from the competition, and the Fixtures Committee therefore did not consider them further. ' Then we heard that he had no authority to do so. It was asked that the Star juniors be readmitted, and that was agreed to. Whilst we were at work on the pitch at Victoria Park, this mattei - was discussed. Mr Cooper asked me about making fixtures for the Star juniors, and that was agreed upon. The matter of Pascoe, who had already played one match for United A., was mentioned, and Mr Cooper said that he was not financial, would not’ travel, and the Uniteds could have him. United played Pascoe against Stars, and, aftei- the game was over, a protest was sent in regarding the playing of Pascoe. It was decided, under Rule 21, seeing the Star juniors had withdrawn and Pascoe was not given a game with the seniors, and after Mr Cooper saying the United could have him, that the best the Stars could hope for was a replay. That was decided upon, but the Stars would not give the replay. That seemed to me to be an ABSOLUTE DEFIANCE of the Management Committee. There is only one thing—we were either right or wrong. If we were right, we want power to carry on. If we were wrong, we want someone else put in to do better. I would like to say that the Management Committee has been stated to me as being run by the Uniteds for the Uniteds, and the Stars were not getting a fair deal, that the delegate system would be better, and other things have evidently not pleased all concerned. My own position is that of a past player who loves the game, and works for the good of the game, devoting a fair amount of time to it which I might perhaps profitably, but not more pleasurably, occupy in other ways. If anyone else is better suited for the position, then he should in the interests of the game, be put into the position of Chairman As regards the Management Committee being a failure, I would just like to notify you of one or two of its failures. Last year, a Canterbury team came to the Coast foi* the first time; a West Coast team travelled over the

Ranges for the first time; this year, we have games on the cards from Canterbury, Ashburton, and Auckland teams, all during the racing carnival s week. Never in the history of Coast .cricket was the game so well catered for. Junior and third grade Canter-, bury teams are coming on Januaiy 9., A ground has been secured at the Park for £lO per year. The Association is committed to these things, and, if our resignations are accepted by you and another committee is put in, I for one am willing to help that committee in regard to the obligations the Association has entered into. What the Management Committee has done, it has done in good faith. I think that the Stars should have shown a sporting spirit, and should have replayed the game that was put before them to replay. They could then have appealed t'o the New Zealand Council. Instead of that, they preferred to hold ■up the game. The only thing for the Management Committee to do was to resign, and to ask for the confirmation or otherwise of this meeting. If reappointed, we will carry on to the best of our ability. If we have done wrong, we should be ousted, and better men put in.”

THE DELEGATE SYSTEM. Mr Casey, speaking with reference to the delegate system, pointed out that New Zealand cricket, from Auckland to the Bluff so far as the centres Rnd most of the minor Associations were concerned, was controlled in the same manner as the West Coast Association—by a Management Committee, and not by direct club representation. The minute book showed what the position was in 1926-1927, when each club had a representative. Apart from senior clubs, there were seven junior clubs with one delegate each. Eleven meetings were held, and the junior representatives attended as follow:—November 15, one; November 28, three; December 13, three; January 10, two; January 24, nil; February 7, nil; February 22, one; March, two meetings, nil; March 20, one; April 4, one. Now the Management Committee was told that the juniors wanted representation. They had not shown in'the past that they z did. What object could there be in putting men on the committee if they were not interested in the game? In the face of those figures, someone now wanted to say that the delegate system had been a success. Mr Mullins: What distance were they away from the town? Mr Casey: The same as they are now. Mr Mullins contended that there were more junior teams in the town now, and it would be easier for delegates to attend. A point of order was raised by Mr T. Ryan, who said that Mr Casey should be allowed to complete his remarks without interruption. Mr Casey said he would make his statement before replying to questions' Ho did not think Mr Mullins had any right to speak at that meeting. The Star Club were allowed only two delegates, but there seemed to be three present. Mr B. Ryan: Who are you representing?

“The executive,” replied Mr Casey. Continuing, he stated that the members of the Management Committee were appointed because no one else would accept the positions. That was a well-known fact. Three out of seven delegates were junior representatives ‘ —Messrs Cooper, Harper, and Nightingale. Mr Cooper had resigned. Either he was not satisfied with the treatment they were getting, or he was not doing justice to cricket. At this year’s annual meeting, only three junior clubs were represented. If the Management Committee had not been satisfactory, why did not those present at the annual meeting rule it out? The new rules were adopted, and he contended that the Management Committee had been a success. If the delegate system ■ had been perfectly 'satisfactory, it was natural to think that there would have been objection to a change, but the vote in favour of the appointment of a Management Committee was unanimous. LETTERS IN THE “STAR.” , Mr Casey referred to the fact that letters written by Mr Cooper had appeared in the “Star.” That newspaper had also published a leader, saying that the hatchet should be buried. Mr Casey equired whether he would be -allowed to reply to Mr Cooper at that ineetirig. - Mr . Cooper: I have taken up the matter on my own behalf, and would rather not discuss it at this meeting. 'The Management Committee had resigned before any letter appeared in print. Mi* Casey declared that, if not allowed to reply at that meeting, he would reply through the Press. The Chairman said that it was a question for those present to decide. Mr T. Ryan expressed the opinion that Mr Casey was entitled to reply to the letter, either at the meeting or through the Press. If the hatchet was to be buried, said Mr Casey, it would be better to take ■his reply at once, and get it over. Mr Cooper rose to speak again, but several members raised a point of order. “If this man—l beg his pardon —if Mr Casey wishes to pull the letter about, I am easy!” declared Mr Coop'er. Mr T. Ryan moved that Mr Casey be allowed to make an immediate reply, and the resolution was carried on the voices. After reading Mr Cooper’s letter, Mr Casey said that he had not the faintest idea as to whether the remainder of the committee intended to resign or not. He had not replied to that point raised by Mr Cooper, as he did not think it was worth while. If Mr Cooper was not convinced by the figures in the minute book regarding the delegate system, then he was hard to convince. He would leave it at that. Mr Casey made further statements, on the lines of his previous remarks (published in the “Star”). He Was. prepared, he said, to swear by declaration that notices of the annual meeting were sent to all the clubs, and the meeting was also advertised in the newspapers. The Star Club was very lax in not holding its annual meeting before the annual* meeting of the Association was held. When clubs did not take sufficient interest in the matter to hold their annual meetings and appoint their representatives, there was no other course for the Association to take but to appoint representatives for them. The Management Committee did not deal with teams, but with clubs. Each team was not entitled to representation, but each club was. If each club had a representative, there would be about 30 on the Association. Mr Casey contended

that Mr Cooper had definitely stated that Pascoe was not wanted by the Star Club. Mr Cooper’s moral duty was to have said that the Star Club did not agree to his statement, and that the Club would not agree to Uniteds playing Pascoe. Having given his consent, however, even without the authority of his Club, Mr Cooper should have advised his club to let ■Pascoe play. Instead of that, and during the match,, he merely said to the speaker: “You know the rules.” That was no reply for one sport to make to another. Mr Cooper would not agree to United playing another man (Denton) in place of Pascoe. “I am perfectly aware that Mr Cooper had no right to speak on behalf of the Star Club,” added Mr Casey, “but on the West Coast things are not run as they are in the centres, and you get very little in writing.” The attitude adopted by Mr Cooper was not fair either to the Uniteds or to Pascoe. He could easily have got over the difficulty. Mr Cooper knew perfectly well that the notices of meetings were not sent to individual members, but to the club secretaries. Mr Clarke, in reply to the Chairman, said he did not think he could add anything further to the remarks made by Messrs Greenwood and Casey. “TOO THIN-SKINNED.” After listening to Messrs Greenwood, Casey, and Clarke, said Mr Cooper, jie would like to state that anything he had said in the newspaper was purely his own opinion, and was not Said on behalf o'f the Star Club. Any correspondence that had appeared did so after the resignation of the Management Committee. He did not think jany reasonable explanation had been '■given for the resignations. It appeared to be only a matter of the Star Plub’s protest. The Club had the right to go to the New Zealand Council if it chose. The club had never objected only by refusing to play. His ppinions had been expressed by the letters to the newspaper, but they appeared after the resignations were put in. No reasonable excuse had been £iven for the resignations. Unless any controlling body was able to stand ‘criticism from any individual, they were too thin-skinned to carry on. His criticism had been purely his own views, and not from the Star Club. He did not intend to discuss the matter of Pascoe at that meeting. Ho might have said that Uniteds could have Pascoe, because he was not financial and was not prepared to travel. If the Uniteds were prepared to take a man under those conditions, the onus was upon the United Club if a protest arose. A club had the right to appeal on any decision of the Management Committee.

“But not the right to refuse to play!” retorted Mr Greenwood.

Mr. Cooper: It is absolutely ridiculous to say that a match can be replayed on a protest. It has never been known in New Zealand or Australia. “I question that,” said Mr Casey.

Mi’ Cooper: I think this Association side-stepped the issue. That is my opinion. The whole thing seems to hang on the Star Club. I would rather have seen the match awarded to United than have it replayed. The only thing the Star Club did was to refuse to replay that match. If the Association is going to listen to hearsay or to personal opinion, it will never get very far. It should b$ prepared to accept a little criticism. A VOTE OF CONFIDENCE. Mr Davis pointed out that, if better progress were not made they would be there until midnight. The resignations were apparently due to the fact that the -Star Club refused to play a. particular match. They ,could take the feeling of the. meeting as to the action of the Star Club. In order to get something tangible to go on, he would move: “That this meeting considers the Star Club was not right in its action.” If they decided that the Star Club was right, it would mean that the Management Committee was considered to be wrong. Otherwise, it would. amount to a vote of confidence in the Management Committee. The resolution was seconded by Mr Whiteside. Mr Mullins wanted to know why the Management Committee should give two divergent decisions, but the Chairman ruled him out of order. Mr Rear: If a man is not financial, he should not be accepted by another club. Mr Greenwood: Neither should he bo accepted by his own club. Mr T. Ryan pointed out that the rules called for the “posting” of the names of unfinancial members. The resolution was carried on a show of hands, by ten votes to one If the Star Club had done anything wrong, said Mr Cooper, they were quite prepared to acknowledge it. So far as he was concerned, however, he would not take one word back that he had written in the newspaper. Mr Hunter asked whether the Star Club still had the right to send a protest to the New Zealand Council, and answered in the affirmative by the Chairman. Mr T. Ryan moved that the resignations of Messrs Greenwood, Casey, and Clarke be refused. It had been stated that they had not given their reasons for resigning, but he thought they had done so. What had happened was absolutely a vote of noconfidence in them. The committee decided upon a certain thing, but the leading club in the competition held a gun at their heads and said, “We won’t play!” The committee did what any sports would do. They resigned, and called a special meeting. Mr Ryan expressed the opinion that too much space had been given to Mr Cooper’s letters. ' No notice should have been taken of them. The interest Mr Cooper had taken in the game was well known. He could have been on the Management Committee this year, but was not looking for work. Outsiders would not come in and help in the work of entertaining visiting teams. That all fell back on the Management Committee, and he did not think the work could be in better hands. If there was any illfeeling, let them, as the “Star” leader advised, bury it now, once and for all. The resolution was seconded by Mr Mullins.

AN ANGRY MEMBER. Mr Cooper asked whether he could reply to Mr Ryan, but the Chairman ruled him out of order. “He can certainly be personal to me,” complained Mr Cooper, “but I cannot reply to him. I can tell you what he has done for cricket, and what I have done!” Grasping his hat, Mr Cooper rose angrily, and made for the door. “Can I leave the meeting?” he asked the Chairman. “I don’t like a man to abuse me, without the right to reply!”

Several members uttered soothing words, and Mr Cooper resumed his seat. Mr Kear stated that the remark about what Mr Cooper had done for cricket was not justified. He had done much good work to keep the game going. The resolution, that the resignations be refused, was carried, without dissent.

Mr Mullins said lie would like to give an assurance that the Star Club had nothing against the Management Committee as a whole. If the committee was at fault, however, had not the Club the right to chastise them? The committee’s work, on the whole, had been very satisfactoory. The Star Club had simply complained about one matter. One match had been awarded to the protesting team, but the StarUnited match had been ordered to be replayed. The club considered that the committee was inconsistent. Mr Greenwood stated that he was pleased with the tone of the meeting, and he was also very pleased to hear that it was also the opinion of the Star Club that the Management Committee had not done so badly, after all. There were only four clubs in the senior competition, and if the Star Club refused to play the others could not carry on. The only option the committee had was to resign, and go before a general meeting. If the Star Club was willing to work under tlie committee, he for one was willing to carry on. The committee had acted in good faith, and, if it had made a mistake, it was willing to accept the decision of the New Zealand Council The Star Club had the right to appeal to the Council, but not to hold up the competition by refusing to play. Mr Mullins asked why the other competition matches could not have been gone on with. Mr Cooper said he thought there was a little misunderstanding. The protest match, to be replayed, was not a competition match. The Star Club had the right to appeal to the Council, and, if licked, it would take a licking. Mr Greenwood: So will we! Mr F. Costello said that the discussion had gone far enough, and he moved that it be closed.

Mr T. Ryan agreed, and said he took it that cricket would go on in the good old way, and that the hatchet would be buried. Mr Casey said he was quite satisfied to carry on for the remainder of this year. He hoped the next annual meeting would be as fully representative £s the one that evening was, and that positions on the Management Committee would not have to be foisted on to ,men .who did not want them. It was ( also hoped that the clubs would hold their annual meeting in good time, and send delegates along to represent them. WATERSIDERS’ GRIEVANCE Another question, continued Mr. Casey, was the refusal of the Watersiders’ Club to allow the Fixtures Committee to use their ground, even though the club had a bye. Personally, he would not stand for things like that. If the Watersiders did not like to accept the decisions of the committee, would it not be better, in their own interests and the interests of cricket, if they got out? If committees were elected, they should be upheld by clubs. i Mr. Kear, representing the Watersiders, said that the latter fully expected* to go to Brunner last Sunday, but the fixtures were changed, the club did not get a match, and two other teams were given its ground. Fie did not think the club had been well treated. Mr. Nightingale pointed out that the Watersiders were unfortunate enough to have drawn a bye. The same thing might have happened to the other clubs. Mr. Whiteside, on behalf of the Wanderers, said that he would like to express his club’s appreciation of the help given them by the Cobden Club. Another member present said that apparently the Watersiders did not believe in assisting new clubs. Mr. T. Ryan declared that all enthusiasts should remember that cricket was played under certain rules, and they should not write to the newspapers. They must carry on this year under the Management Committee system, and the matter of the delegate system could be discussed at the next annual meeting. Mr. Greenwood said it seemed as if a misunderstanding, more than anything else, had been at the bottom of the trouble. They had a big programme of cricket coming along. Let them put their shoulders to the wheel, and help the 'good old game along. Let them work together as one whole club, for the benefit of cricket on the Coast. They had been unfortunate in losing a good many senior players, who were missed, but at the same time there were great opportunities for the juniors to come along, They would get a good representative team if they forgot their differences and worked together. “They are already forgotten,” said Mr. Casey. Mr. Greenwood: The whole thing, so far as I am concerned, is washed out and finished with. Let us look to the New Year. A vote of thanks was accorded to Mr. Patterson for occupying the chair. SELECTION OF REP. TEAM. The following sixteen players have been selected for practice at the Park this (Wednesday) evening, with a view to selecting the rep. team: Casey, Merriman, Spender, Nightingale, Baldwin, Mclntosh, Clark, Langbien, Knapp, Thomson, Mercer, Eggleton, Dewar, Matthews, Barlow, Cooper. The practice will commence at 6 p.m. JUNIOR FIXTURES. Following are Sunday’s junior fixtures: Star v. Marist B at Park; Marist A v. Cobden at Cobden; Brunner A v. Camerons at Camerons; Rpnanga v. Brunner B at Brunner; Wanderers v. Watersiders at Omoto; Kumara v. Kokiri at Kumara. Kumara to pay expenses; United a. bye. Senior and third grade fixtures will be published to-morrow. >