DISPUTE OVER M.C.C. TOUR

Hawera Star, Volume LI, 24 May 1932, Page 3

DISPUTE OVER M.C.C. TOUR

SUGGESTIONS OF DISCOURTESY,

NO COMMENT IN DOMINION.

(By Telegiaph— p ress Association.) CHRISTCHURCH, May 23. The New Zealand Cricket Council officials decline to comment concerning the controversy over the M.C.C. tour. Their attitude, it is believed, is to avoid adding fuel to the fire.

The chairman of the New Zealand Cricket Council (Mr E. B. Caygill) and the secretary (Mr W. H. Win so r) would neither confirm nor deny the statement nor make any comment on it at all when approached by a Christchurch “Sun” reporter on Saturday regarding the “News Chronicle’s” story that the Australian Board of Cricket Control was rude to the New Zealand Cricket Association’s representative at a conference on the extension of the English team’s tour to New Zealand. There is stated to be, however, at least some truth in the “sensational revelations,” though it is questioned whether the publication of the inside story will improve the relations among the international governing bodies of cricket. The history of the trouble dates back to the New Zealand team’s tour of England last winter. Mr A. T. DonnelTy, who was then chairman of the management committee of the New Zealand Cricket Council, accompanied tne team on part of its tour, and took the opportunity to make representations to the Marvlobone"'Cricket- Club that English teams yisiting Australia should have their programmes extended to include a visit to New Zealand. The Marylebone Cricket Club, impressed with the representations, passed • these on to the Australian Board of Control, suggesting that the tour of the English team this summer should be extended to New ZealandEarly in January Mr Winsor, representing the New Zealand Cricket Council, waited on the Australian Board of Control in Melbourne, and placed a re quest along those lines before 1 the boaid. The “News Chronicle” says that at that meeting Mr "Winsor was given only a few minutes to state his case, being “most rudely received.” This is a first published statement of the nature of the proceedings at that conference. . Mr Winsor is the only man in Christchurch who knows what really happened there, but he has made no public statement since his return, and declined to discuss the question. It is known, however, that the An*, tralian Board of Control was certainly not pacifically disposed toward the request for an extension of the English tour, and, in fact, subsequently refused to agree to it, though the M.C.C. has since insisted that the tour should be extended to include New Zealand. Whether, however, Mr Winsor was -just formally received by the Australian Board of Control, allowed to state his case, and then told that, a decision would be communicated to him in tlie way that ■deputations arc often received, or whether the Australian Board of Control entered into a full and sympathetic discussion of the subject with him in a spirit of willingness, to co-operate, or whether the Australian Board of Control told him off-hand that a decision had alreadv been made and that he could read it in the newspapers, as the cabled story suggests, is a point on which it is impossible to get anything like definite and authentic information. . ■ Generally, however ,there is a feeling among people highly placed in cricket affairs that the Australian Board ot ] Control did not go out of its way to help the New Zealand Cricket Council, and that Mr Winsor was given only a very brief and formal hearing when he met the board in Melbourne. Several enthusiasts who told a reporter that they would not be surprised if the “News Chronicle’s”. story was true, however, regretted .that it had been published. The relations between the M.C.C., the A.B.C. and the N.Z.C.C. had been rather delicate over a few months, they said, and publication of this story would not help to improve the feeling between the New. Zealand and Australian bodies on this rather touchy subject. . The refusal of members of the New Zealand Council to discuss the matter publiclv, a reported gathered—though they would not say so—was partly dictated by a desire to bury the past.