AMATEURISM IN GOLF

Hawera Star, Volume LIV, 28 April 1934, Page 8

AMATEURISM IN GOLF

PLAYER=WRITER QUESTION RULINGS FROM PARENT BODY TOURING EXPENSES PAYMENT. The secretary of the Ne-.v Zealand Golf Association, Mr G. -O. Sutton, submitted to the Royal and Ancient Golf Club of St. Andrews at the end of last year certain questions relative to the writing of newspaper articles in connection with golf, and the following reply lias been received from the Royal and Ancient Golf Club of St. Andrews: . The following are your questions and the answers of my committee: Would a player violate the conditions of amateur status i u (I).Wciting the leaders in a monthly golf paper unsigned Answer: No. Would it make any difference if they were signed Answer: No; provided that by his writing he does not exploit his skill at the game, or allow his skill to be exploited for profit. (2) —Contributing monthly . or weekly summaries of the doings iu a club to a golfing or other journal Answer: No; provided that, if signed, he does not by his wafting exploit his skill at the game, or allow his skill to be exploited for profit. (3) —Weekly or monthly articles in the daily Press, signed or unsigned, commenting on local golf news? Answer ; No; provided than by liis 1 writing ihe does not exploit his skill at the game, or allow his skill to be exploited for profit. (4) —Playing in a tournament and writing critical comment in the daily Press, articles, signed? Answer: This would be a contravention of 'Clause 3 of the conditions of amateur status. Would it make anv difference if they were not signed. Answer: Yes'; provided they were written under a description from which the player could not be recognised. A further decision received by the New Zealand Golf Association from the Royal and Ancient Golf Club of St. Andrews by the same mail relates to the payments of travelling expenses and is as follows: X beg to inform you that the championship committee of the Royal and Ancient Golf Club of St. Andrews has adopted the following note to the conditions of amateur status: “Without forfeiting their amateur status. players may receive their travelling and hotel expenses when representing their country, county, club or similar body in team matches, provided such expenses are paid, by the body they represent; or when representing their country in a tour overseas, provided such expenses are paid through the authority controlling golf in their country.” IMPORTANT DEVELOPMENT:

There lias, been an important development, one which appears to have escaped general notice, regarding the new amateur definition recently issued by the Royal and Ancient Golf Club (says a writer ip a London paper). While St. Andrews has made it reasonably plain as to the type Of golfer no longer eligible to" compete in amateur events, no indication is given as _to how the iaw is to be enforced. Having sole jurisdiction over the amateur championship, the R. and A. will be able to reject the entrv of any suspect, whether he be a golf-ball traveller, a whisky representative, a motor-car dealer, an insurance agent, or any man who is obviously, and flagrantly, exploiting liis skill as a. golfer. But what of the _ hundreds of open amateur events held throughout the country during the season?. Who is going to take the responsibility of saying to Snooks, who conies along with liis entry hoping to lift the cup and to lay hands on the {sweepstake, “No thanks, we don’t want you. this is an event for amateurs, not for semi-pro-fessionals?” Snooks, who is present primarily, to push some particular type of ball, wins the cup, pockets the cash, and, when he has gone, the committee twiddling their thumbs, look at ’ ope another and say. “There you are.; but what, could be done?” A SIGNED DECLARATION.

A good deal could be done, but none ' seems to have the courage to do it. Snooks turns up at some other place, and, without q whisper, of protest, repeats the process. In order to deal with this problem, the Joint Advisory Council of the four British Golf Unions j has deeided'to recommepd to the unions !to obtain a signed declaration from intending competitors in open amateur events in regard to their eligibility under the new definition. This does not strike me as being a very courageous attitude. Not only lias. the. council refrained from expressing any. opinion on the R. and A.’s new definition,, or indicated to the public how it intends to interpret the definition, but it has thrown the responsibility of interpretation upon the player. He will be called upon to sign a declaration that he regards himself as eligible to take part in amateur golf, and that, in his opinion, the provisions, of the R. and A.’s pronouncement ex-‘ amplifying cases of players not eligible I to compete as amateurs, are not applicable in his case. Several prominent players are involved. Now that he is a full-fledged journalist, and on the pay■roll of a Scottish daily paper, J. McLean will, it is to be imagined have, no difficultv in signing his name to.such a declaration. For others who have not Been so fortunate as to skip from a golf-ball firm to the editorial department of a newspaper, it is a rather different matter. Each must interpret faithfully, or as faithfully as his conscience will permit. the igovening -‘'clause debarring from playing in amateur events, “those who,' being employed by firms, companies, or individuals interested in the mnaufacture, or sale, of golfing goods, play in golf tournaments, or competitions, with the object of furthering their employers’ interests. The player himself is the only person who can say whether he competes in tournaments “with the object of furthering his, employers’ interests, • oi tor his own personal pleasure. If the latter, then lie may attach his signature to the document in perfect good faith. In the case of the suspect, it is a mixture o,f both. While enjoying himself he is also doing his best for the firm that is employing him, and supplying him with the wherewithal to attend and play in tournaments. But is the pseudo-amateur going to get the unions and the I*. and A. to swallow Ins declaration that, in face of the new definition, lie is entitled to play in amateur events? In some instances that occur to me, I doubt it very much. Bv reason of the action of the unions, there is the prospect of a player signing the declaration, and then having it flung back in his face as. much as to say, “Your’e a liar.” It is a horrible thought. ON THE BORDER-LINE. It is to be imagined that players on the border-line, rather than risk such an indignity, will first submit their casej to the union, and in all probability they j will get a hint as to what the officials! thing about them. I fail entirely to ap-. preciate the point of the objection that 1

if , is. not, :rair to the player to leave so vital a matter to his conscience. Is not the whole game of. golf based on the honesty, and integrity, of each, individual player ? It is left to him alone to say how many shots he has taken in a. bunker; to tell his opponent that he has moved the ball and "so incurred a penalty, or that he Jias played the wrong hall. Unless he. is a cheat, devoid of the instincts of a spoilsman, the knowledge is not withheld: As a sport, golf could never have stood the test of time had not each plwrer been able to implicity to trust the other. And it is because, he can be trusted, that no insurmountable difficulties are likely to be. met in the matter of the union declaration as to his amateur status.