RUGBY v. NORTHERN UNION.

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume X, Issue 153, 14 June 1920, Page 3

RUGBY v. NORTHERN UNION.

[to ths bditob.l l Sir, —On arrival in Hastings some five years back, I made up my mind to retire absolutely from football circles despite all entreaties I have up till -how remained silent. I have been a .keen follower of the Northern Union code since 1910, and I take strong exception to your correspondent writing notes under the non-de-plume “Rugby” in which he makes the following statement “our national game will never be replaced by any other so-called Rugby football, in which scientific and open football is a lost art and is replaced by a most monotonous off-side handball system.” Now, Sir, it is strange that while these so-called' “Rugby experts” cry the Northern Union game down to the level of mud .they turn in the very next breath and try to “pinch” the said Northern Union rules for the improvement of their own game. To be plain, to play Northern Union under I the New'' Zealand Northern Union Council is a crime and you are sentenced to be a “professional,” but to play the same rules under the NewZealand Rugby are of ocurse a “lily white amateur.” I want to say right here that I know a good deal about amateurism —more than I care to state. The “All Blacks” received whilst on tour in England the sum of 3/- per day, plus expenses, and you know they were amateurs. The Northern Union players receive whilst touring 10;'- per day, plus expenses, a monetary difference of "/- per day, but you will also understand they are “professionals.” When the Northern Union game first started in New Zealand, you will remember the Rugby Union killed it by kindness, that is to say, disqualified any player who played Northern Union. What are they doing to-day I will tell vou —they are what they call reinstating the ex-Northern Union players and above all, trying to “pinch,” as I said before’, the Northern Union rules, even at the risk of breaking away from the English Rugby Union ,their governing body. I could write a lot, Sir, but it would take tin too much of your valuable space, but T would like to point out that there is no Northern Union played in this town at the present time, therefore Rugby has no opposition here. Again, if this so-called “monotonous and handball game” is sii«'h a failure as your correspondent points out how can vou account for the fact that th" said game draws in Svdn<‘v everv Saturday 25.000 to 30.000 people, whilst the Rugbv game draws onlv 3000. Rugby has been a good o’d game, but it must now give way to the ’•ast’v superior rul°s of the new game. Tn conclusion. Sir. I would like to notot out to vonr correspondent that “vulgarity is not wit ” —T am, etc.. AV. J. PENETT.

p « —v o „ will h-vo noticed that the Fn'dirii Northe-n Union team d-ow an nftaprlnnce of fiO nrm "oople in Sydney lari. Saturday.—TT.7.P.