THE RANFURLY SHIELD.

Manawatu Standard, Volume LV, Issue 243, 11 September 1935, Page 14

THE RANFURLY SHIELD.

STATEMENT BY CANTERBURY. Per Press Association.' CHRISTCHURCH, Sept. 10. Objection to remarks at the last meeting of the Now Zealand Rugby Union made by Mr W. J. Wallace, a member, and Mr A. E. Neilson, the. secretary, criticising Canterbury’s actions during the times when it lias held the Ranfurly Shield, was taken by members of the Canterbury Rugby Union at a meeting. It was reported last week that Mr Neilson had claimed that Canterbury had turned Wellington down, and that Mr Wallace had said that Canterbury “seems a bit scared of Wellington, whom it sidetracked two years ago.” It was to these remarks that exception was Mr J. T. Burrows, former selector of the Canterbury representative team during a long series of Ranfurly Shield matches, said lie thought that the chairman should make a statement to the newspapers explaining the Ranfurly Shield arrangements, because some members of the New Zealand Union had made some astonishing statements.

Mr H. E. Davis said Mr Neilson should be asked for an explanation. Mr Neilson was merely the paid secretary of the New Zealand Union, and as his job was to attend to his secretarial duties he should attend to that job and not criticise the actions of affiliated unions (Hear 1 hear!). Mr Neilson should be asked to withdraw his statements, which wore uncalled for and most unjust to the Canterbury Union. Mr R. Britton: There seems to be a lot of pot-hunting in the attitude of some- North Island Unions. It is like chasing a block of wood. Canterbury has played the game and has not hunted the shield. Mr D. I. Macdonald: It is not as though Wellington has beaten every team in New Zealand by 30 points or so. Actually, its . record. against South Island teams is nothing startling. It beat a “crocked” Canterbury team, was lucky, to beat Southland, and then just beat Otago by one point. The discussion ended when it was decided that the chairman should make a statement to the newspapers after the meeting. The chairman (Dr W. S. Seed) explained to the Press that when Canterbury had last held the Ranfurly Shield Wellington had refused a choice of four Saturday dates. Wellington at that time could have rearranged its

dates so as to play Hawke s Bay on the dav the North Island v. South Island match was played, and that would have left Wellington with a freo date to play Canterbury. Hawke s Bay could have taken up the corresponding date by playing Poverty Bay. The committee decided to accept Taranaki’s challenge for the Ranfurly Shield on September 28, the one vacant date in tbe union’s representative programme. The union had received challenges from Wellington, Hawke’s Bay, Taranaki, and Ashburton, and at that stage there was only September 28 to be allotted, provided Canterbury held the shield. The New Zealand Union was asked for an opinion concerning what action should be taken, but it referred the question back to the Canterbury Union, which made its decision to-night.