ONE BIG UNION

Manawatu Times, Volume XLIX, Issue 2715, 24 June 1925, Page 4

ONE BIG UNION

Manawatu-Horowhenua Rugby Fusion CONFIRMED BY NORTHERN DELEGATES. In yesterday’s Issue was reported the fact of the carrying on Monday night, by 27 votes to 10. of a resolution by the Horowhenua Rugby Football Union confirming the proposals for limited amalgamation with Manawatu (for the purpose of representative matches). hast night, a special general meeting of delegates of the Manawatu Rugby Union was held, presided over by Mr. A. Hannay. There were present. in addition to those referred to in the report of the executive meeting. Messrs. R, McNae and R. Richardson (Oroua Sub-Union), J. M. Croucher and A. IC. Drew (Te Kawau), W. M. Crystall, E. H. Gylos. F. D Mackie and P. A. Meehan. The chairman stated that the object of the meeting was to consider the amalgamation proposals of which all present, were cognisant and if approved, to confirm them. He was of opinion the fusion with Horowhenua was the finest thing that had ever happened to football in both districts. Equal to Anything-. As they were aware, the tendency wias for the larger unions to confine their representative fixtures to themselves, and the Manawatu was not big enough to play against them on its own. What the Union was out for was big football and the amalgamation with Horowhenua would enable them to put a team in the field that could stand up against the representatives of any Union in New Zealand. The outlook of the sub-unions (Oroua and Te Kawau) would be greatly improved too, and the speaker, in referring to recent matches in which they had figured was fully convinced they players worthy of being brought out to compete in the big representative matches of the future. The proposals showed that a fair thing had been done as far as Horowhenua was concerned, Manawatu having a slight advantage in the matter of representation. Mr. Hannay hoped the meeting realised this was the greatest step that had ever been taken for Rugby in this district. He then formally moved that the arrangements made by the delegations of the two unions be confirmed. This was seconded by Mr. A. S. Faire, a vice-president of the M.R.F.U., who took a leading part in the negotiations. Oroua and Te Kawau. Mr. J. M. Croucher (Tc Kawau) asked would it not be possible for the sub-unions to have representation on the amalgamated union. The chairman remarked that eventually tho position would be much the same as existed in Wanganui, when four sub-unions, Manawatu, Horowhenua, Oroua, Te Kawau, would be affiliated to a district parent body, in which case the sub-unions would be greatly benefited. At the present time, however, it would be impossible to alter the representation now arranged.

Mr. Faire pointed out that the controlling body’s functions wore practically confined to representative matches and that therefore the interests of the sub-unions were safeguarded by way of selection. Otherwise, the amalas'amtion undoubtedly left the sub-unions out of consideration.

Mr. A. K. Drew (Te Kawau) said the general feeling among delegates in the sub-unions was that t-hey should have some representation. Was it not possible for one of the Manawatu six committeemen to bo appointed (a town resident if necessary) to represent the sub-unions? Mr. H. Crawford did not consider this necessary, as he thought all six would, in fact, bo representing the sub-unions. Direct Representation. Mr. Lyon thought the question of direct representation on the amalgamated union was taking too big a step. If the sub-unions were represented on the M.R.F.U., as they should be. they would have a voice in appointing the union’s delegates to the amalgamated council. The speaker suggested ths best course was to adopt the proposals in toto and lAtvc the matter of representation of the sub-unions to the future. dealing, however, with representation on the present Manawatu Union, as soon as practicable. Mr. C. W. White supported this view and said the sub-unions would have nothing to lose, whether represented on the combined committee or not, as the Manawatu representation thereon iwould see that sub-union interests were safeguarded.

Mr. R. McNae (Oroua) agreed to all that had been said regarding fostering the sub-unions, but supported Te Kawau's two spokesmen in the matter of their having some representation on the amalgamted union, While ho was there to support wholeheartedly the proposals, he said he would like the meeting to know the sub-unions did desire representation, could it bo arranged. Mr. Faire was of opinion that Te Kawau and Oroua should be more'intimately connected with the Manawatu Rugby Union and it would be in the interests of Rugby were there more co-ordination between the three bodies. Ho had no doubt Te Kawau and Oroua would, in the near future,, have representation on the M.R.F.U., and felt they could not get over the difficulty of representation on the amalgamated Union except by working It internally. Mr. J. M. Crouchor (Te Kawau) supported the proposals generally, subunion representation being the only matter in issue. Tenure of Grounds. Mr J. R. Hardie was very pleased the amalgamation had been brought about, 1 as it would improve football in Horowhenua, Manawatu and the Sub-Unions, and enable them to place a strong representative side in the held. He thought the combined committee’s first duty was tp see to the

securing of the tenures of all grounds under its jurisdiction. The chairman suggested that arrangements be made to amend the rules in the ordinary way (by notice of motion) to at least give the subunions representation on the M.R.F.U. He was delighted to see their representatives present and to hear their views on the successful culmination of the efforts to bring about the amalgamation. The motion was then put and carried amid applause. Mr Lyon moved that as an act of courtesy, the Sub-Unions be Invited each to appoint a direct representative to the M.R.F.U. without voting power, until the by-laws could be amended in accordance with the rules. Mr A. H. McNao said this would give great pleasure to OToua and go a long way towards meeting its wishes in the matter of representation. Mr Drew voiced similar sentiments on To Kaiwau’s behalf and was of opinion, in answer to a question by Mr White, from the front benches, as to why the Sub-Union's wanted'representation, that they were at least equally entitled to a seat on the M.R.F.U. committee as the Primary Schools and Referees’ Associations. (Laughter). Mr White: "I have been misunderstood.” (Laughter). .Mr Crouches: “That’s what you get for sitting in a front seat. (Laughter).