FINANCING CRICKET

Northern Advocate, 14 August 1931, Page 4

FINANCING CRICKET

UNSOUND SUGGESTION. (Special to “Northern • Advocate.”) WELLINGTON, This Day. “The suggestion is. not sound) and there is no good reason why the fo.ur associations should be paidfilOO-a year each, with the New Zealand Cricket Council in its present position,” said Mr P. B. Broad, chairman of the. Wellington Qricket Association. - Mr Broad was commenting upon an Auckland suggestion that as the present cricket tour o,f England appears likely to yield a surplus the council should take the £6,700 profit from the Art Union now invested as a guarantee to the shareholders in New Zealand Cricket Limited, make the sum *■ up to £7OOO, re-invest it fit 6 per cent j and pay each of the four majot. associations £IOO a year each, towards-their coaching expenses. Such action would result in the immediate reengagement of Wensley, the Auckland coach of last year, it was pointed out. " The need of the council was greater than that of the associations) said Mr Broad, who gave his opinion that the £O7OO should certainly be set aside, hut by the controlling authorities for its own purposes. A suggestion such as the present one was most unfair to the council, he said, for that body, needed a fund of at least £IO,OOO before it could feel that it was financially well placed. Such a fund was now within sight, and- there was no reason to devote it to the financing of provincial association, which should be able to look after, themselves. . In the case of the Canterbury association, there was a body that was wealthier than the New Zealand Council. Canterbury had £9OOO capital, and why should it receive £IOO a year from the New Zealand Council? The provincial associations had not yet felt the pinch of the bad times, and would not need to do anything for some time yet, said the Wellington chairman. In any case, they were able to look after them • selves.