A FOOTBALL FIASCO

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LVI, 24 July 1923, Page 5

A FOOTBALL FIASCO

[To tho Editor.]

Sir. —Some few weeks ago I was foolish j enough to be enticed to the Park to watch a. game which was advertised as i “football” to bo played between “Possibles and Probables.” Instead of the : advertised players there were, instead, if I remember rightly} about eight or nine junior players shoved in at the last moment to take the places of several of the senior gentlemen who were either indisposed or too dignified to take part in such a match. So far as can be learnt no disciplinary measures were taken by that august body (materially improved this year by the addition of new blood), styled the Nelson Rugby Union. The errant players may have been reprimanded gjor mayhap- the Union refrained from being too harsh with their delicate, feelings. However, on Friday evening last I saw a big advertisement headed in bold type “Seddon Shield-”, Now, I am not : going to pretend that I was deluded by j this into thinking that on Saturday last 1 1 was to see the Seddon Shield contested i for. lam sufficiently in touch with footI ball to know that it was to be a practice | game to get a line on the proposed players for the rep. team. That advertiseI ment, I. take it, was inserted for the benefit of people who are not aware of current doings in the football world, and I maintain, Sir, that it was a distinctly misleading one; in fact, if a business man were to insert such he would speedily be the recipient of fairly scathing criticism. However, to resume our subject- I read in the locals that ah players had been interviewed and that all had given an assurance that they would play. What did we find? We found that a number of these players had failed to turn up and that juniors had to bo picked up at the last minute. Why didn’t they turn up? I saw one player (named for the B team) sitting down on the part provided for that propose in the pavilion, watching the game* : in which he was supposed to be playing. IWhy didn’t he play? Not that, in fact, I think, the game suffered by his absence, because as a matter of fact, the junior who played gave a far better exposition of the game than ever our friend did. But the point is, lie and several others who had given their personal assurance of their availability deliberately turned down not only the public, but also the B team; and also the A team, who were entitled ; to be tried out on something better than a half junior team. We have already seen several exhibitions of the week-kneed spirit of compromise adopted by the N.li.U. Is it going t<, take this sort of flouting sitting down? What’s the matter with our players (oi rather some of them?) Do they get their backs up because they haven’t beer, sorted out for a week’s board at Wainui? Have they got yellow streaks in them! What’s up? Some of us can call to mind the old football days when Whiting, for instance, was working in Elaine Bay—no telephone and a big part without roads. Did Whiting raise any difficulty about play? No. Sir. '“Ettie” was here on "Friday night. “Ho\v did- you get here, ‘Ettie?’ ”.. Oh, I walk'ed most of the way and ran the rest, because T was a bit out of knick:” 'Fifty-four jniles, mind you, and back the same way on 'Sunday! Many such instances can be called to mind. The players of to-day arc receiving far too much spoon-feed-ing. It’s about time the Union took a stand, exercised a little discipline, and thus restore confidence in the public mind—confidence which must be sadly lacking after the fiasco on Saturday.— 1 am, etc.,

OLD TIMER

[To the Editor.]

Sir, —I think it is a great pity when a game is advertised, and the public are ' assured by means of your columns that a full muster will turn out, that some players are so devoid of a sporting spirit [that they fail to turn up. . I am one of :a large number of the public who are disgusted at this sort of thing. Last Saturday there must have been quite six absentees whose places were taken by juniors. This is not conducive to good football, and it certainly was not keeping faith with the public, who had been piomised an interesting game. Neither was it fair to tiro A team who naturally vanted as good a team as possible to practise against. Some at least of the vacancies require a great deal of explanation inasmuch as the missing players were sitting in the grandstand watching the game. Surely they know enough of the spirit of the game to realise that the fact of not being selected for the representative team is insufficient excuse for refusing to play a practice game against their more fortunate mates. It seems as though more and more players tire requiring to be coaxed and bribed to play at all. Let us hope the Rugby Union will keep those players’ names in mind for next year and refuse to consider them when rep. honours are bein s bestowed. Such treatment by selfish players is unfair both to the other players and the public.—l am etc. DISGUSTED.