FOOTBALL RIVALRY.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLVI, Issue 14148, 25 August 1909, Page 8

FOOTBALL RIVALRY.

AMATEUR AND PROFESSIONAL

RIGHT TO A PLAYING GROUND.

THE DEVONPORT DOMAIN.

At last night's meeting of the Devonport Domain Board an application was received from the North • Shore Albions Football Club (playing under Northern Union rules) for permission to us© the Board's'football ground on September 4, and to charge for admission. The club stated they understood the present tenancy of the ground expired on August 31. Mr. J. Taylor proposal, and Mr. J. Mays seconded, "That the application be granted." Mr. R. H. Froude'said the Council had no authority to grant the applicants the use of the ground. The amateur footballers had worked up the ground, and the professionals wanted to come in. and take advantage of the amateurs' work. Mr. Mays said that before only the Auckland Rugby Union was to bo considered ; now a club, over 100 strong, applied for the ground, and they had as much right to be considered as the union.

Mr. Selwyn Mays, who was present on behalf of the North Shore District Football Club, said that in 1890 the Rugby Union had first started to put the ground in order. , In that year, and for some years after, subscriptions had been got together, and the Rugby Union had donated a sum to improve the ground, and for some years since the union had guaranteed the rent. The revenue derived from the union's matches only went into the union's coffers nominally; as a matter of fact, all the money went into the ground. Again, the union had up to date given the North Shore footballers £90 for the erection of a training shed, and were shortly to give £30 more, and then further sums of money. The professional club was not a local one at all, though there were a few local players in it. It was not true that the union's lease o* the ground ended on August 31; the football season ended when the cricket season started. If the board let the ground to the professional body, it would be making a mistake. The amateurs wanted the ground for recreation, the others to make money. Ho doubted if the Council could let the ground for money-making purposes. The Rugby Union had spent more money on the ground than "the Domain Board— £400 altogether. Tho Rugby Union still wanted to use the ground.

Mr. T. Considine said he knew of men in the new club who worked in Devonport and paid their rents and rates there. These persons should not be stopped from recreation because they were called professionals, as they were in reality amateurs.

Mr. W. Handler considered the Board was in duty bound to let the Rugby Union have the first say.

Mr. Froude said the professionals were perfectly free to play, but.let them choose their own ground without encroaching on those of the amateurs. The Board could not let its ground to the professionals when it had not enough for the amateurs.

Mr. Handley remarked that if the Rugby Union was still under the impression that it occupied the ground, and as it had not received notice of the termination of its lease, it was only fair to let it have the ground.

The motion on being put to the meeting was lost.

A motion by Mr. Considine that 14 days' notice be given the Rugby Union to surrender the ground, and from then compete with others for its use, was on being put to the Board also lost.

An application from the Australian Football League for the use of the ground on September 4 was then received.

It was resolved that as the ground had already been arranged for the application be refused.