RUGBY BREAK LIKELY.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVII, Issue 20519, 21 March 1930, Page 18

RUGBY BREAK LIKELY.

' POSITION OF DOMINIONS.

WHY BRITAIN IS AFRAID.

1 DESIRE TO RETAIN CONTROL.

[FKOM OUB SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT.] // LONDON. Jan. 21.

When are New Zealand and South 'Africa going to break off relations with the International Board ? This question may be causing your Rugby legislators much concern, for undoubtedly the four Home uniot)3 in Great Britain are dead giving you the full representation you require.

Having studied the whole question, both in England and in South Africa, what 1 find is this: That the governors of the game in this country bold that, apart from sentiment, Great Britain has not a great deal to lose should the Do,minions break away. And myself, I am confident that both South Africa and New Zealand will have to carry out their threat of breaking away from the Internationa] Board and the Home unions before the board fully realises that its attitude toward you and toward South Africa is based on- a rotten foundation.

A break has got to come, and when the questions are clearly stated why Great Britain refuses to give you full representation on matters pertaining to International Rugby, I am sure the people of this country, if not certain writers, who are as narrow-minded as some Rugby legislators, will stand by the Dominions, and not- the four Home unions ! Not Interested.

To-day the people oi this country do not understand the question concerning your desire to have the right to participate in the legislation of a game in which you are our superiors. The rank and file are not interested. International affairs , .with oversea teams do not worry them. The reason for this is not hard to explain. Here in this'country Rugby is a recreation. Those who play it are not interested in those who watch. It is not /the same as professional Soccer, in which the populace claim that as they keep the players going—which is quite true —they demand the highest standard. j Rugby matches in England, except International matches, are of an exclusive character. They are not played to attract the people. It is a game played for J the players and their immediate friends, V'ho will have no truck with professionalism because in their eyes "professionalism is infra dip." So long as the club match programme goes through, those who legislate for the game in tnis country are satisfied. No interest is taken in the legislative sido of the game, consequently the trouble between the Home unions and the Dominions i? ;i mere detail. The Broader Principles. /// As a matter of fact 1 do not think one per cent, of the players understandsthe question relating to your demands. . The other day, following upon the Jing/lish Rugby Union's resolution to the - South African Rugby Board, 1 got in touch with a critic who claims to have complete knowledge of this business of equal representation. All he could tell (i me was what X had known for years, and on the broader principles of your claims he knew little or nothing. The fact of the matter is that at heart the four Home unions, together with cer- j ■ // tain newspaper writers, leaiiy believe that the claims of the Dominions for mil Tepresentation on all matteis pertaining to International Rugby are justified, but they wilf not admit it. As far as i can gather the position stands thus: — The International Board, which is com- ,' posed of England, Ireland, Scotland and :j Wales, says "We are willing to form an Imperial Board or Conference, which can make suggestions, but on no account can it frame or alter rules. In other ' < words Sonth Africa and New Zealand must not have a say in nite-maknig or rule-changing. That is the. exclusive right of England, Ireland. Scotland and ,'jj Wales. Now comes the question: "Why does the International Board put up the ban igainst South Africa and New Zealand as regards the question of rules? Let us ba plain on this point. It is because it fears that Rugby, being a game for the populace in New Zealand and ooutii 'Africa, your legislators, in order to maintain the popularity, may desire to tinker - with the rules to make the game more . attractive j Not For Popul3Ce. / And remember in Ensland Rugby is rot a game for she populace. The bulk of English people watch professional football. Believe me, the. view held in this countrv is that New Zealand, in order to compete with your protess-onal / Rugby, your P.ngby Union legislators would never be averse to changing the rul<<s to suit the occasion. Hence the In- ' ternational Board puts the bar dp against

That is the whole crux of the matter. The- rule-makers in Great Britain are more afraid of New Zealand in the. respect of revolutionising the game thaD they are of South' Africa, where Rugby has no serious competitor. I fc ,s e ; v Zealand that the International Board is / afraid of. In South Africa, the point * has been urged that, even if the Dominions were given a vote on all matters pertaining to the rules, the Home unions would still be able to hold the winning card in voting power. But this is haidh .For instance, if South Africa, New Zealand and New South Wales are accepted into the folds of the International Board —that is to say, to have equal rights—it means that Canada, which in a matter of years mav be another Rugby stronghold, will also have to be given a vote, and then who knows but that Rhodesia and India may come along with a request for a place in the sun. Thus the voting power is turned over to the outposts o' •the Empire.

Keeping Game Amateur. Of course, where the Home unions are wrong is in miking it out. that if the control of the game sets out of their hands it will go to the rlogs. Peisonally, from what I lis\<? seen of those who con trol the game overseas, they are equally ;>s zealous in keeping the game purely amateur as the people in Great Britain. Furthermore, 1 think New Zealand and South Africa can certainly te.-jeh Great Britain much in the handing out of inter national caps. For instance, while fear ing for the honesty of the game should the Dominions get control, the Inteyiational Board sits quiet when England plays a South African, who happens to 'be at college in this country, against Scotland Then again we have colonials of Scottish birth filched by England just because she has picked her team before the Scots.

, England is never slow in collaring colonial players—birds of passage, who happen to be studying in England—with the result that there are certain players who have played both for and against Great Britain. Apparently with the Home ijnions it is a case of getting in first. No, I do not think the Home unions can 'claim to be reasonably perfect in their legislation. For instance, in the recent trials, England selected a threequarter, who has been in South Africa since he was a child. He is of Scottish descent Had England not picked him, then Scotland would have done so-—and it would have had more right to- him. y I anr just giving these instances to show that, after all there is a certain keenness in Great Britain to field the best team, irrespective of moral rights of certain /countries. No, wo in Great Britain cannot claim, to be perfect. The Dominions can cettainly "teach us a great deal in this respect. They do not filch nlnyei'9. rely upon players born in own j country. 1