“TO CLEAR THE AIR”

New Zealand Times, Volume XLVII, Issue 10881, 22 April 1921, Page 7

“TO CLEAR THE AIR”

AMENDED RUGBY RULES IMPORTANT LETTER BY PRESIDENT OF N.Z.R.U. "THE POSITION IS 1 CRITICAL." Nothing has created such inteilst in Rugby circles in the last couple of seasons as the proposal to adopt the Auckland rules. At the meeting of the New Zealand Union next week the subject will crop up again, and because of this Mr .Tames McLeod, president of the New Zealand Union, has addressed a letter to the Wellington and other unions. Mr McLeod refers, in opening, to the proposals originally brought forward by the Auckland R.U., and details the "unofficial" resolutions carried at a conference of chairmen of the various unions. The onlv vital point he states, one which we in New Zealand are at variance with the E.R.U.. is in respect to what is known as the "kick into touch" rule; and he feels that, despite the decisions of the chairmens* conference, it would be unwise to include it in our plavinp laws this season without another effort being made to induce the E.R.U. to judge the proposal from our view point. "CRITICAL POSITION." "It is a fact," continues the letter, "regarding which both .Mr Slade and myself have convinced ourselves, that throughout Auckland, the style of play induced by the penalising of line-kicking has, taken, complete hold of both the players and the supporting public, and it is quite impossible to get any club team to play under the strict E.R.U. code in so far as this rule is concerned. Now. it is with regard to the concluding sentence of the preceding paragraph, that I set out particularly to deal. What attitude should the unions of New Zealand

adopt regarding* Auckland? The position is a critical one, must be handled with the greatest tact, keeping in mind the predominant interests of New Zealand amateur Rugby, and also its internationalism. We need to realise at th* outset that the Auckland Rugby UnioJ is really fighting Hard against the *u croachment of the Northern Union game and that the fight is one i for strict!; amateur football. Only in Aucklan< has the Northern Union game made anj headway of consequence (it really mad< its bic strides during the war period) and that the amateur game of Hugh; has more than held its own against tin stron«- comnetition of Northern Union ism, ig entirely due to the true amateur Rugby spirit of the Auckland Rugbj Union and its thousands of players, li is only right that tiiose responsible for the government of the game in New Zea laud, should in fairness to Auckland realise and acknowledge that this is so At the same time I confess that I cannot see any constitutional way in which tlio difficulty may be overcome, short oi altering our own constitution, and thal has not 4 been seriously suggested. W< could order Auckland to .confine their play strictly to the official laws of the same, and in the event of a refusal or non-compliance, Auckland could be suspended. I am convinced that the clubs throughout Auckland would cheerfully accept suspension rather than give ri their style of play, and would continue :o play amateur Rugby. But what would Rugby Union, football in New Zealand rain by such action? In the first place ve would be playing right into the hands >f those governing Northern Union footmil in New Zealand, and it could on!** >e expected that every advantage would 5° taken by them of the opportunity afforded thfem. None of us want this to aappen THE ALTERNATIVE "The alternative is for the gnimal neeting of the N.Z.R.U. to agree in view if the very- special conditions existing n Auckland, to give the Auckland Rugiby Jnion permission to play the amended 'kick-into-touch” rule, at least until

such time as the whole of the circum stances have been again considered b;j the English Rugby Union. Aucklanc I would continue as at present to play the other unions, in New Zealand m interprovincial football according to the E.R.U. by-laws, the new rule (being applied only to cluib and sub-union games within the Auckland Union or provincial ’boundaries. This appears to me to be the only solution that will prevent disruption, and it is also the only honest way. It has been stated by prominent Rugbyites. in England that there will be danger as was exemplified in America years ago, that further isolated tinkering with the rules, may lead to practically a new game being evolved. We know there is no such danger from New Zealand. Having convinced ourselves that this new rule, after exhaustive trial, is in the (best interests of the game, and that it does not lead to -any single one of the abuses that its opponents prognosticated, it is our duty to again impress on the E.R.U. our conviction. W© do- not dispute that a universal code is very much to be desired. INTERNATIONAL GAMES. ''Advantage will no doubt be taken of the presence of the South African team dn New Zealand this season, to afford our visitors the opportunity of witnessing exhibition game©, probably between college teams, of the amended rule .an operation, with a view to proving to them its intrinsic worth, and also that nothing is to be feared from its introduction universally. If, however, dt is not ultimately possible to attain unanimity throughout the Rugby world regarding the rule, then we should ask the E.R..U. to grant Australasia permission to play it, on the understanding that E.R.U. rules shall be played in international games whenever New South Wales or New Zealand is playing against countries that have not adopted the rule. I have no doubt our case can be presented to the E.R.U. in such a way as will convince the parent body that

nothing is further from the mind of New Zealand than the severance of relations ; that the new rule is a distinct improvement to the game, hut that even if it cannot be conceded it may still be played ir\ New Zealand and New South Wales without affecting either the spirit °r the practice of the game as heretofore played; that (it is vitally essential in the meantime that JEhigiand should approve of the N.Z.R.T7. giving Auckland a special permission to fight against file iNorthern TJmon game and professionalism m Toofiball with 'the weapon Auckland had devised; that there is no reason to fear that thus small change in the laws of the game will involve any change in the government of the game, or that, in the words of Mr Rowland Hill, there need 'be any drifting- apart or losing of touch in defence of the great principle of amateurism England should scarcely need any convincing that there is n<j more truly amateur body of athletes in fho world than the thousands of Rugby players in New Zealand. The importance of the position warrants every endeavour being made to find an honest solution. On the one hand we mar be threatened with the .possibility of England ‘'cutting us off." and on the other with the possibility of breaking up our own New Zealand Union. Neither must, be allowed to happen if any sojution that may in reason a.nd honestly be applied, can be suggested." I