NEW ZEALAND CRICKET COUNCIL

Otago Daily Times, Issue 16070, 11 May 1914, Page 2

NEW ZEALAND CRICKET COUNCIL

■•» THE LATE AUSTRALIAN TOUR. PAYMENTS TO PLAYERS. SOME STRONG COMMENTS MADE. PROTESTS BY ASSOCIATIONS CONSIDERED. (Pkk United Pbess Absooiation.) . CHJRISTOHURCH, May 10. Tho quarterly general mooting of the New Zealand Cricicet Council was hold on Saturday night. Present: Messrs J. J. Clark (president Otago Cricket Association), C. WyJklo Brown, 11. C. Ridley (Auckland), A. T. Donnelly (South Auckland), F. li. Labatt (Havvke's Bay), 11. Vincent (Poverty Bay), A. W. Hardy (North Taranaki), J. 11. Williams, hon. treasurer (Wairarapa), G-. F. Francis (Wonganui), E. Caygill proxy for Mr C R. Clark, and A. Cant, proxy for Mr D. Reeco (Canterbury), E. J. Austin (Nelson), F. E. Brittain, J. F. Peaks (Otago), S. A. Orchard (Southland), J. S. Barrett (Manawatu), J. Fanning, and C. G. Wilson (Wellington)* Dr Orchard (Rungitikei), and Mr F. C. Raphael (hon. secretary). Apologies for absence were made for the president (Mr E. Heathcote Williams), and Messrs F. Wilding, C R. Clark, and D. Reece. 0 _ Mr J. J. Clark was elected ohairman. Mr S. A. Orchard moved—"That the Southland Association be permitted to engage, in Plunket Shield matches. Mr J. S. Barrett seconded the motion, which was agreed to by 13 votes to 5. MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE'S BEPOBT. Mr Francis submitted the following report : —Since last quarterly meeting the tour of, the New Zealand team in Australia has been-completed. The balance sheet shows a loss on the tour of about £400, £130 of' which was borne by the council, £68 10s by the _ Wellington, Otago, and Auckland Associations, and £80-odd by • Canterbury Association. Certain associations had written to the committee complaining of certain items in the balance sheet, and your committee thought it desirable that these letters should be placed before the council. The tour was, on the whole, successful from a player's point of view, but the team was unfortunate in failing to extend the New South Wales and Victorian matches to beyond the second day, thus impairing the' financial result of the tour. The visit of a fine combination of Australian players, secured by Mr Arthur Sims, was the means of creating considerable enthusiasm in the game. Most of the associations cleared expenses ; but, unfortunately, the council lost £147 14s 2d on the two test matches. However, owing to the heavy cost of get-' ting New Zealand teams together, the committee is always faced with the prospect of almost certain loss 'in these 'matches; but there can be no doubt that,it is in the interest of the game that they should be played,, and that, money so spent is well spent. Your committee is now in negotiation with the South Australian Association .with a view to arranging a tour in New Zealand next season for a team' from that State, and .„ has also received communications from Queensland and Fiji, consideration of which has been held over, pending a reply from South AustraliaMr S. A. Orchard (manager) read a lengthy report on the New Zealand team's tour in. Australia, and the report was adopted. The Secretary read a balance sheet of the tour and also correspondence from some of the associations. The Auckland Association wrote, under date May. 1, thanking the council for an explanation of various items in the balance fh?et of the tour of the team in Australia. • These explanations," the letter went on, have not tended to restore my committee s confidence in your council's actions. We are unable to find the rule under which .ou say the council was bound to pay the players, and my committee is of opinion tha.t those payments should not have been made without the. sanction of the associations concerned, and. that the present state of our finances does, not warrant such payments. If all loss of wages are paid at present, then we propose to move that this practice be discontinued, and. we will be glad if- you will inform us what wages have been paid in the last two test matches recently played,, and also the amount paid to members of the 1599 team which toured Australia. The tour in Australia appears, to have been conducted without due regard to the state of the finances of the associations finding , the money. In our local cricket all players are called upon to make some sacrifice when touring, and we are strongly of opinion that your council should adopt the same plan, instead of in some cases practically throwing money at players whordon't either expect or need it. We 'are quite aware that there are special cases when there is some justification for some payment, but these should be the exception, not the rule. We note your statement that your council's; action was confirmed by a meeting of delegates, and can only express our regret that we were not informed of this at the time. As my committee is anxious to take action, perhaps you will be good enough to let me know what rule it -will be necessary to alter.''

The Otago Association wrote expressing the opinion that it should have been sup-, plied with more details of the estimated expenditure, and that allowances to players should not have been arranged for without the sanction of the aesociationa concerned in the guarantee. Payment of the allowance under the circumstances was most undesirable. . In a further communication, the association stated that the explanation- was extremely unsatisfactory. It reiteratVl ite protest against the council deliberately keeping affiliated associations in ignorance of increased liabilities for which it had arranged, more especially as the association had already expressed to .the council its opinion that players taking part in the tour should themselves be asked to contribute towards expenses." Further,-the association considered that under rule 19 the council had no power to grant on allowance to players. ■ / ■ Lettere from the other associations were on similar lines. ' . :

The Management Committee forwarded a circular letter on March 21 to these associations. ' It' stated that ther'e had been some misunderstanding as to the reason for the expenses of the tour exceeding the estimate. When the tour was firet proposed it was assumed that it would not last longer than six weeks, but by adding the south match tha tour could not be completed under eight weeks, thus adding considerably to. the expense. The July quarterly meeting of the council was emphatic that the South Australian match should, be played. Teams travelled in Australia during Christmas week and the week after, and on account of railway regulations relating to Christmas travelling no concessions in railway fares were allowed. . The difference between the estimated /ail fares and the, actual amount spent was considerable, and other items (ground men, attendants, etc.) were charged which could not have been foreseen before the team left New Zealand. These charges were usual, and were recognised by all teams playing on big grounds m Australia. They were not in the nature ,<H tips. The New Zealand team paid considerably less than most inter-State teams. Disorganisation caused by the strike prevented two matches being played in New Zealand before the team left. The receipts from these matches were included in estimates of receipts. "There has been," the letter went on, "some criticising of the item 'players allowance,' but this criticism overlooked the rule of the. council dealing with this particular question. The council, under its rides, is bound to reimburse players for loss of wages. In the case of the New Zealand tour to Australia in 1899, and all New Zealand matches since that date, players have been. reimbursed by the council for loss of wages. According to the duty which is laid upon the council by virtue of its own rules, the council felt, however, that it oould not afford to pay players for loss of_ wages during the whole of last tour, and instead the committee decided to make a special allowance to playere—to pay them 5s per day in lieu of loss of wages. This arrangement was accepted by all the players. From the council's point of view, this was the best bargain that could be made in the circumstances. Whatever opinion members of tho committee may individually have had concerning the .propriety of making an allowance to the players", the committee as a body could not disregard one of its own rules whils it remained in tho rule book. We might also add that this arrangement was confirmed by a meeting of delegatce." Mr Raphael quoted' from the balance sheet of the 1899 tour the amounts paid in wages to some of the players. Tho total was £78. and the tour lasted four weeks. Mr Wilson (Wellington) complained that the Management Committee had not seen fit to reply to tho Wellington Association's queries, 'and had be£n entirely lacking in its duty. He asked for a ruling on the provision in rule 19 stipulating that allowances to playere could be made only upon a certificate from the association to which the player, belonged. The chairman did not consider that the rule born out the committee's interpretation. Mr Ridley failed to soe anything that tfiey could fall foul of the committee for iinvinn done. The had made n cheaper arrangement than if tin l rule hv<\ been strictly adhered to, and the council

wae to bo commended rather than blamed lor having inudo tho arrangement. If cricketers were going to enter the area of intercolonial cricket they .must be prepared to put their liiinds in their pockets. If not they should sit down and say that they were not going to take part in big cricket. Until cricket reached , a higher 6tate of perfection they wo(ild not command big gates in Australia. Mr Wilson asked if Mr Ridley know whether the allowanoe to players was included in tho estimate of expenditure. Mr Ridley eaid ho did not know anything about the estimate sent to the associations. Mr Raphael paid that it wae included. Hβ produced and read tho estimate submitted by Mr T. W. Reese at the July quarterly meeting. It contained tho item: " Play ere' out of pocket oxponece, 5a per day for 12 players, £120." Mr Francis: That wae for five weeks and β-half Mr Raphael: Yes. The Chairman said that no details of expenditure wero given. The associations simply said that the costs of the tour would bo so much Mr Fanning contended that tho committee had not replied to the Wellington Association's letter of March 21. Mr Williams i,did not think that the meeting was. for the purpose of criticising the committee's action. With respect to Wellington's letter, if the Wellington Association was not satisfied with the information given it should have written for further information, which would have been given. Tho Wellington delegates seemed to have attended with the idea of making capital out of tho fact that the Wellington Association's letter wae not properly answered. Mr Wikon eaid that ttie Wellington Association asked for certain information, arid the committee had seen fit to throw them on, tho general body of delegates. He movwj—" That the letters from the four associations be' referred back to the Management Committee to answer." Mr Fanning seconded the motion. They had, ho eaid, asked for further information, but did not get it. Tho Chairman took it that the Wellington delegates' contention was that they were not supplied with sufficient information to enable them to discuss the balance sheet in a satisfactory way. Mr Wilson eaid that was so. He failed to see why the committee should seek shelve its duty by' referring the lettere to , the general meeting. Mr Francis (chairman of tfie Management Committee) said that in bringing tho lettere before the meeting the committee had no intention of shelving its responsibilities. It was evident l>hat tho four associations were not at one with the committee with regard to its management of the association's Tour Committee. He thought it was only duo to the council that the opinions of the associations ' should be brought before it. The committee, as a whole, was quite prepared l to take whatever the council was prepared to say or a to do. Personally he thought that the committee's letter to the associations should have been sufficient. There was no doubt that the committee was at variance with the opinions of the aseociat.ons as to tfne items complained of. The committee had done its best in the matter of running the' tour, and had done it honestly. The associations were penalising the committee when they cavilled—he did not use tine term in an offensive way—at every little item of expense.

A Delegate: £210. Mr Francis said that the committee took legal advice, and was informed that the word " may " in rule 19 was an obligation under which it was to players. If the.association desired that cricket should be run, on strictly amateur lines in future, there was nothing to prevent the rule being deleted. So long as the rule was there'they were under an obligation to pay players. A Delegate: All players?

Mr Francis: Yea 'To expect the committee to depart from its 'practice in this matter seemed to him to be expecting too much. Personally he was retiring from the committee at the annual meeting. Mr Raphael: No I

Mr Francis (continuing) said that unless associations possessed' confidence in the committee it would be far better for the council to run everything. He felt strongly that the associations should send delegates from their own centres to at least two meetings of the council yearly. It was impossible to communicate by letter all the negotiations that • the committee had to deal with. If delegates attended from different centres there would be less misunderstanding. He wished to plead with associations for better understanding. Until they : did so they would never get good work done. Mr R. Vincent eulogised the work of the committee, and said that if the associations had to finance a, tour such as that the committee bad to finance they would be a little more generous. With- respect to rule 19, the committee did its best in the interests of cricket. ,

Mr A. T. Donnelly said that In v.W of the statement of Mr Francis that it was in tended to answer the letters, .leieg'.itescould assume that there was no sinister or improper motive in bringing them before the council. •

The Chairman said that in being voted to the chair he had been placed in rather an awkward position, but though, representing Otafjo, he hoped it would not interfere with the impartial discharge! of Wβ duty. He did not want the committee to thfnk that the associations were antagonistic to it, or were in any way attempting to curb its powers, and make things unpleasant for it. The Obago and other associations felt that there was a big principle at stake, and Otago was extremely sore when it received the balance sheet, especially with reference to the allowance to players. Not only did Otago have no anticipation of such a -payment being made, but it bad suggested that lite placers should be asked to contribute £.10 towards the tour. It was felt that a very serious question had cropped up in practically making professional players out of the team that went to Australia. There wae no evidence that the players had actually lost wages, and as far as Otago's solitary representative was concerned, the Otago Association was not asked if he had loet any money. But if the allowance had been necessary supporters of the game in Otago would have been only too pleased to pay him. They felt that it was a dangerous precedent to allow to come in. The committee led the Otago Association to believe that no allowance would be made, except such ae was authorised by associations to which players belonged. The charge for blazers and caps was not a legitimate one against affiliated associations, and "should have 'been borne by the council. Otago also felt sore that so much money was spent in hotel tips, especially in view of the 5s allowance. They, did not desire, to make the committee feel that they were hampering it in anv way, but desired to obviate similar trouble in connection with any_ future tour. When negotiations were being made with'respect to the tour the committee's letters were very optimistic, ' and the association thought there was no risk, and that it was almost certain there would be a profit.

Mr S. A. Orchard said that it was very evidont that delegates did not understand players as well as ho did. Ho was perfectly certain that players wore always " out on tho make'" all the time. The time had arrived when they should prohibit any player getting any allowance. If they could not play for the love of tho sport they should not play at all. The council had a duty to perform in reimbursing players. It had been done in the past, and he did not see why it should not bo dono now. While it was optional on the part of tho council to pay wages they would always have players expeoting payment. There were any number of players in Now Zealand who wore not sports enough to play for tho good of the gamo, and only played when they could mako money out of it. Mr Williams contended that the council's letter had given all tho explanation necessary, and no good purpose would bo served in referring tho letters back to the committeo. Mr Ridley moved as an amendment: "That the balance sheet as produced by tho Management Committee bo approved." Mr Labatt seconded. Mr Caygill criticised the committee at some length, and said that ho felt there was lacking sympathy between the committee and the associations owing to the committee's failure to take the associations into its confidence. Mr Labatt said that as auditor he went through every item of expenditure with Mr Orchard, and in his (Mr Labatt's) opinion tho expenses had been kept down to a very moderate extent. If players were to bo called upon to go on tours and they could not afford to pay their travelling expenses, then cricket would be deprived of the services of a very large number of young players., Mr Cant aaked if it would be inconsistent if he supported both motion and amendment. Ultimately the amendment was temporarily withdrawn, and the motion was agreed to. The balance sheet as submitted was approved. The Chairman expressed appreciation at the attendance of the delegates of the Wellington Association. Mr Wilson said that the Wellington Association's desire was to further the best interest of cricket.' There was no wish on the part of the Wellington Association to belittle the work of the committee, and he was sure that the committee would do its best to satisfy all associations in their an r awors.—(Applause.) Mr Labatt brought up_ a resolution by the Hawke'e Bay Association relative to the selection of New Zealand teams, asking that consideration should be given to players outside the four centres.

The Secretary said that the committee had replied to the Hawke's Bay Association. Mr Francis,pointed out that thoro was no rule preventing the selectors selecting any player' in New Zealand, _ The Secretary submitted' the balance sheet of the two test matches played against the Australian team. For the, Dunedin match the expenditure was £411 16s 7d, and the receipts £359 ss, representing a loss of £52 lis 7d; for the Auckland match the expenditure was £392 18s 7d, and the receipts £297 15s 6d, leaving a loss of £95 3s Id. A refund of £29 lis 6d was anticipated in connection with the Auckland match.