CORNWELL CUP CONTROVERSY

Otago Daily Times, Issue 20584, 6 December 1928, Page 15

CORNWELL CUP CONTROVERSY

CHALLENGE NOT IN ORDER. : YACHT ASSOCIATION’S FINAL DECISION. A challenge _ issued by the North-East Harbour Boating Club for the Comvcll Cup contest to be held at Lyttelton in January has resulted in the club’s action being strongly resented by the Otago Yacht and Motor Boat Association and by all the affiliated clubs in the harbour. At a meeting of the association a month ago it was -unanimously decided that in view of the, unsatisfactory result of last year’s contest held at Auckland no challenge would be sent forward from Otago this year. Thlh decision was forwarded to all the affiliated clubs, but was flouted by the North-East Harbour Boating Club, which forwarded a challenge on its own behalf. The matter was brought before a meeting of the; association-last night, and a long discussion ensued,, after which a very far-reaching "resolution' was carried.

The club wrote regretting" the association’s decision not to issue a challenge, and stating that the club members v felt that- as a result of the association’s action it appeared'as,if the governing body was not inclined‘to assist the various affiliated clubs and the sport of ’ yachting. It was also pointed-out that the Takapuna class of yacht racing was originally fostered by the club,-arid it had the only Takapuna class boats in Otago waters on‘its register.

Mr J. T. Paul (president of the Otago Yacht; and Motor Boat Association) said he strongly resented the action taken by the North-East Harbour Club. ’ The decision of the association was not arrived at in a hurry, and no attempt was made to interfere with the opinions of other clubs. • Had the decision of the association been - in. the other direction there would have. been a great deal of sion among members of other Otago clubs. He had been assured personally fay meinbers of the other affiliated clubs that the association had taken the-right course. TheNorth-East Harbour Club had riot been loyal to the f association, and unless therei.waa; loyally; ori\the part'of the affiliated bodies, the association would not have the support - and, confidence of boating men. The. reasons for the association’s action were: twofold. In the first place, the’, various clubs had great difficulty, in collecting -.the ncccssaty money to send two coritest crewS' away, last year. He ihad no hesitation in saying that none or •the centres could afford to contribute to two. contests every year. In, the secopd place, the decision of the association had. been influenced to some extent by the treatment meted out to the Otago crew in the Cornwell Cup Contest sailed at ■ Auckland last January. No one could convince him that the Otago crew, did not win the cup. He had consulted many prominent boating menon the conduct of the Auckland contest, .and he had yet to find a man who would say that the ruling of the Contest 1 Sailing Committee was the correct one. There had been a good deal of nonsense talked about the association not encouraging boys to take up the sport, but he wished to point out that unless they abided by the rules,of yacht racing such contests must be detrimental to the sport. The decisiSri of the association had not been arrived at without careful consideration. The statement made by the North-East Harbour Club that the association was not inclined to assist boys was ■ not according to fact. The most that could be said to that statement was that the association did; not approve of the action of the Sailing Committee which gave its unsatisfactory decision at the last contest. It was a mistake for any club to-think it could flout the decisions of the association. . When a club did' that it was not going to assist the sport. If the Takapuna Club abided by its ,rules, it could not accent the North-East Harbour Club’s challenge.; He had no. feeling in the* matter and favoured no club, and he had nothing against the- North-East ■ Harbour Club. He would be lacking in his duty .if ■ he did • not _ express . the ■ sentiments'of the association. - O. Martin said,the North-East Harbour Club had been ill-advised, arid in sending a challenge it had sounded its death knell. The Broad' Bay Boating Club Committee’had como. to a unani-. mous opinion that the association’s decision had been flouted and that the NorthEast Harbour Club’s action was an insult to all the clubs in the harbour. The Whole question should be.referred back to the North-East Harbour Club with a request that it withdraw the challenge.

Mr T. Anderson said the club had taken a course that flouted the government and • constitution of the association. As the governing body it was in existence for the betterment of the sport, arid it, did not attempt to . interfere with the inner working of any affiliated club. Unless the challenge was withdrawn, . the club was going to be, boycotted by other clubs in the harbour', as the matter had been freely discussed by members of every club. ' ■ r

Mr E.; T. Moller said that as a delegate from the-North-East Harbour Club be did not think the club would withdraw the challenge. If the association wished to take up such an attitude, then it would be better if the North-East -Harbour delegates left the room. He wished- to point out that the club was prepared to finance an Otago crew, , and .there would be no expense involved by the association. If Otago challenged this year, there would be every -.opportunity offered to thresh out the question'of last year’s contest.

Mr W. Sell said that the whole matter had been fully, discussed by bis club, and it.failed to sefe why it could .‘riot issue: a challenge when. it was prepared to ‘bear all the expense!

Mr T 1 Brookes said the club’s action was ari insult to the_ association’s intelligence. He would not like to see the North-East Harbour delegates leave the room. The decision of. the association was unanimous. The North-East Harbour Club evidently . had no confidence in its delegates. The association had taken the right and proper course. Mr Paul said that if the Takapuna Club conformed to its contest rules the challenge must be rejected. But that was not the point. It was a question of the North-East Harbour Club flouting the decision of the association.

Mr Holler replied to the effect that he was interested m the contest, and he did not care to listen to the discussion, and he could see no sense in prolonging the agony; ■ Mr Paul: It is not a question of prolonging the agony, but a question of arriving at the best decision in the interest of the sport. Mr F. Goodwin said the Otago Yacht and Motor Boat Club members felt very strongly regarding the action of the North-East Harbour Club/ The Yacht Club members felt that the Macandrew Bay Club should have waited until the association had_ a decision from the Yacht Racing. Association concerning the decision arrived at in connection with the last contest. Mr A. D. Asher said that the BurkesSt. Leonards Aquatic Club was unanimous that the association had adopted the proper- course, Mr Martin' then moved—" That the North-East _ Harbour Club be asked to reconsider its decision with reference to the club’s issue of a challenge for the Cornwell Cup. and that, failing such withdrawal; the club .be asked to withdraw from tne association.” The chairman divided the motion into two parts. The first part was r carried unanimously. A vote was . then taken on the second part, namely, “ failing ..’such withdrawal tic club be asked to withdraw from the association,” and it was carried by seven votes to three. ■ Mr Paul said that the North-East Harbour Club would be duly advised bf the association’s final 'decision, and it was to he hoped that the dub would look at the matter in the proper light and withdraw the challenge.