AN ABLE ADDRESS.

Otago Witness, Issue 1851, 30 March 1904, Page 57

AN ABLE ADDRESS.

At Saturday night's meeting of the Otago itugby Union

The Chairman, in moving the adoption of the report and balance sheet, said : The report deals, as you will recognise, somewhat fully with the events of the past year, but with your permission I propose t ) run over some of the featvires presented in it. You will obser\e that the committee did not feol justified in holding that the standard of play that was shown last year was equal to that of previous years. They are satisfied, nevertheless, that the Otago standard was not inferior to that of other portions of the* colony, this being shown, indeed, by the" results of the interprovincial matches, in which Otago won four contests out ot seven t>layed, one being drawn, and scored 55 points' to 29. The principal disappointment in connection with the interprovinoial matches was furnished by the Auckland match, which, attended by the largest crowd that has ever witnessed an interprovincial match here, produced a most indifferent exhibition, in which, I cannot help thinking, the Olago team was hampered by the attempt to adopt a style cf play that was different from that usually employed here. Apart from that match, the play in the interprovincial gamee did not indicate that there was any cause for us to deplore an inferiority in the play of Otago as compared with that of other portions of New Zealand. But I think it is fair to aay that the standard of play and tho style of play were not what they wed to be. Passing among the forwards and concerted dribbling rushes have almost become memories in our football, and in tho endea\our to master pome of the socailed fine points of the game, of which we hear occasionally, players seem tc have to a large extent neglected featun's of the prame which, while they arc alti active to the public, are also highly profiHblo to the team that adopts them. "And I am bound to say, and I "say it with profound regret, that there has been a marked deterioration in the spirit in which the game is played. The committee was gicatly exercised last year over the number of cares of fotd play that came under its notice, and theic were probably quite as many cases that did not, come under its notice. Nor weie cases of tho kind confined to the ptu-el>- locil grni"^ o\er which the union fcicics cmtiol. Tl.ere were unfoi tunatoly q'axv.- o<.t'i'iiei.ces of foul play in inteipiOMiic ;>i ir..ichr-. and 1 do not hc-iUte to »ay that in two ol tiicec

] matches that were played on the Caledonian Ground last season the refnec uould, in each instance, if he had fearlessly done his duty, have ordered two or three players off tho ground. A stricter enforcement of tho laws of the game and of the spirit in, which the game should be played is most necessary. The duty in this respect rests primarily upon referees, and a duty lies upon tho Rugby Union also to accord to referees all the support that is in its power. This leads me to refer to a case that, as delegates will remember, occurred last year, and that excited at the time a considerable amount of interest— a case in which 0 majority of tho committee came, in effect, to tho conclusion that the referee, in reporting a player, must have made a mistake. The principle involved in a decision which practically iejected the statements of the referee on a matter cf fact was felt to be so important that the Referees' Association appealed to the New Zealand Union on the subject. The Referees' Association, however, hadno locus standi in the matter, and the NewZealand Union felt itself powerless to deal with the appeal, but it recorded the opinion, which is, I am satisfied, absolutely sound, that evidence for the purpose of disproving the referee's decision on a matter of fact is not admissible in an inquiry. That opinion will necessarily have to guide the union in any future case, and in the fact that it has been placed on rocord the case in question will form a very useful precedent. As you are aware, some friction occurred last year between the New Zealand Union and the Otago Union over the operation of this union's by-law permitting the reporting of players by players other .than referees. Prior to last season the position was that the New Zealand Union, whatever it may have thought regarding the by-law, was precluded by its own constitution from entertaining any appeal against a punishment inflicted under the by-law. It seems, however, to have made up its mind to discover, if possible, some way by which it could exercise its authority in respect to the by-law, and consequently it approaohed! tho English Union on fhe subject. I am bound to say that the New Zealand Union did not act so frankly as it might have done ia the matter, for, while it made to the English Union the representations of which 1 have epoken, it did feo without informing the Otago Union that it had done so, and without giving your committee the opportunity of placing its side of the question before the English Union along with the ■communication from the New Zealand Union ; and wlipii the New Zealand Union received an opinion from tho English Union which it interpreted to mean that the by-law was ultra vires it proceeded to enforce this view in a rather high-handed and objectionable manner. But, as the report shows, we c-übseque-ntly leceived a le-tlor ftom the English Union which was in its terms perfectly satisfactory to us. ?.•= ifc sustains us in the position v,e had adopted. The action, of the New Zealand Union in this matter may be contrasted with its inaction in another matter— that of the substitution of freo'h players for disabled. As. to- this, a practice has grown \ip in the colony which is at vaiiance with the English practice, and' is uot sanctioned by tho English Union. The practice i?, in fact, apparently a- Yankee notion. Let me read" an extract, from an article in one' of the last issues of an English magazine:— "The winning of » game being the only end that an American 1-layer has in view, he subordinates every ether consideration to this, and cheerfully relinquishes &uch old-fashioned ideals as ' style,' or ' good form,' or the other shibboleths which have become antiquated in the land of their birth, and arc scarcely known at all in newer countries. He feels, for instance, that he cannot win without a full side ; and, as the peculiar methods oE his game are- so dangerous that only the most courageous of young men will face the ri&ks involved, he makes every preparation for the inevitable accident. The doctor's bale of bandages and a bucket of antiseptics are common objects of the playing-ground. A line of eager substitutes in long coats stands ready to speing into the fray and take the place .of every casualty" tho moment a player is ' knocked: out.' In England we still abide by our accidents, and play short if a man gets bmt." Well, we had got into the way of not playing short in this colony. But because the English decision and practice are clear on the subject your committee decided that, so that the laws might be obeyed in their ertirety. they would s-st their faces last ye.v- against the introduction cf substitutes in a game. Unfortunately, a want of loyalty to the union on the part of t'.e Otago captain and the meekness of the referee prevented our decision from being cairied out on the occurrence of a casualty in ono of the interprovincial matches, and the New Zealand; Union, which had been so determined m the other case I have mentioned to enforce the supposed ruling of the English Union, was in this case quite spineless. In the cant phrase, it i<. sportsmanlike to allow an injuied player to be replaced by another, but sportsmanship does not allow any universal practice on the subject. It all depends upon the stage of the game at which the accident happens wh&n a substitute is allowed or not. On the Saturday before the incident to -nhich I ha^e just referred, the team to which the injured man belonged was playing an interprovincial match in a sister province, and one of the side opposed to it was injured and had tc leave the field. That side did not, however, secure a substitute for the injured man. No. The accident occurred a quarter ot ar. hour or so before the end of the game, and the sportsmanship, which decides that substitutes s-hall be allowed, stops short ot permitting them to come on when a match is ncarins? its completion. We are reduced, consequently, to some such absurdity as this: that what is sportsmanlike at 4.L> say. cea*es to be sportsmanlike at 4 16 or 4.17. Really, you must have one thine; or the other— Substitute* or no substitutes, — and the faire=t, and after all the most ■sportsmanlike, thing to do is as is done, in othe-r pastimes, to abide by your accidents. If any amendments in the laws of the Rains are required, it i,, I fce-1. not in this particular that they are necessary. I do believe that the game would be all the better for modification.* in oertoin directions, and T know that f am not =im>ular in this belief. Mr G. F. C. Campbell, for instance, who 's president of the New Zea'avtrl i?n^by Union, and who was. >'n hi-> playing days one of the finest forwards Jn the colony, 13 the nuthor of several proposals which were published about the caul of hibt season, for olte.'atio.is m tho laws of the game. I do not intend to di=cu«A Mi Campbell's proV.i u'-. With •-omo of which 1 usioo. bu" v Mi n "-*■ of ". !iio'.< 1 disotjr. c. fi'rthor thai .• U p; last rhi y rre very ir^icsunq, an,." l ' ! open up a field to which disv.u>-&icn icav i v

the near future be very advantageously Hirected. I have already detained you too • long, gentlemen, but there are one or two other matters not covered by the report upon which I should like to say a few words. I refer to the proposals for the visit of a New Zealand team to England; next year and the proposals for the visit of an English team to New Zealand this year. The report contains no mention of these matters, because up to the time at which the report was prepared the committee had received no informaticca respecting them to lay before you. Since the report was circulated, however, as delegates will have seen _ in the newspapers, the New Zealand Union has agreed to certain proposals in respect to 'Bach of these projects. As to the proposed visit of a New Zealand team to England, I feannot think the proposals are satisfactory. feey seem to me to show that the Now Zealaaid Union is rather deficient in the sense of responsibility. Usually when a person is in pursuit of .glory he is prepared to risk something for the gain ho has in prospect. The New Zealand Union, however, elamly proposes to thrown on to the individual unions nearly th& whole of the cost of its venture. The tour is estimated to cosfc.' £5000, and the guarantees from Home are supposed to be equivalent to a ,value of £3000. leaving £2000 to be provided in tho colony. Of this, it is hoped that £200 will be produced by matches tolayed by the team prior to its departure. The New Zealand Union .proposes itself to provide a modest £300, while it relies fen the subordinate unipns providing £500 Jn "cash and floating debemtures, ior which ■they will themselves be respectively responsible-, to the value of £1000. These "Sebentui-es are to be redeemed, so far as the 'Jfew Zealand Union is concerned .only in 'the improbable event of there being any profits upon the tour. That is to say. ihe Subordinate umions-, besides voting away considerable sums of money absolutely to the cost of sending tho i«am Home, are also to have all the anxiety that may be felt regarding the financial success of the tour. {For if the t-our is not successful they will know that the amount represented by the debenture indebtedness is igono as irredeemably as the money they voted straight out. The proposed method of financing, the trip may. however, be viewed in. another way. Is it conceivable that if all the unions throughout the colony are to contribute - towards the expense they will not consider ■that they should receive a quid pro quo in the form of representation in the team? .Indeed, it may, I think, be safely affirmed that -if the subordinate umions of the colony are +o .provide contributions towards the cost of this expedition, those contributions ■will have to be proportioned to the representation they receive in the team. And I aeed haTdly point out to this meeting tnat a team composed on such a system would Hot- he- at all likely to be thoroughly representative of the cokmy. As to what would Jiappe-n if tKe tour should co^t more than the £5000 -estimated 1 by the New Zealand Union, and the gaite takings in the United" Kingdom should not produce more than the sum reckoned upon. I don't kmow. It is, however, not impossible that the cost of the tour may exceed £5000. I should b& inclined to think, on the basis of the cost '*>£ sending the team to Australia last year, the expense incurred in sending a more Numerous team Home would certainly exceed £5000. " It ds in view of this possible conJfcingency that a clause in fhe circular - Vecyently issued by th-e New Zealand Union, becomes interesting. It is humiliating to See-- that the New Zealand 1 Union counts iipon obtaining special aid from the Premier ~by which it meams that it hopes to have a sum of money voted to it by Parliament. (Tn other words, it is seriously contemplated that a portion of the expenses of the tour should be borne by the general taxpayer** of the colony. What the taxpayers .vould ia,v© to say if the Government were to propose anything of the kind I cannot, of course, positively assert, but I have a very strong suspicion, that the settler in th© 'back-blocks, who is toiling on under the disadvantage of having no road to his door and no railway -to within miles of his holding, would express^iiifi opinion in terms of strong indignatiom and detp disgust. Regarding the question not from the point of ,view of the taxpayers, but from that of the football player and the football public, I Bay unhesitatingly that the New Zealand .Union argues itself to be lacking in the £ens© of shaxne if it harbours for a. moment the idea of throwing on to the colonial exchequer any portion of the expense of its enterprise., Football is the most popular of all pastimes in the colony. It is the -game above all others in New Zealand that has money in it. And If tie project to send a New Zealand team •Home is a good one, then I contend that ■the iootbaH public will supply, and shottkt isupply, the funds that may be required. If the public will not supply the ftuids •'that is the proof that the" project is not » good- one, or that it is premature and at should be dropped. And" what general " 'benefit is football in New Zealand to derive from the tour? I venture to saj- what Iv-said, I think, Irom this place last year, +nat" it would be of ve-ry much more advantage to the game in New Zealand if an English team toured the colony than if a colonial team toured England. Concerning the proposal for the visit of an English *cam to the colony, the committee has Received no information ; but elelegates will have observed that the New Zealand Union ihas offered terms to fhe New South Wales Union for a series of five matches in Now Zealand. If, however, any difficulties should arise to prevent the English team from coming to New Zealanel, I hope that no countenance whatever will be given to any suggestion that a, New Zealand team shovdd be sent to Sydney to play the Englishmen. The way to encourage a team to come to New Zealand is not to send a New Zealand team 1200 miles across the s ea to meet it; and it stands to reason that this colony •would not be fully represented in a match played in Sydney as it woulel bo in a snatch played in New Zealand. Permit me. moreover, to say that a distinct danger 'lurks in proposals for the travelling of football teams here, there, and everywhere. Take the case of an Otago player worJiy of a place in the New Zealand representative team. He will wish to go with the Otago team on its northern tour this year — that will take three weeks; if a New Zealand team were sent to Sydney, auel he were chosen for it, that would be another thrpe weeks ; and if the inter-island match were played anywhere else than in Dunedin, where it assureelly should be played, the best part of another week would be taken Up. At anyrate, he could reckon on havirg to be six or seven weeks away from his employment. And if the New Zealand Union should succeed in getting its team liway to England next year, and this player ihouid be selected, &ix mouths' absence from

hi f t employment would have to be looked for. It would hardly be a matter for surprise if that player's employer under such circumstances should be tempted to conclude that it was not worth his while to keep in his service one whose proficiency in football involved such heavy demands on his time. I would take this opportunity of acknowledging the obligations the Otago Rugby Union is under to employers of labour in this community for ths generosity with which they have in the past treated those of their employees for whom it has been necessary to obtain leave of absence to enable them to take part in interprovincial and other matches ; but I recognise that there is a risk of presuming too much upon the forbearance of employers, and I would warn delegates that any marked increase in the amount of tripping which playera may be called upon to perform may quite possibly lead to a general curtailment of the privileges that are now liberally granted by employers to their servants. Further than that, I would emphasise from this chair what was said a few months ago in a very different place — at tho Science Congress in Dune-din by the president of that distinguished assembly: "We should be the last to discourage any healthy sport. But when we worship in tho cricket or football fields the wood and the leather we must remember that they are but idols, ancl must not let them occupy the chief shrine in our hearts."