F.A. SOCCER TROPHY

Sun (Auckland), Volume II, Issue 417, 27 July 1928, Page 13

F.A. SOCCER TROPHY

Why Auckland was Cut Out of Competition

N.Z. COUNCIL EXPLAINS

THE handsome masterpiece of the silversmith’s art. presented to New Zealand by the Football Association for competition here, was allotted to the major provinces as an inter-provincial trophy, possession of which was to be decided on similar lines to the Plunket Shield cricket competition between the four provinces. So far Auckland has never been defeated in a match for the trophy, but last season finished equal with Canterbury on points scored, with a win and two draws each, but Auckland was well ahead on goal average. So far the ruling body in Wellington has declined to state which province it considers the holders, and the matter of goal-average is said to have been referred to the Football Association in London.

No reply has yet been received from either the English or New Zealand authorities which definitely determines possession of the trophy, but the following letter received to-day by the local association, gives a more or less clear explanation of the present position. Mr. Andrew Menzies, president of the local management, left for Wellington on Wednesday to attend a special meeting of the Mew Zealand Football Association on Thursday night, but no result of the deliberations has yet been received. The letter from the secretary of the New Zealand Council to the Auckland Football Association is dated July 25, and reads as follows: “RE F.A. TROPHY” “The correspondence that has passed between us concerning the above matter has again been brought before the council and, in particular, your letter of the 19th setting out the terms upon which you were prepared to meet Canterbury. “When my council first considered the alteration to the conditions of the trophy, it was decided that the first match should take place between Auckland and Canterbury, at either Auckland or Christchurch. Under the rules the home association was liable to the travelling association for the whole of its travelling expenses.

match, and the expenses of the visiting team to be the first charge on the balance.

“This was not acceptable to the Canterbury Association. Canterbury in turn offered to meet Auckland in Wellington, the New Zealand Council paying the ground charges; Auckland and Canterbury sharing the net gate on a 50-50 basis. Owing to the state of the council’s finances this proceeding was not acceptable. “There only then remained one way out of the difficulty in order to get one match for the season, and that was for Wellington to play Canterbury at "Wellington, Wellington paying expenses. Wellington was quite prepared to do this, but you will realise, from its point of view, it would be much more expensive to bring Auckland to Wellington on the same terms. In fact, it would cost £IOO to bring your team to Wellington, whereas £3O would easily cover Canterbury’s expenses. This match between Wellington and Canterbury for the trophy, under the new rules (and I would here point out that this does not affect the position) is to determine the holder of tlie trophy for the 1927 season. “When the decision from England comes to hand, if it does, the name of the winner will be inscribed on the trophy. The new rules have been brought into being since that date, and the competition is being run on different lines altogether. “We desire your association fully to appreciate the position: Firstly, that a match could not be arranged between Auckland and Canterbury, and that in order to arrange some interprovincial match during the season, someone had to come to light, and this was Wellington.”

“Canterbury, on account of its financial position, could not accept Auckland and pay their expenses; Auckland, on account of its financial position, could not agree to the expenses of the Canterbury team in return. The Auckland association was prepared to meet Canterbury under Brown Shield rules, giving the Auckland Football Association £4O for the expenses of the