Amended Rules Stand

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 674, 28 May 1929, Page 13

Amended Rules Stand

DEBATE AT RUGBY MEETING

Grammar’s Motion Defeated

BY’ 39 votes to 11, delegates from clubs affiliated to the Auckland Rugby Union last evening turned down a proposal that Auckland should abolish the local rules relating to the imaginary line through the back of the scrum and the no charge against a kick from a try or a mark. The proposal emanated from the Grammar Old Boys’ Club and was discussed for more than two and a-lialf hours before the ballot was taken.

Mr. J. Arneil, president of the Auckland Rugby Union, presided over the j meeting, which was held in the Cham- j ber of Commerce Hail last evening. ; With him on the platform were Mr. M. J. Sheehan, vice-president, Mr. IT. Frost, Chairman of the Management Committee, Mr. P. Macky, president of the New Zealand Referees’ Association, and Mr. W. Maben, secretary of the Rugby Union. The motion, which moved by Mr. A. St. C. Belcher, and seconded by Mr. G. Clcal, read as follows: “That this union cease playing the following Auckland amendments as from this date: (.1) The imaginary lino through the back of the scrum rule; (2), the no charge at kicks at goals irom marks and tries. Also, that in future the union plays all matches under the same rules as are at present in vogue throughout the rest ol' New Zealand.” At the outset it was agreed that, in the event of clubs not being represented by their full quota of delegates, those who were present could vote for the absentees as well. “It may be thought that the Grammar Club has some ulterior motive in making these protests, but 1 hope to show in the course of the debate that such is not the case,” said Air. Belcher, proposing the motion. “1 do not want you to think that this is an attempt to introduce the thin edge of the wedge in an endeavour to abolish tlie Auckland amendments that have proved themselves over a number of years. DETRIMENTAL RULES Mr. Belcher pointed out the detrimental effect that the two rules complained of had had on Auckland football. He claimed that the selector had to make a representative team forget all that it had learned in club football, so that it could compete on anything like an even footing under the universal rules against other provinces. “This rule is breeding the ‘shiner type of forward,” he said. “If it were not for our present selector, Auckland representative teams would be badly beaten everywhere. It is only because the selector is unselfish enough to give so much of his time that the Auckland forwards go out to play in representative matches as well prepared as they 11 The delegate pointed out that referees were divided in their ruling on the points at issue and that some referees took very little notice ot. the imaginary line rule. “One hears no complaint from either players or the public,” he commented. It was admitted that at the time tho amendments came into force Auckland football was in a parlous state and that the effect of the amendments had been to bring Rugby back into popularity more quickly than would have been the case under the bid rules. Mr. Belcher believed that Rugby would have regained its position under the old rules. NO MORE “SHINERS” Mr. A. Billington agreed that the day of the “shiner” was over. The proper activities of forwards had been so restricted that they had been forced out into the open and the hardworking men had no opportunity or incentive. Heeling was sluggish, and halfbacks lacked the thrust and speed that were necessary under the old rule.

It was practically useless for the pack to break up quickly as, by the time the forwards were away from the scrums, the ball was well along tlie line of backs.

“In all the phases of the game I have mentioned the amendments are contradictory to the basic principles of the Rugby game,” he

Mr. Billington agreed that the imaginary line rule had done much to provide a solution of the wing-for-ward problem, but he considered that good refereeing would have done that in any case. Mr. A. Bayliss could see nothing wrong with Auckland football under the amendments. “What was wrong with tlie Fonsonby-Varsity game last season?” he asked.

Mr. Frost considered it extraordin- j ary that he should have to reply to ; such a motion as that brought forward by the Grammar Club. After playing the rule for 11 years it had been found radically wrong. Mr. Frost declared that the imaginary line rule had done more to speed up and improve the game than the kicking-inlo-touch rule even. Two years after tlie amendments had been introduced, continued Mr. Frost, the New Zealand Union had declared that the rules contrary to its handbook had to be abandoned. A requisition signed by every club in Auckland and the local sub-unions had asked that the Auckland Union be allowed to continue to play under the amended rules on account of the extraordinary conditions existing in the centre. At the second presentation the petition had been granted. ABOLISHING WING-FORWARD Mr. Frost mentioned that in 1019 he had moved at the annual conference that the wing-forward be abolished in the terms of the Auckland imaginary line rule. Mr. McLeod had seconded the resolution which had been passed. Although the resolution could not be mandatory on unions, it was interesting to note that it had never been rescinded. Dealing with provincial fixtures, Mr. Frost said that 70 games had been played since 1921 under the amended rules. Of these 51 had been won and IS lost. "In view of this record, how can anyone in his right senses complain about the standard of representative football?” he asked. Under the old rules quick breakaways had led to the sudden collapse of the scrum and repeated “sacks on the mill.” The amendment, to a great extent, corrected that and made for better packing and quick heeling. “The modification has led to less whistle, and cleaner football,” continued the delegate. “Also, Auckland players in international teams have acquitted themselves as well as those of any other union playing under the old rules.” Mr. Frost considered that the appearance of a ‘“shiner” forward was not a result of the amendment. Referring to the grubber kick, Mr. Frost asked coaches and delegates to appeal to teams to centre play, and keep the interest sustained. “To go back to the old rules would be the worst thing that Auckland delegates have ever done,” he added. Mr. A. Lucas supported the motion.