ASSOCIATION.

Sun (Christchurch), Volume I, Issue 54, 9 April 1914, Page 2

ASSOCIATION.

, PLAYERS' BOOTS. A QUESTION OF DISCRETION, A considerable amount of discussion took place at the last weekly meeting of the Beferees' Association on players' footgear. Possibly some reader may be inclined- to think that such a simple affair as players' boots is not worth discussing. As a matter of fact, the question is one of so much importance that extra special attention has to be paid to it in future by our local referees. Playing conditions vary, and there is no doubt that to be badly shod' knocks a lot off a. man's form. It is in attention to details that victory is often made possible. « It is, however 1 , in regard to the boot studs, etc., that I want to draw some attention. The playing rules are very definite on two points. The studs must be round in plan-r-mustrhave a ;: maxidepth and diameter of half an inch. A glance at the laws will show how players aire required to coivform £0 a particular and very .restricted regulation. As to that there will be little difference of opinion. The risk of injuring opponents must be as far as possible reduced. Nail-heads —square or angular—studs and bars —iron plates and things of that sort are liable to eause serious danger." The risks of all.games are plenty . without adding ,to them. The point I would like to consider is the serious' consequences of a breach of this law. If a referee finds a player wearing illegal boots, he sends him off, and "he may take no further part in the game. The player may have offended innocently, ignorantly, or thoughtlessly, but there is no excuse. He has to gd off and stay off. It is open to any player to ask the referee tq examine his boots before a, game starts, in which case a change may be made or the defect remedied, but. iafter that the referee has no option in the matter. ... It would appear that the law was made so definite as it is in order to. safeguard, the players. It is .possible, also, that it was made at an earlier period in football, and when; jio doubt,, as all old players will recall, specially ;made football boots were not so cheap 'or so easy to get, and thousands played in ordinary boots. The nails and plates and other aids to prolong the wear of a boot sole are often fearsome things, but it is rare now for any butregulation boots to be worn. That being so the breach of the law most likely to occur is not by reason of improper studding-in the first instance, but of worn and brokien studs. Players are apt to pay very little attention to their footwear. I have known'cases in \ which the mere wearing down of the leather part of the stud has exposed the nails, with disastrous consequences. But the offence of omission to examine the boots is not quite so bad as the deliberate use of illegal aids to a foothold: It has been argued in the Old .Country that the referee should be empowered to let a player return after being sent off for a fault of this sort, if he remedies it, or gets new and suitable boots. I don't know that I am averse to this, provided the referee has the power to make a distinction where it is possible to do so. A bad case* would not call for any consideration, but they are surely very few. As a matter of fact, if the rule were to be -thoroughly carried out the boot examination ought to be required both before every match and at half-time. That is, P take it, impracticable, and the facts are only aj>parent when complaints ■ are made — always as the result of an accident. , I need hardly say that the very fact that the punishment is'so severe would be bound to affect the decision of a referee; If he has to declare against the boot he robs a side of the player in question. Therefore there is the chance of his construing the law broadly, whereas if the player could return we might really secure greater safety, if that be true, then the present seemingly deterrent rule tends to defeat the object it was aimed at. UNa