PAY AND PLAY.

Timaru Herald, Volume XIIC, Issue 13866, 31 March 1909, Page 3

PAY AND PLAY.

PROFESSIONALISM IN SPORT. (By Alfred Gibson, in London "Leader.") What is an amateur? If one were to settle tins question satisiaotonly there would bo no more trouble m tho world of sport. It is tlie definition, or want ol definition of the amateur, that has caused all'the unpleasantness in the recent dispute between tic Rugby Union of Scotland and Rugby Union of England. Let us begin at the beginning. Every man who earns Ins living is a professional. A social distinction is made between trades and professions; but everyone knows that that is merely an artmeial and arbitrary distinction. The ma.i who works with his hands equally with a man who works with his brains is n. essence a professional. In the world of sport a. man who receives regular payment is usually called a professional. There are, however, other definitions. The Henley definition is that a mechanic or artisan is a professional. Only those are allowed to compete at Henley who are either engaged in the higher paid professions or who do not work for a living at all. If we fix our mind on the basic fact that all of us who are earning our living are professionals, we can then proceed with our argument. Tlie question next arises why there should be anything derogatory in a man engaging himself to play in sports or pastimes. The Marylebone Cricket Club, wise mi their generation, do not have a direct definition of the amateur; and they find that this rule works exceedingly well. In Australian cricket there are practically'no amateurs and no professionals—or, if one likes to put it in another way, they are all professionals because a man may earn a good deal at cricket and still maintain his amateur status.

THE QUESTION OF STATUS. If the rule or no amateur definition works well in cricket, why should it not work equally well in other sports P Why should footballers, cyclists, and athletes generally be more fastidious than the cricketer? An amateur cricketer, like Lord Harris, for instance, has not the slightest objection to play with or against professionals. On the other hand, he finds a delight in meeting men in friendly sport who devote the whole of their time to the perfection of their game. Writing in the "Times," Lord Harris said: — "We have, in my opinion, reached that very enviable stage where ' Manners make the man,' not ' money, whether that bo taken in tho form of 'wage' or of 'expenses.' Wo have all for years past, of both classes, been trying to raise the status of the professional cricketer, and successfully; and tho higher he has risen tlie closer have become the bonds of comradeship between him and the ' amateur,' and the rude and abusive professional will now be avoided by those of his

own profession as markedly as by amateurs. Tho game in its Highest- forms is controlled by clubs of which the professionals are valued employees; tney do not as a general rule seek membership, and therefore they do not infringe on purely amateur cricket; but, 'if an amateur club does play against one which includes professionals among its players, the status of the former is in no way affected. I can imagine this description will considerably startle some cricketers; but I think that after strict examination they will admit its correctness, and I hope they will be able to feel thankful that we have arrived at such, a stage. If so, we may justifiably recommend it for the consideration of the supporters of other pastimes." "I venture to think that if the members of the various Rugby Unions were to approach the present question of professionalism in this broad-minded manner, the solution would be and profitable. The pious horror which a great number of people affect at playing with or against the professional is largely a case of silly tradition of pure hypocrisy. If we arc not exactly a nation of hypocrites, we do a great deal to dissemble our honesty. I have not the slightest doubt that the system which works so successfully in Association football would work with equal success if adopted by the authorities of the Rugby game. For a. long time both the Rugby and Association games were carried on in a similar manner.- That'' is to say, they were ostensibly amateur; but everyow' knew that certain men and a few others who belonged to a superior class received some sort of remuneration for their

services. THE HISTORY OF THE SPLIT. The transition in the "Soccer" game to professionalism from amateurism was not effected without a great deal of hVat and recrimination; but wise men like Lord Ivinnaird, J. C. Clegg, and the late W. C. Alcock, believed that it would be well for the future of tlie game, both as a pastime, and as a spectacle, if those who receive payment were to be governed in the same way as those who played entirely for love. The Association game, as now governed, is perhaps the biggest and most successful thing ever known in the history of sport. One does not pretend that the government is perfect, or that the game is perfect; hut, dealing with human nature as it is, the advantages of tlie combination of amateur and professional overwhelm every other consideration. The split in the Rugby Uuion game came when certain Northern counties asked the Rugby Union for permission

to pay-■" broken, time" to some of their working men players. Very unwisely, as I think, the Rugby Union refused to have anything to do with open payment, although, for niauj years, they had been winking at surreptitious "payments of all kinds. The result was a split and the formation of the Northern Union, which is now composed, of amateurs and professionals, in tho old days, when England was the predominant partner in Rugby foothall, a few working men here and there wore quietly remunerated lor their services (as 1 have not the slightest doubt they are still), and no one was a whit the worse for it. J.he came itself was infinitely better. THE PAID PLAVE.R. Krom the moment ol the Rugby Union split the game of Rugby football, as a pastime and as a spectacle in England, began to decline. England's record in international matches for the past ten years is a ghastly procession of failures. in Wales, where the game is played better than elsewhere, thev have a very large mixture of the working man element; and although there is supposed to be no payment, there is very little doubt that a considerable section of V elsh Rugbv Union players receive some sort of he noli t from their respective clubs. The English Rugby Union know perfectly well that men are being paid, and vet they are powerless to stop it. Why" then,.* not come out in the open and' legalise "what never was wrongP \\i this .way we. shall probably sec a return to the old days when Rugby football was played better or at least as well in England as in any other country.

Tho" best team that England ever sent out were usually composed of half a dozen Yorkshire or Lancashire forwards, with an occasional half-back or three-quarter hack from the Northern counties. The teams were then made up chiefly from London or 'Varsity clubs. At the present day most of our best forwards arc in the West of England; and the majority of them belong to the working man type. One almost despairs of the Rugby Union dealing with this question in an honest and straightforward manner; hut T believe that only in this way can the Rugbv game, be"saved for England.