BOUNDARIES DEFINED

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXV, Issue 18554, 29 April 1930, Page 10

BOUNDARIES DEFINED

RUGBY SUB-UNIONS. | SPECIAL MEETING OF DELEGATES A special meeting of delegates of ; clubs affiliated with the South Canterbury Rugby Union was held last night, j to consider a notice of motion, moved ! by Mr T. H. Langford, and seconded 1 by Mr D. O’Connor, as follows: “That the boundaries of the Mackenzie and i Waimate Sub-Unions be defined; and j that no Sub-Union players be permit- . ted to play for town clubs.” There were present: Messrs H. H. j Fraser (president), W. dimming, Hugh i Fraser (Star), S. Williams, G. Fair- ! brother (Zingari), D. Hertnon, J. Roseveare (Celtic). W. Harte (Temuka), M. . Ledingham (High School), A. Clemens (Geraldine), D. O'Connor (Pleasant Point). J. Harley. F. Geaney (Macken- . zie), E. G. Bray, A. Sawell (Waimate), j J. Davey, W. Watson (Old Boys), A. B. : Rowlands (S.C. Schools’ Sports Association), G. F. Doyle (Referees’ Asso- i ciation), and A. B. Herdman. The president said that the meeting j had been called on the notice of Mr > Langford, seconded by Mr O’Connor, j to consider the defining of the boun- ; daries of the Mackenzie and Waimate , Sub-Unions. | Mr Cummins said that Mr Langford ( had communicated with him. and had i explained that he was unable to attend, and asked him to sponsor the | motion. At the time he agreed, but j subsequently he found that he was not i fully in accordance with the motion. | Mr O’Connor was the seconder of the « motion, and he would put it forward. | Mr Langford was disappointed that he , could not be present, and would be glad if delegates would agree to an adjournment of the meeting. However, a way ovfer the difficulty would be for the chairman to move the motion, pro forma. The chairman: “Why don’t you move it?” Mr Cumming: “I want to speak on it.” The chairman: “Why push it on to me?” Mr Watson: “The meeting lapses for want of a mover.” The che 5 an then moved the motion, pro fOn..a. Mr O’Connor seconded, pro forma. Mr Watson: “Is that all the motion?” The chairman: “No.” Mr Watson: “We were called to con- , sider the whole of the motion.” Mr Cumming asked what the posi- 1 tion was. The chairman had read only | the part of the motion relating to the boundaries. The chairman then moved the whole | of the motion, pro forma.

Mr Watson asked if the delegates had power to define boundaries. He | said that he had read through the . rules, but could not find anything which gave the Union power to fix boundaries. 1 Mr Clemens said that the Union had power to deal with matters which came under the heading of general. The chairman said the meeting had power to deal with the matter. Mr Hertnon asked if there was not something in the rules enabling the Sub-Unions to form their own boundaries. , The chairn t a negative reply. Mr Sawell iat rule 4 of the Waimate Sul a stated that the boundaries of u;j Sub-Union should be as defined by the South Canterbury Rugby Union. Obviously Waimate were under the impression that the • Union could and ivould define the i boundaries. Mr O’Connor moved as an amendment that the boundaries of the Mackenzie Sub-Union should be the Mac- ; kenzie County boundaries, and those | of the Waimate Sub-Union shall be the | j Waitaki river on the south and the Otaio river on the north, and that all [ players shall fulfil the residential , qualifications so far as the present rules were constituted. The amendment was seconded by Mr Roseveare. Mr Watson asked if the residential qualification referred to the South Canterbury area as a whole, or to the areas defined in the amendment. Mr O’Connor said that his interpretation was that a player in the Waimate Sub-Union area must play for a Club in that area. Mr Watson: “The motion and the amendment are the same.” Mr Davey : “How does a player get on who lives in an area which has a Saturday half-holiday, and the competition is held on a Thursday?” Mr O’Connor said that most players in South Canterbury played on a Saturday. Mr Davey: “That is not answering my question.” Mr O’Connor: “That is bringing in a bigger matter.” Mr Watson: “Answer the question.” Mr O’Connor: “Get up and address the chair yourself.” Mr H" i that the business of the m to define the boundarie ion of players could be •?• :er, and if necessary. ' • -J, as was done in other • hairman: “Words have been in- I 'ed into the motion which give /atss the right to discuss players.” In reply to the chairman, Mr O’Connor said that the Mackenzie boundary came to the Cave railway station. Mr Watson then gave notice of a further amendment. The chairman said there was little difference between the motion and the amendment, and with the consent of his seconder, he would make the amendment the motion. To this Mr O’Connor agreed. The Waimate and Mackenzie delegates indicated that the Sub-Unions j were agreeable to the suggested boun- } daries. Mr Watson then moved as an amendi ment that the boundaries of the Mac- ! kenzie Sub-Union be the Mackenzie j County boundaries, and those of the

Waimate Sub-Union the Waitaki river on the south, and the Otaio river on the north.

Speaking to his amendment, Mr Watspn said that the motion was raClier mandatory, for if it was carried, players a few yards outside the SubUnion boundaries would be prevented from playing for the Sub-Unions. Mr F. Geaney, the representative of the Mackenzie Sub-Union, arrived at the meeting at this stage. He said that the Sub-Union was in accordance with the motion. They did not wish to debar senior players from securing good football, but they were hard-pres-sed for players, and anticipated a lean year.

Mr Sawell said that the Sub-Unions had a hard row to hoe as it was. without senior players going to the centres to join strong clubs. The Sub-Unions looked to the strong players to assist the game, and they were strongly opposed to outside players being allowed to participate in the South Canterbury Rugby Union's competitions. He felt sure town clubs would appreciate the position the Sub-Unions were in.

Mr O’Connor said they were all present in the interests of football, and they should not forget that the SubUnions were part of the Union. If the amendment went through, a number of players from Mackenzie and Waimate would come to Timaru. Was it fair of the town clubs to take players away from the Sub-Unions? The chairman: “It is not fair to make remarks concerning town clubs when they are not here to defend themselves.” Mr O’Connor: “They are and if they do not intend to defend themselves, you have no right to.” Mr Watson: “Get on with the game.” The chairman: “Don’t make the reference to town clubs again.” Mr O’Connor: “That’s all right.” The amendment was lost by nine votes to six, and the motion was carried, the voting being the same.