ROUGH RUGBY.

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXV, 17 July 1930, Page 8

ROUGH RUGBY.

Dr. Adams’s Allegations. REFEREE REPLIES TO CHARGE. (Special to the "Herald.”) INVERCARGILL, July 16. Mr A. E. Budd (Bluff), who acted as referee in the match at Timaru between the British team and a Combined fifteen, was asked to-day if he desired to make any reply to the attack that Dr. Adams, president of the New Zealand Rugby Union, is reported to have made on him at football dinners in the North Island. Mr Budd was not keen to make a statement, but ultimately consented to do so. He described “cautioning” incidents in which two British forwards were concerned, and administered a mild rebuke to the president of the New Zealand Union. Mr Budd stated that he was quite satisfied with his rulings in the match, and suggested that the extent of the illegal play had been grossly exaggerated.

“I saw only two incidents to which particular objection could be taken,’’ he said, “and on each occasion I cautioned the offending player. One of these was when I saw Rew's fist thud into a South Canterbury man during a line-out melee. For some time I had known that there was something going on in the line-outs, but was unable to detect it. This time I went round to the front of the line, and I did not have to wait long. However. I did not order Rew off the field. Wl.at I said was, ‘lf you do that again, you will go off the field.’ Apparently Strang misunderstood me, for he interjected on Rew's behalf. To be perfectly frank, I would have ordered Rew off had it not been a British team that was playing. That may be a weak thing for a referee to say, but it is an honest fact.”

The other occasion which incurred Mr Budd’s displeasure was during the first spell, when Prentice (the British captain) kicked an opposing player who was on the ground with the ball. Prentice also was cautioned. "He fell out with me during the first minute of the match, when the Britishers were penalised and Strang kicked a goal,” said Mr Budd. “Then two Britishers were running together one having the ball, while the other was offside, and was obstructing a South Canterbury man who was trying to tackle the man with the ball. The second Britisher took his pass offside, and I penalised him both for being offside and for obstruction. Prentice said, ‘The pass forward was the first infringement, sir,’ and from then on he queried my rulings, not in words, but in looks and actions.

“The game was not unduly rough,” said the referee, “but the South Canterbury chaps played so hard and tackled so effectively that I think the Britishers were taken by storm and began to squeal. It was Prentice who received the tooth-marks, which he showed to me. There was certainly a bit of illegal tackling going on. but both sides were penalised impartially. On one occasion, if the Britishers remember it, they were given a penalty for this reason, which brought them very timely relief right in front of their goal.” Referring to the try which it was claimed Callanan had scored towards the end of the game for South Canterbury, Mr Budd said that he was in a position to get a clearoview, and both Callanan and Bassett reached the ball at the same moment. It was impossible to award a try in these circumstances, “and,” he said, “the section of the crowd which hooted was away at the other end of the field.” Mr Budd remarked that he was congratulated on the manner in which the game had been controlled immediately following its conclusion by a high official of the South Canterbury Referees’ Association. “Everything said at the official dinner was complimentary,” he remarked, “and Messrs Baxter and Prentice are not men who are afraid to speak if they have reason.” Rebuke for Dr. Adams. When asked for an opinion on Dr. Adams’s remarks, as reported in a Press Association message from Wanganui, Mr Budd said it would be presumptuous for him to criticise the president of the New Zealand Rugby Union. “However,” he said, “he is the head of New Zealand Rugby, and referees and all other officials who are trying to help him to send the game ahead expect his backing, even should mistakes be made. If his remarks concerning that match can be taken as an indication of the support he intends to give to referees generally, then we are in a sorry position.”

“NOT MEANT FOR PUBLICATION” DR. ADAMS’S ALLEGATIONS. EXPLANATION ASKED FOR. By Telegraph—Press Association WELLINGTON, July 16. The remarks attributed to the president of the New Zealand Rugby Union (Dr. Adams) regarding foul play in a match between the British team and a Combined fifteen at Timaru, were not intended for publication, and were simply a confidential chat to members of the Wanganui representative team on the eve of their departure on a southern tour. This explanation was made by the chairman of the Management Committee of the New Zealand Union (Mr S. S. Dean) this evening. Mr Dean explained that Dr. Adams had got into touch with Mr Wylie and himself that morning, and had stated that he had informed representatives of the Wanganui papers that his remarks were not for publication. He had addressed a few words of advice to the Wanganui team on the eve of their departure on how to play in the best spirit of the game. A number of referees had been present at the function at Wanganui on Saturday night, and Dr. Adams had also offered a few words of advice to them. He had made it clear to representatives of the Wanganui Press present that his remarks were confidential, but they had got into the Auckland Press via Taihape, through an outside reporter, who had been sitting at the back of the hall. Mr Wylie suggested that as Dr. Adams’s strict res on the game at Timaru had got into print, it would be as well to ask the South Canterbury Union and the referee to furnish I reports upon the match. At the instance of Mr Dean, it was I decided to forward Press clippings of ! the remarks alleged to have been made to the president of the New Zealand Union for his explanation. “ERROR OF JUDGMENT.” In the course of an editorial headed “An Unfortunate Outburst,” the Auckland “Star” says:— The president of the New Zealand Rugby Union (Dr. G. J. Adams) has thought it necessary to make publicly some very strong remarks about the football match Britain versus Combined, at Timaru. We do not venture to pronounce authoritatively about the facts and incidents to which reference

has been made, though we may remind our readers that there are always two sides to a question; but apart from this we think that Dr. Adams has committed a grave error of Judgment by permitting himself in his official capacity to make such charges against Che players and the referee in this way, and publicly to cast such aspersions upon New Zealand football. These comments, with the authority the president of the New Zealand Rugby Union behind them, will be circulated throughout the world, and they will produce an entirely unjust impression of this country and its people which may take many years to obliterate. If Dr. Adams feels so strongly about this matter —and his wish to be just to our visitors is entitled to all respect—we cannot understand why he did not say something about it earlier. It may be mentioned in passing that his strong censure of the colonial players is not corroborated by any newspaper report of the match. In any case, it was open to him, as president of the N.Z.R.U.. to take steps to bring the offenders to task and punish them summarily if they were proved guilty. This could have been done without damaging, perhaps irretrievably. the fair fame of New Zealand sport. We believe that we represent the views of many footballers and a large section of the general public when we express regret at the impropriety of Dr. Adams's action. DR. ADAMS CHALLENGED. The Rev. W. B. Scott, of Waimate, formerly a well-known referee in Christchurch, writes as follows regarding the British game in Timaru: — “After twenty-five years’ intimate association with Rugby football, both as an executive officer and as a referee, one does not want to rush in ■where angels fear to tread. At the same time I I cannot allow the startling statements of Dr J. G. Adams to pass without giving another point of view. I was privileged to see both test matches, and also the game at Timaru. I was in front of the grandstand, close to the Press table at Timaru, and had an excellent view of the whole game. There was nothing to suggest that the game was like Donnybrook Fair. At I the first test I took exception to the ! habit of ‘playing the man’ by at least I one member of the British team. That player adopted the same tactics at Timaru and to Mr Budd’s credit, be it said, that player was penalised for this offence. He was absent from the second test, and ‘playing the man’ disappeared. If photos of the first test are consulted it will be seen that this British player was distinctly ‘off-side’ in the line out. When obstruction tactics are commenced by one side what is likely to happen? There is no need /or me to answer the question. At Timaru I plainly saw a British forward in the scrummage lay hold of an opponent by the scruff of the neck and pull him through the scrummage although he was not in por ■’ssion of the ball. There is absolutely no excuse for the use of j teeth. Such a man should not play ! any games, but, why blacken a whole | side and create the impression j throughout the Dominion that a most exhilarating game was a free fight? The fact of the matter is, the British team expected a runaway victory and when the game seemed in danger then obstructionist tactics were adopted. I hold no brief for our team that played in Timaru. I do admire much of the style and tactics of our visitors. lam rather hoping that New Zealand will lose the majority of the tests. I am not unpatriotic, but we need that kind of lesson to do us a world of good. However, I must emphatically object to Dr Adams fouling his own nest and putting most of the blame on the referee. The match was unexpectedly fast and Mr Budd was carrying too much weight. At the beginning he appeared to be very nervous, but he did penalise players who obstructed, and in spite of Mr Hollander’s excellent display that did not happen in the first test.”