FOOTBALL DIVERGENCES

Observer, 24 July 1909, Page 2

FOOTBALL DIVERGENCES

Auckland and Wellngton Again

THERE are the makings of a pretty little interprovincial

scrimmage in the differences which have lately developed between the Auckland Rugby Union and the New Zealand Rugby Union with reference to the amendment of the laws of the game. Officially, it is a matter between the authorities of the two unions. Actually, the> gap that is widening is between the> footballers of Auckland and Otago> and the band of Wellingtonians who* form the executive of the New Zealand Union, and control with a somewhat heavy hand the methods under* which the game is carried on in the' Dominion. Present appearances suggest that unless a modus vivendi is. shortly arrived at a rift is likely to be created that will divide New Zealand footballers into two distinct camps, which may be designated theLiberal and the Conservative.

The well-worn political terms fairly sum up the situation. In football, just as in politics, it is impossibleto stand still. There must be football legislation, as "well as politicar legislation, suited to the needs of the.

hour, or stagnation will result. Yet the public have been complaining for some time past that the rules of the national game have not kept pace with the developments which its exponents and admirers have seen to be necessary. This backwardness on the part of the rules which govern the amateur game has helped the give the professional players, with their faster Northern Union system, a footing in the Dominion which threatens to make football more and more of a money-making business. Accordingly, the Auckland Rugby Union has been endeavouring for the last year or two to bring about the introduction of modifications that will increase the popularity of football by improving it in the view of both players and spectators.

What these alterations should be has been pretty well agreed upon. Their general direction is to provide for a more open game than has hitherto been the rule, to prevent congestion on and about the touch-line, and altogether to make for more skilful and spectacular play. The proposals have been under consideration by the various provincial Unions for more than twelve months, and were even provisionally agreed to by a special meeting of delegates to the New Zealand Union some months ago. Then they had to be sent Home for the approval of the English Rugby Union, which under the present constitution has the final word as to the methods to be followed in the New Zealand football field. At the recent annual meeting of the New Zealand Rugby Union, an Auckland delegate endeavoured to move that the amended laws lie put into force in the Dominion, but was blocked by the technical objection that the necessary notice had not been given.

Here comes in the difficulty that •causes the immediate clanger of a rupture. Though the alterations have not the force of law, the Auckland delegates were informed by leading officials of the central body that there was no reason why they should not adopt the new system for their local games, co long as the old rules were applied to interprovincial matches. Accordingly, this season's Cup matches in Auckland have been played in accordance with some of the proposed modifications. But no sooner was this fact recognised by the authorities in Wellington than a circular letter was issued forbidding the innovating Auckland--ers to continue playing under the new plan. Auckland footballers and public, however, appreciate the changes, and the local Union is indisposed to follow the dictates of the "Wellington executive. Considering -that the innovations affect no one "but themselves, it is difficult to see -why they should be interfered with. <Otago is also inclined to break away from the Wellington controllers so it'ar a.s local matches are concerned.

It will be interesting to see within the next few weeks what arises from -this interesting situation. Will the New Zealand 'Union make a virtue of necessity, and recognise the reasonableness of local control in regard to jßwnutlae of local matches ? Or will they be prepared to wait till the season is over, and probably longer, for the decision of the slow-moving English Union ? And if that decision is adverse to the changes will they be disposed to keep back the development of the New Zealand game in accordance with English conservative notions ? Whatever happens, the feeling in the Auckland Rugby Union is in favour of adhering to the alterations already adopted, even at risk of suspension by the controlling body in Wellington. If the Otago Union should then follow suit,_ as seems probable, and suffer a similar penalty, two of the strongest unions in the* Dominion will be found flying the flag of independence. Could the New Zealand "Union, with only Wellington. Canterbury, and the smaller unions left under their direction, hold out successfully against such important secessions ? Also, is New Zealand for ever to restrain the progress of a game in which it has specialised before the world because the dominant English body says she must ? The problem is pregnant with piquant possibilities.