SELECTORS WRITE TO RUGBY UNION.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 17880, 23 June 1926, Page 13

SELECTORS WRITE TO RUGBY UNION.

WISH TO KNOW WHETHER HAVE “ FULL CONFIDENCE.” NEWSPAPERS BLAMED FOR “ AMBIGUITY.” ) Misleading reports were said to be the cause of a misunderstanding: between the Management Committee of the Canterbury Rugby Union and the three, senior selectors, which came to a head at last night's meeting: of the Committee. The following letter came to hand, signed by Messrs If. E. Davis, P. Harvey, and T. Milliken, the selectors:— '• YY e desire to dra w your attention to the enclosed newspaper reports of your criticism of us at your last meeting. [ You must admit that through ambig'uous and exaggerated statements we have been placed In a false position, and we believe that you will ajtree that in justice to us some correction of the j misleading: newspaper reports is duo by • your committee. We emphatically deny 1 tha t we have at. any time wasted the money of the union. The only occasion when transport has been provided at day previous to the picking: of team to meet Wellington. On this occasion we were at the Show Grounds forty minutes. We take strong exception to the remarks that our method of selection is 'all rot.’ We hardly think it necessary to point out that we must be left free to select the team in our own way. If we have not the full confidence of the committee in this connection, then we shall be pleased if you will advise us. In that event wft are ’prepared to place our resignations in the hands of your committee.” The chairman (Mr A. E. M’Phail) said that the newspaper reports were certainly ambiguous and did not convey what the committee had to say exactly. It seemed to him that the selectors were entitled to some explanation as to how the remarks came to be made. The letter seemed to him to be a reasonable Mr S. T\ Wilson said he had read the reports in the newspapers, and he had not read them as the selectors had apparently read them. At no time had he said tor thought that the selectors were wasting the union’s money. In fact, it was just the other way round. His remarks that when he was a selector his expenses had never been queried were not meant to convey the impression that the present selectors were incurring expenses that were not incurred in his day. What he meant to convey was that the Management Committee of the union would never query reasonable expenses incurred by the selectors. As far as his remark was concerned that it was “rot” that the three selectors should travel between Lancaster Park and the Show Grounds to watch the teams for half a game, he still thought that this was so. Air E. 11. Cross said that the trouble had been caused by the reports of the meeting. It was not the selectors’ expenses that they were talking about at all, though one newspaper had seen fit to make it appear so. It was only fair to the selectors to make the position clear to the public. T>r W. S. Seed said that the quickest way out of the trouble would be to draft a letter of explanation and send it to the selectors. The chairman said that it would be better to have a resolution on the matter from the committee. Mr W. Britten said that the Competitions Committee had been blamed few putting a senior match at the Show Grounds on the Saturday before the team to play Wellington was selected. However, it was the Management Committee that had decided this. Mr J. Dunne moved—“ That the- committee has every confidence in the selectors and regrets that through a newspaper report it was made to appear that the committee thought the selectors were wasting money on travelling ex-

penses.” Mr A. Barrett seconded the motion. He thought the trouble was due to the newspapers publishing misleading state--111 The chairman said that the committee had confidence in the Seleffiors. They had no reason not to have confidence, as the selectors had not picked a team yet. Mr Wilson: I quite agree with you. (Laughter.) After a good deal of discussion the motion was amended to read—“ That this committee has every confidence in the selectors, and regrets that the reports of the discussion at the last meeting of the committee conveyed the impression that they did not have the full support of the committee.” Mr J. K. Molohey wished to move An amendment to the effect that the committee had every confidence in the selectors and that the committee dissociated itself from any criticism of the selectors at the last meeting. The chairman said that he could not accept that as An amendment. There had been some criticism of the selectors and some of the remarks published were The motion as amended was then put and carried.