PICKING A MANAGER.

Star (Christchurch), Volume LXVI, Issue 20283, 18 April 1934, Page 11

PICKING A MANAGER.

Criticism of All Black Selection. SYSTEM “CUT AND DRIED." Criticism- of the method of selecting the manager of the All Black team was voiced at the meeting of the Management Committee of the Canterbury Rugby Union last evening. It was alleged that if a member of the Management Committee of the. New Zealand Union were nominated he would be appointed, irrespective of the claims of other men. The union instructed its delegates to bring the subject up at the annua! meeting of the New Zealand Union with a view to a postal ballot being taken from all affiliated unions within a month after the annual meeting in 1935, to which nominations for the managership of the New Zealand team for the tour of England would be submitted “At the back of the motion must be a. vote of no-confidence in the New Zealand Union,” declared the president of the Canterbury Union (Mr A i.' "i 10 T . is . - also President of the New Zealand Union. Several members denied that a vote .of no-confidence was involved, and Mr \ . Jj. Jensen, whose motion was carried. said that there wag no allegation of unfairness against the New Zealand Union. The motion gave wider voting powers on the appointment. “If the president has gained the impression that this is a direct hit at the New Zealand Union, it is wrong,” Mr Jensen declared. Mistakes in the Past. The question was brought forward by Mr J. K. Moloney, who said that great 'y as . taken in getting together an All Black team, but the same trouble was not taken in the appointment of a manager. On occasions in the past the appointments had been left to the Management Committee of the New Zealand Union, and it was well known that some managers had been appointed on onlv two or three votes in what was a small committee. Men had gone away who were not naturally fitted to manage a team. New Zealand wanted a good type of man to represent it in England. In the past the system had been wrong. an( l s « t , wa x tinie that Rugby followers rectified what was a bad state of affairs. The president: I don’t think that would be a very good idea. Mr Moloney: You know that there have been mistakes in the past, and we should put our house in order. By having the manager elected at the annual meeting of delegates, or by a postal ballot afterwards, we would get a wider choice and a bigger voting power. In any case, there would be a certain amount of lobbying, but we want a man who can manage a team as it should bo managed. As it is, a good percentage of the managers have been taken from the New Zealand committee. Appointment Forecasted. Mr M’Phail said that at the annual meeting of the New Zealand Union, arrangements would be made for a discussion of the subject. If the Management Committee were not considered competent to appoint a manager, it should not be elected. He thought that if a certain man were nominated as manager lie would be appointed to the position. A member: Does that not prove that the appointment is already cut and dried? Mr E. V. Phillips: I will support the motion if it is altered so that delegates can appoint a selection committee. Surely there are some men in provincial unions who can speak their minds. If a man on the New Zealand Union is nominated he will go in irrespective of the claims of the other men. "Who is going to say that the selection committee will be more fair than the New Zealand Union committee?” asked the president. “ I think this is rather an absurd way of setting about the job. If you don’t like the men on the Management Committee, you can take steps to empty them out.” Tiie motion by Mr Jensen was carried by eight votes to six. An amendment by Dr W. S. Seed, that the matter be brought up at the annual meeting of delegates to the New Zealand Union, was lost.