RUGBY DELEGATES.

Star (Christchurch), Volume LXVI, Issue 20479, 4 December 1934, Page 12

RUGBY DELEGATES.

Method of Selection is Criticised. OVERSEAS TOURS.

The Canterbury Rugby Union at its meeting last evening decided to recommend that the selection of men for important positions involving overseas trips should be made by a committee i comprising one delegate from each union in the Dominion. During the debate, bitter criticism was levelled at the system of making appointments. and the statement was made that the placing of the appointment of men to the delegates’ positions, which were described as a means for a “ jolly good trip,” in the hands of six or seven men in one centre, was absurd. Ihe subject was introduced when attention was drawn to the need for nominations for the two delegates to the international conference, and it was then mentioned that the final selection would be made by the Management Committee of the New Zealand Rugbv Union. Mr Moloney said that Canterbury should have some say. He would propose - as a delegate to the conference I -Mr A. E. M’Phail, president of the Canterbury Rugby Union, who was in the chair at last night’s meeting. I do not hold with the way the New Zealand Union’s Management Committee does its business,” Mr Moloney continued. “In theory this system of election may be all right, but it does not work out in practice. These delegates and the manager should be appointed by a meeting of delegates from the unions.” Mr Moloney moved that Mr M’Phail | should be nominated, and also that the final election should be by a meeting of delegates. An Opposite View. “ 1 second the nomination,” said Dr W. S. Seed, “ but I cannot second the second part of the motion.” Mr H. E. Davis supported Mr Moloney in his contention that the election should be done at a meeting of delegates. It was then unanimously decided to nominate Mr M’Phail as a delegate, and the discussion turned again to methods of election. “In the past,” said Mr Moloney, “ men have been sent overseas in important positions who should never have had the job. There is a lot of lobbying in the present system. With election by delegates, the net would at least be wider. At present Mr M’Phail has no chance of election. It will be one of the committee members. We want a wider selection.” Mr M’Phail called atten#m tc the fact that the members of the Management Committee had been returned to that position for two or three years without change, though there had been men nominated against them. That showed that they had the confidence of the unions. Mr W. Britten moved that Wellington should be written to and asked that the election should be made by a select committee made up of a delegate "from each union. Mr Masters said that the two delegates were in for a jolly good trip. No one who had had a good trip before should get one again. Dr Seed: The Management Committee members are just as much entitled to the trip as we are. They have done just as much for Rugby, perhaps more. Mr Moloney; There is no harm in flogging a thing, so long as it is right. We will be vindicated. Mr W. Maxwell moved as an amendment that only the two delegates, and not the All Black manager, should be elected by the special committee recommended in Mr Britten’s motion. The amendment lapsed for want of a seconder. Mr Britten’s motion was carried, Mr M Phail and Dr Seed recording their vo'-es against it.