LAWN TENNIS

New Zealand Illustrated Sporting & Dramatic Review, Volume IX, Issue 664, 27 November 1902, Page 9

LAWN TENNIS

The idea of having an Australian champion cup has, I am glad to say, caught on (says “Bisque,” in the “Australasian ”), so I fee! confident that by next November it will have become an accomplished fact, and we will see all the best Australian players competing for •what will fie a most coveted honour. At present, I fancy the best method of deciding it would be. to have a separate event, played at the interstate tournament, and competed for by men who were authorised by the states to play in the championship as their representatives. The championship cup would be perpetual, but the winner should receive a gold medal, and the runner-up a silver one. I am sure ehe event would prove most interesting, and will be taken up by all the other states. New Zealand ought to be allowed to take part, and would be sure to uphold their end with credit.

G. W. SMITH’S HURDLE RECORD. It will be remembered that at the last meeting of the N.Z. Executive many delegates expressed the opinion that the case for the mail vote has been unfairly put by the Union. In replying,to their charge “ Prodigal” has the following :— .“I cannot see how any of the members of the N.Z. A. A. A. Council can make out the case has been unfairly put, and it is hardly necessary to say that the executive in stating the case for the mail vote merely did what they considered their duty, and in a wholly unprejudiced manner. To their way of thinking, the rule can'• only be read one way, and in this respect, so as to fortify or dispel their belief, they took counsel’s opinion, and this was in accordance with their views. The rule proper says distinctly that to be accepted, a record must be done in a ‘ competition,’ &c., &c. To this rule there are two sub-clauses showing in what class, of competition such performance should be done. Sub-clause A states that it must have been accomplished at a pro perly-constituted amateur meeting, &c., while in sub-clause B the competition may have been in a ‘ special event,’ &c. “ But these sub clauses in no way affect

the main fact in the rule itself, viz., that the performance must be in. a competition I notice that whereas some committeemen relied upon sub-section B of the rule as if such sub-section stood by itself—if it did the record would be in order—some writers state that the Council was satisfied by the declaration to hand from the officials of the Auckland A.A and C.C, that the event in which Smith competed was a ‘ competition,’ and not an ' exhibition race against time,’ as stated by the executive officers of the Union, and perhaps this is the groundwork of the chargeof unfairly submitting the case. If this be so, I will quote from the programme of the meeting at. which Smith did his memorable 15 1.5 sec—and I have one before me as I write. The head-lines to the event io the official programme read: ‘ Exhibition 120yds Hurdles, G. W. Smith v Australasian Record.’ In the ‘ time table of events’ this form of wording also appears: ‘ Event No. 16, Hurdles, &c.’ “ Furthermore, in a report of the race > I notice that, although Martin ran against Smith, being allowed syds start and his first hurdle down, no mention is made of it being other than a race against time by Smith, Mart n apparently being a pacemaker. It would thus appear that no charge of unfairly stating the case can be laid at the doors of the executive officers. These officials do not say that the event in which Smith competed was not a competition within the meaning and letter of the rule, but they ask for an expression of opinion upon a point which they think is debatable. It is quite understoodthat the event was (as allowed in sub-clause B) a special event at a pro-perly-constituted meeting, but the question is : ‘Was such special event a competition within the letter of the rule ?’ ”