"A Good Provincial Standard"

The standard agreed upon was a "good provincial standard," and it is the interpretation of these words that has caused much bitterness among students during the past 11 years. The reason appears to be that some people fail to realise that a man might be a New Zealand representative in his sport, but may not be of "a good provincial standard." This statement may seem a contradiction in terms, but only if one thinks of what is a good provincial standard in any year, instead of what should be a good provincial standard.

A sport could be extremely weak in this country, with the result that New Zealand representation in such a sport may be easier to attain than in a sport where New Zealand leads the world; consequently, membership of the top provincial team in New Zealand in a weak sport can be less difficult to come by than representation in an average province in a strong sport. As a result, the words "a good provincial standard" are interpreted as meaning such a standard as would give the person concerned a place in the team of a good province when that sport in New Zealand is strong by international standards. For the sake of clarity strong by international standards does not mean being the world champions.

Another method of stating what a blue should be, is the definition used by a member of the Panel. The writer has heard him ask the following question on numerous occasions when blues selectors are being interviewed: "If we give Joe Smith a blue, we would want him to be able to go anywhere in the country and we would want a provincial selector who had never seen him to say 'I don't know this man, but he has a New Zealand University Blue. He must be good. I had better have a good look at him'. Now, if we gave Joe Smith a blue, would that selector be disappointed?"

At times blues selectors have altered their opinions when this question has been put to them and it is a question which many students could well ponder before criticising the Blues Panel on awards they have not made.