PLEASE forgive your Wanganui Chronicle sports editor for the lack of a column last week.
My attentions were somewhat diverted by the small matter of spending Friday afternoon and then early evening talking to both sides in a virtual civil war threatening to break out across Whanganui football.
The debate over Central Football's alleged overcharging has dragged on since the nets were taken off the posts at Wembley Park in October and came to a head in the last seven days, with everybody pointing fingers in different directions.
It's one of those stories where the journalists find themselves tip-toeing through the diplomatic minefield of conflicting opinion.
"Where'd you get your information?" I was challenged on one phone call this week.
"From everyone quoted in the story," was my bemused answer.
Key to this matter is local paranoia in some circles that a governing body based in Napier and responsible for five different regions, whose main centres are spread 565km apart (more than seven hours' driving time) may not always have their best individual interests at heart.
It is very true that one size cannot fit all - what's good for the Gisborne goose may not work for the Palmerston North gander.
I do not envy any centralised organisation, be in CD Cricket or Central Squash, having to try and tailor their fee structures and revenue collection around the variances in expenses and costs found in each district under their banner.
But on the other hand, here is some advice with no cost. I'll give it away for free.
A "take it or leave it" attitude is not going to work in the stubborn, grudge-keeping world of grass roots football.
For the record, Central's CEO John McGifford has been open to media interviews and not dodged any query through this time, although it is safe to say he has significant issues with the claims of Whanganui Football Charitable Trust chair Russell Eades.
In one email exchange over last Saturday's story, McGifford wished I had asked him directly about the parallels found in the Whanganui situation with the Taranaki Soccer breakaway group a few years ago.
There was a lot more to it than what the story detailed and through resolution we're all happy families up there now, he explained.
As a reporter with the Taranaki Daily News over that 2009-2012 time frame, I can say McGifford is right on one track.
There was a lot more to that story, and it forms a cautionary tale for both sides of the Whanganui debate.
Namely, what happens when individuals can't stand each other and fall back on their organisation's basic directive of maintaining the game's integrity to prove they are in the right.
I'm not sure if I would get the same happy families response if I rang up Taranaki Soccer's Neil Smith (no relation) or Mary Burkitt - who lost her job as Taranaki's Central Football representative in a "streamlining" measure before the breakaway.
More like Civil War survivors sick of conflict, they'd probably just say everything is better now but the situation should never have escalated to that level.
Interestingly, the previous Central Football boss Bob Patterson, who left a mess for McGifford to negotiate, was unmoved when Taranaki set up an 'advisory committee', which is similar to the current 'Hub' concept being put together by the local clubs to represent their combined interests.
"It hasn't been formed with the consent of what I'm picking to be the basic majority of people associated with the sport, given the disappointing number of those who voted," Patterson said.
Only problem with his claim was 43 out of 47 Taranaki clubs and schools did vote in favour of having the committee, and Patterson's heavy handed approach won few allies and ultimately caused more than a few defections.
McGifford has obviously learned from those experiences, as the willingness to work with a Whanganui Hub has proved.
Yet the battle of wills with Eades, and the exclusion of Marist from Tuesday's meeting when he wasn't accepted as spokesman for the absent Wayne Ruscoe, remains a worry.
Eades is adamant McGifford could have provided the invoices for Central Football's charges months ago, while the CEO countered it was the Central board's decision not to do so.
Yet who is it that takes the request to the board and how was it phrased to them? Likewise, with what tact, or lack thereof, was that demand made?
This is where personal issues can over-ride good judgement.
I was not able to reach Ruscoe before the deadline for Friday's story but he made it plain to me yesterday that Marist considers this matter far from resolved.
I'll finish with the full quote I did not have room to include from the Castlecliff club's Georgina Keegan in Friday's story.
I've appreciated the candid views of the Keegan's - Ivan and Georgina - who just want to get down to brass tacks by addressing the costs of paying Central for local goalposts, while inspecting the Wembley Park fields and finding rusty net hooks as evidence other work being billed for wasn't done.
And they are more than willing to work with whoever can address these affordability issues - either at Central level or through the Hub.
"Normality in football gets underway. Well, as normal as it gets in Whanganui football anyway," Mrs Keegan said.
We've got a long way to go yet.