FOOTBALL. — AUCKLAND V. TAURANGA.

Auckland Star, Volume XIX, Issue 222, 20 September 1888, Page 5

FOOTBALL. — AUCKLAND V. TAURANGA.

(To the Editor.)

Sir,—Your report of the football match, Tauranga v. Auckland, is very imperfect, most incorrect, and I fear I must say flavoured with a strong tinge of partialityleaning, naturally, to the Auckland side. That the Auckland team was not a very scratch one the names will be sufficient to prove. The Aucklanders at kick off had a strong wind in their favour, with the sun full on their opponents. Certainly Auckland played well during the first,twenty minutes, bub their best could not overcome the Tauranga; play. V■' t ; , .. . Everyone on the field must acknowledge that in collaring, in running, in fending and in, driboling the visitors were nowhere in cbmparisbh to the Tauranga men. Ryan, Crowe and !one or two morel kicked well, but the backs never had'a chance of doing work^ the collaring being top much for them.;..,.'.;,'... ~.,.. .■' ~..• •■.. ... -■.■.., <■>%•:'<-■

The, Aucklanders never scored a try, never got a real forco-down,.never got through the Tauranga. backs, and during thti second spell never "got the ball within the TJauranga '25, r Tanner got an honest try—it was disputed.' Tauranga umpire ■>■■. gave in, :., although „ > Tanner iv\l on the ball and afterwards pulled .. it back: betwpep his, legs. Joe JTor-an got a"try; it was .disputed. Tauranga umpire gave in, although Jordan tbuchetfihe ball down before"hewas rolled over with it against the corner post. Andrew Hauft'got a' try; ifc was disputed, but aftera time allowed, and H. Tanner failed to kick a goal. Andrew Haua attain got.a. try; it was disputed.\ The Tauranga umpifejrave in. The goal,kicked by Ryan from mark, secured by Crdw6, was, the only lawful honest score made by Auckland. That kick was a splendid one. / : As to your, neat .goal dropped by Ryan, certainly the ball, after, being kicked, passed over the bar, but Ryan should not hay© kicked, aB the ball was dead at the time he picked it up, and the Auckland umpire had his flag up, but when he saw the ball going to be a goal he took his flag smartly down. This goal was disputed; butUllowed by the • referee, yet so dissatisfiedwere the Tauranga men they declined to play ,any more, but at their captain's request resumed play. After that the Aucklanders fell to pieces and the Tauranga men walked through them. But now the Auckland umpire took up the play, and, I assure you, sir, well did he act his part;. What with flag - flying, arid whistle-blowing. (so eye-witnesses report) the Auckland umpire kept thQ Tauranga men in check; There was Sam T ( anner, after 'passing over Auckland goal-line, (failed back. Oh, off side ! There was Joe jbrrtan called backji'with only the full back to pass. Oh, off side I .There was Joe Tanner called back, with only.the full-back to turn over (having previously prostrated the crack, backs). Oh, off side ! Jhero wai Andrew Btaua called back, with only the full-back to taste a second time, of his mettle/ Oh, oS side, of course! Now, who was all the time calling,these men back 2 None other save the Auckland umpire. The question naturally occurs, why wei c not these men called back before they got so far? The Auckland umpire &\oho can answer. The Tauranga'umpire waa a perfect nonontifcy,; and the referee was in Mbilnis. Whon time was called, where was the ball ? Within a, few yards of the Auckland goal-line, with, your " cracks completely done in wind and g6 (including *>yedT Crowe), with geir «'crackps as fresh as when they'begab; " ''"' •_; . - The game has given manifest:,dissatistacr tion—not, marki you, because the Tauranga men lost, but beoftUHf? it was unfairly won. All things being honest and fair and square, the Score would most prbbably^be something like Tauranga 12, Auckland^ 3, but that would never do, the "old parliamentary hand ".was directing; the game, and Auckland must win like tigers though theyshouid even play like jackals.—Yours, i; etc.,. ' vChablssJordan; 8.A.,., Incumbent of Tauranga. : September 18th, 1888. ■ [Our report of the^ above; match g^ve the .Tdaranga players the benerit,o|^all s their good play and acknowledged that they had all the best of the gftme. The writer of the above letter 'i* evidently very much prejudiced, and judging from an exprea:aion in- the letter was not lumselt an of the match; and be apparently reliee upon the opinions of mants who/know very -little of the ea»k To prove that, we vvere per ; tecfcly correct in saying the Auckland tead \w*» & scratch one we have only to point to tb© men yvho^ea^ tu°^t'^' Brown, H. B.X»sk, A. Braund, M.Herrold, P yMackie,' H. StepbepßDli, L. Meldrum, a^bShe fecks; anSO^W ? J^T. O'Connor, J. Heflarnan, C. Marshall, J. A. Stewarcamonp the forward^ all reps,' and forming almost team in themselves, not to inenlion Whitesid.e, ' Elbott, Madigan, S^Ca^n^and N. Mcl^n. Therp were certainly eight "reps" m only five played egainst England in the last match. - Mr Jordon confuses tries and touchdowns, for the vjsrtojtt had to, do the latter eeveral times- i^Uf &*%%!% ho mentione of. the ball being called back'he must blame the refereo,_ noyhe .umpire, If he were well acauainted with Jthe yulea Mv JordflP would knowtftob a

single umpire cannot call the ball back. If one umpire holds up his stick the referee uses his discretion, if the two do he must blow the whistle. He protests with good cause about the delay in the blowing of the whistle, but he should quarrel with the referee about that. When Ryan kicked the goal the ball could not; have been dead,as it was passed to the'aAuckland back, and the umpire denies having held up his stick for any such thing. The " offside" business that was ordered back so much was very apparent all through. Mr Jordan evidently forgets that the Auckland players are from experience better readers of the rules than the Tauranga men, and that; Mr R. Whiteside, who umpired for Auckland, also umpired with satisfaction against England and is a thorough judge of the game.]