ONLOOKERS' VIEWPOINT.

Auckland Star, Volume LVI, Issue 224, 22 September 1925, Page 13

ONLOOKERS' VIEWPOINT.

THE ALL BLACK MATCH. "Ex-Rugbyite" writes: —" As a been supporter of the game I would like to pass a few remarks regarding the game in general. I witnessed the New South Wales v. All Blacks on Saturday, and I must say I was very disappointed with the New Zealand backs. If they had the Queensland League backs against them they would have looked like a lot of schoolboys. Not one of the New Zealand backs lived up to his reputation, the muchboomed 'stars' were the worst of a poor lot. Nepia, whom I never did go 'nap' on, was just second grade compared with Toby. I have also seen three other fullbacks this season who are superior, namely, Harris (Canterbury), Stephenson (Otago), and Craig (Queensland). Dr. G. Sinclair, late Otago University, was the daddy of them all. Of course the latter is not playing now. 1 saw Cooke play for the first time on Saturday, and if that is the general style of his play, I don't go 'nap' ou him either. He certainly is a great Individualist, which may be all right iv a weak club team, but playing with men and against men who are all internationals, it doesn't work. If he persists in trying to play a team singlehanded, he is going to get a severe buffeting, and in big football be will lose more contests than enough, providing he still plays so selfishly, ln the first spell on Saturday he never gave Swnson one single pass on the right wing. In fact he only passed out to his wings live times all day, although he had as much of the ball as any centre could wish lor. He would keep on running uptil he was absolutely blocked. Then instead of passing to anyone near him. he would persist in kicking over his oppouents' heads, trying to regain possession for himself again. If I was picking a New Zealand team Cooke would certainly be in it, but right out on the wing, where he could go for the line all day single-handed, and would please everybody. If it wasn't for the wonderful display of the forwards I don't know where New Zealand would have been. If both packs had been equal I am sure New South Wales would have won. The half-back Mill was only medium, too. He has been used to playing behind a winning pack all tbe time, but on Saturday he wasn't getting so much of the ball as usual (thanks to the 3. 2. 3 formation I. That is the reason I prefer Dalley to Mill, because he is more reliable, and plays a good game with a winning pack, and a brilliant game with a losing pack and a real snorter on a wet or windy day. Even

if he does not score bo many tries as Mill, he gets the ball for others to do so; so it's fifty-fifty as far as that comparison goes. Nicholls and McGregor—well the only time they were prominent was when they were up-ended by their 'opposites.' I.ucas did one or two nice sprints, but when Mr. Toby got in his way, he seemed to 'quit.' The New Zealand back team that went to Sydney this year would take some beating, with Cooke as one of the wings, and Dalley as half-back, and perhaps Svenson as one of the five-eighths. Before I conclude I would like to know how the New Zealand Rugby Union is going to remain an amateur body when they allow a benefit match to be played, and the proceeds given to an amateur player. I have never heard of such a thing being done under Union rales in the Old Country, where the real amateurs are. I know the case is most deserving, but according to Rugby Union rules you cannot give a player anything exceeding the value of, I think, £2. It is only a couple of years ago when that famous old club Newport were disqualified for allowing its players to accept gold watches, valued at £25 each, from the citizens of the town I maintain thnt after this benefit match comes off the New Zealand Rugby Union censes to be an amateur body. I have always been in favour of aniatenrs and professionals playing together in football as they do in cricket, so I think after this benefit match the New Zealand Rughy T'nion had better join forces with the Rugby League: hefore they have to. I haven't much brief for the English Rugby Union, but I do think they are purely amateur. They do play Rugby Union rules, they don't play League rules nnd e<*ll themselves Rugby Union. All the N.Z.R.U. have to do now is to do awar with the lineont. take two men off each tide, and there's the up-to-date League game. Th? New Zealand Rugby Union onnot expect tn be recognised by the Ens'ish. Irish. Scotch or Welsh Rugby Unions !f they persist in playing Rugby partly ender Leagne rules, and giving benefit "intrhes to players. I really do think that Scotland has a genninp gfndgp, the wny the New Zealand Rugby Union break the rules of the 'good old game.' " E. "MaePherson'B opinion:— was very disappointing, and I think Craig, the Queensland full-back could give him a few Ipssons. Nicholls' goal kicking and Cooke's display were up to standard, but comparing the play of the two teams, the display of the New Zealand backs was second rate In fact, although New Zealand won easily. New South Wales played the better football The passing among their backs was miles nhead of the New Zealand team's. It was only New Zealand dreadnought forward and the wind that gave them the game. I am of opinion that Queensland's cracV thirteen could play New Zealand's erne! fifteen on a dry ground and heat them. I* was a terribly dull game, after witness ing the brilliant combination of the Queenslanders."