ALL BLACKS.

Auckland Star, Volume LIX, Issue 171, 21 July 1928, Page 17

ALL BLACKS.

SECOND TEST ON HORIZON. MEW ZEALANDERS KEPT ON MOVE. SIGHT SEEING OR RUGBY PREPARATION? SOMK i >1 "['STANDING SCORING FEATS. (By "PONTV.")

On Saturday week this writer expressed the opinion that, as there was no mid-week game after the first Test,, the All Blacks' best course was to put their Test fifteen in the field against the Northern Districts and then pack the Test vien off back to Johannesburg for a fortnight's training for the second international. Instead, what do we find ? (1) Ten reserves were fielded at Kimherley. and the match-almost presented to Northern Districts (although it is a certainty that New Zealand would have won but for Kilby's mishap). (2) The whole of the party then hiked off to Victoria Falls and Rhodesia, from which latter country it took the team three days to get back to Johannesburg, the venue of the second Test. (3) Thus the object of the week's "spell" before Tests has been signally defeated, and while the New Zealanders were cooped up for three days on an abominable—and unnecessary, for the Test fifteen, at all events —train journey, the Springboks have been snug in camp preparing for Saturday's battle. (4) The Fails and Rhodeslan trip might even have waited until the con elusion of the tour, while the Pretoria match should have been fixed for July IS instead of July 25, so that the All Blacks need never have left Transvaal the week preceding the Test. (5) Now, we have the spectacle of a team having spent the best part of a fortnight in the torrid zone coming down to the veldt for a three days' "spell" before a Test match, to be played a mile above sea level. Thus, all along the line the South Africans have attended tolerably well to "number one!" But the N.Z.R.F.U. apparently doesn't worry much about all the handicaps it has permitted to be imposed on the All Blacks—they will certainly require to be supermen to see their full programme out at all; as for doing it without further loss, the thing's a Rugger impossibility. A Taranaki View. An old Taranaki representative player has forwarded (from New Plymouth) a list of fifteen New Zealand players which he considers superior ("it would beat quite easily," is the writer's phraseology), to "that fielded by New Zealand in the second Test. Apart from the fact that it contains the whole of the five Auckland provincial players, "Old Player" has seen fit to exclude the 100 per cent Taranaki representation! Here is the "team":— Full-back: Lindsay. Three-quarteii': Grenside, Sheen, Lucas. Five-eighths: Nicholls, McGregor. Half: Dalley. Rover: Stewart. Hookers: Swain, Hadley. Lock: Alley. Supports: M. Brownlie, Finlayson. Back-row: McWilliams, C. Brownlie. ("Old Player" says: "Why the South Island should predominate gets well past me.") A Revolutionary Scrum. "Enthusiast" (Grey Lynn, Auckland), writes that he is of opinion New Zealand's wedge formation is a superior scrum to the 3-2-3. Though our average weight is higher than the Springboks our total scrum weight ia lower, due to our light hookers and packing of seven forwards to their eight. For that reason "Enthusiast" would like to see New Zealand's scrum packed this way (because, he says, the only way to get the ball is by sheer weight):— Front-row: Alley, C. Brownlie. Lock: Harvey. Supports: M. Brownlie. Finlayson. Back-row: Hazlett, McWilliams. Rover: Stewart—to use his weight between two back-row men when it is the opponents' turn to put the ball in. Said F. M. Howard iu the "Cape Times" of June 4: — Beaten in the Scrum. "The All Blacks were very badly beaten in the set scrummages. Even when G. Daneel, the best forward of a great pack, was taken out of the scrum and detailed off to the left-wing, the •even Town forwards, with three men up in the front row, secured the ball three times out of four against the New Zealanders' two hookers. And even when the latter did obtain possession the ball hung about in their scrummage and gave Dalley, when at last it did come out, no real chance of setting his backs going with any great hope of success. "Thus once again—and if I have seen it once I have witnessed it a score of times or more—was the inferiority of the New Zealand scrummage formation emphatically demonstrated. I think about it as I have thought for a long time now, that their retaining of it is with them purely a question of tradition and a point of honour. Against any good pack, who really know how to scrummage, it is bound to fail as I have invariably seen it fail. "On Saturday this formation lost the All Blacks the initiative practically throughout the match. And, as it happened, they were not able, as they had been against the Country, to make up for this at the line-out. Here again the Town forwards secured the ball rather more often, though the difference there was nothing like so pronounced as it was in the scrummages." Possibilities of Eight-Back Formation. Three other extracts from the "Cape Times" report of the match in which the All Blacks suffered their first reverse, 3—7, are more than usually interesting: (1) "At one period Brownlie tried packing three in the front row, but after 10 minutes he discontinued this formation." (2) "The tackling of the Town forwards was superb, and in the terrific clash of giant against pant, which characterised almost 85 per cent of the play the local representatives were superior to the flower of New Zealand Rugby manhood. In this connection I never expect Rugby to be a parlour game, but certain regrettable incident* In the course of the mauls were Tery

o\ iflent. It is easy either to gloss over ugly phases or to refrain from any reference to them, but by so doing I feel I would do disservice to a game that should teach us to curb tempers in the heat of friendly rivalry, and I would stress the word 'friendly.' Thus early in the tour a few words offered will be accepted. I feel sure, in the spirit they are meant." ( 3) ' The injury to B. Osiers ankle in the closing stages of the first half was the indirect means of providing a most interesting object lesson to the close student of the game. "During the past three years H. W. C'arolin (vice-captain of original Springboks, 1900) lias advocated at least °a trial of the eight-back formation. I do not propose here to discuss at length what he has argued so clearly in the columns of this paper. We must admit,

however, that the scheme he propounded —which he persuaded Moorreesburg to adopt with considerable success—was never exploited, and most people rather airily dismissed the suggested change as 'the weird idea of a man who has become a crank.' These were the very words used to me by an ex-Inter-national player when I discussed with him the merits of the proposed innovation. "With B. Osier limping, it was decided to play Daneel (a forward!) on the wing, and Stanley went flv-half, with Rousseau as centre, and Bennie merely acted as extra stand-off. "Do you begin to perceive what I mean? With seven Town forwards, mark you—not South Africa's best seven—we got the ball from the set scrums in the second half exactly 12 times, as compared with New Zealand's five. "We had no rover causing so many penalties that the good he did accomplish was offset completely by the advantage we gave the opposing side from numerous free-kicks. No, we simply had an extra back, far from fit, who jumped into the line on the attack; had passes been held as we expect them to be by class players, New Zealand would have suffered a defeat by double figures. "In the fewest possible words, is it too late to consider Carolin's scheme? For long he has been a lone voice appealing for even some scant recognition. Is the policy of playing against the All Blacks in the Tests with seven forwards and two fly-halves impracticable, or is it a sound suggestion? Reflect for a moment. How did Pienaar get his try. even admitting his splendid headlong body fling over the line ? How did George Daneel (acting wing three-quarter) almost get in ? Why, because of the extra back who gave the wing on both occasions the opportunity which it is only right should be offered. "That was why, in the closing stages, the crowd was brought to its feet madly yelling encouragement as the line swung in the traditional manner which has made Province Rugby respected and honoured throughout the world. "It is because of what I saw in the second half on Saturday that I now advocate attention being paid to the eight-back formation. Ido not want the rover type with the functions of a Scrimshaw. I would like merely to see two fly-halves like the brothers Osier, and the usual two centres, scrum-half and wing.

"On the conclusion of the match [ had the pleasure of half-an-hour's talk with Phil Mostert, and when I state here that South Africa's foremost forward—and a man who is no mean tactician —told me that he had come to the conclusion that South Africa should play two fly-halves, I was—well, perhaps there is no necessity to say moreIt needed a mishap to point the way, and it now rests with the Selection Committee. . "Conservatism, I know full well in this case, is ringed around with the steel' bars of tradition. The stock old argument that South Africa prevailed from 1906 onward with eight forwards and seven backs will be offered immediately; but who can say what she would have done had she played eight backs and seven forwards? We had a concrete case on' Saturday, and it gave us victory. Surely that is a sufficiently cogent argument for a degree of experiment. With these words I leave the matter for a time." Is South African Style Legal? "The question arises, is the South African style of hooking legal? They have three men in the front row against our two. If the scrum is worked strictly according to the rules, then the ball cannot be hooked until it has reached the centre, which is the South African middle man. Then, if there is no blocking on the part of the South African outside front row men, we should get possession nine times out of ten, because our two hookers have to beat only one South African.

"Many strange things happen in the scrum in South Africa. When the ball is hooked, it is certainly heeled by the South African middle man, but it appears, in many cases flagrantly, that the two outside men shoot their foot across, blocking our men from hooking. In that fact, as far as I can see, lies the failure of the All Blacks to get possession from scrums." The New Zealander who penned the above for a chain of Dominion papers reckoned without the "fourteen points" signed l»y the All Blacks management at Capetown on May 28. Here are the first four clauses of that historic document:— (1) In a scrum_ a player may hook with either foot, provided the ball has passed both feet of a man on either 'side, and the other requisites with regard to "fairly in the scrummage" are fully complied with. (2) The front line of the forwards is the line formed by the ordinary normal stance of players in the front rank. (3) A player in a scrum may lift his foot from the ground before the ball is fairly in the scrum provided he does not advance such foot beyond the front line of his forwards. (4) Packing should take place alternately, man for man, and two or more players are not allowed to pack with their heads together. New Zealand A B South Africa _ X Y Z It will be observed that the ball is "fairly" in when past a man on either side, so that .t is one All Black against the remaining two Springboks and not vice versa—otherwise why is not New Zealand getting the ball from nine out of ten scrummages? Also, one South African report of the opening match eulogises the efforts of the first South African front-row man in having used all his weight against his vis-a-vis! ' For what object—to prevent him from any effective attempt to hook, more especially as the "contract" permits this first Springbok to lift his foot. As the ball must go past the New Zealander (A) towards the centre of the scrum, what is Springbok X "lifting" for? Certainly not to hook, but because he has been given an invitation to "shoot his foot across" to block the New Zealander opposing him. This might easily apply on both sides of the scrum, leaving the South African middle man (Y) with nobody at all to beat for possession—clause three does not prevent Z from lifting when the ball is going into the scrum from X's side. Even without advancing their feet across the "front line." X-and Z can play havoc with "knees up" (as one of them always has the loose-head, too). It looks as though Kruger (Y) has the easiest job in Africa. Outstanding Individual Efforts. There are no published Rugby records in the sense that the mighty deeds of cricketers of all countries are recorded in that imposing publication, "Wisden." In the task of getting together the following half-dozen or so feats that in any way compare with Benny Osier's

paralysing performance at Durban (when he gave the Springboks 14 of their 17 points by which South Africa annihilated New Zealand in the first Test on June 30), "Ponty" has had to rely more or less on his memory, on which, however, some of these great scoring efforts have been indelibly impressed. That of Jerry Shea, the Welsh centre, at Swansea against England in 1920, will take a power of beating. Wales won by 19 points to 5. Shea potted two goals, kicked one from a penalty, scored a try, and converted the only other try registered by his side—his tally thus being 16 points. Chance played a strong hand in this very wonderful first appearance, for Shea had originally been chosen as a winger, in which position he would hardly have been likely to have got much opportunity of demonstrating his drop-kicking powers. Eric Hammett, the Newport centre, had an English birth qualification, and it resulted in the extraordinary spectacle of both Wales and England selecting him for the Swansea international. He elected to turn out for the country of his birth, and this caused the Welsh selectors to move Shea in and replace the latter with another winger. Frank Fryer, in the New ZealandQueensland Test at Brisbane in 1907, accounted for 15 of the 17 points by which the Bananalandere were beaten pointless. The Canterbnrvian's bag was five tries. K. Starke, in the fourth Test at Capetown in 1924, when the South Africans disposed of the Britishers by 16 to 9, got into double figures with three tries and a potted goal. Duncan McGregor scored the only two tries of the New Zealand-G*eat Britain match at Wellington in 1904. when the Dominion fifteen won, 9—3. In his very next appearance in an international fixture the dazzling Canterbury-Wellinff-tonian (he played for both islands) rattled up four of the five tries by which the All Blacks beat England at Crystal Palace. When the Rev. Matthew Mullineux's Britishers came to Australia they played four Tests (the first of which was refereed by that great New Zealand Rugbvite, W. G. "Gun" Garrard, of Christchurch). England lost the openinc international against Australia, 3—13. but won the remaining three games, 11—0. 11—10. and 13—0. S. A. Spragg, one of New South Wales' many sterling three-quarters — perhaps Australia's greatest—with a try and two conversions, got more than half of his side's 13 points in the sole Commonwealth victory. And in the third Test, with two converted tries, he was the vanquished side's only scorer. Thus, of the 23 points registered by Australia in the Test series, Spragg rang on 17 of them. The sterling calibre of this performance will be more readily recognised when it is stated his vis-a-vis on the British side was the great Gwyn Nicholls. who skippered Wales against the 1905 All Blacks and 1906 Springboks. In 1899 the Welsh idol was at the zenith of his powers— one could hardly say fame, for that was capped by his leadership of the only fifteen to lower New Zealand's colours in 1905.

W. M. Llewllyn, who was out in the Antipodes with Bedell-Sivright'a 1904 Britishers, once scored the whole four tries registered by Wales against Ireland. J. V. Mackay was the only scorer in the Auckland-Wellington flutter in the Queen city in 1912, when in a Ranfurly Shield challenge Auckland beat bv four tries to nil the strongest side Wellington e\er put into the field. His vis-a-vis at wing-three-quater was T. M. ("Harmi") Grace—killed at Gallipoli. 1° the Wellington-Otago Ranfurly Shield game played at Carisbrook on September 16, 1020 (four days before the Wellingtonians lost the trophy to Southland at Invercargill), Teddv Robertsonly just home from Australia where he joined the very select band to score a century for New Zealand—potted two goals for the North Islanders, and very narrowly missed a third drop from the field. On the New Zealand 1884 pioneer tour of New South Wales the unbeaten All Blacks settled Northern Districts by 29 points to nil. Maurice Baldwin (nowadays secretary of the Queensland Turf Club) in a very comprehensive annual apparently last published in 1902— while stating that Jack Taiaroa scored all -New Zealand's tries and kicked a goal from the field, observed that the newspaper records of this particular match were very incomplete and did not publish the teams or names of the scorers. He had, therefore, relied on information supplied bv a Newcastle enthusiast. The late Mr. Ike Hvams (who had a genius for Rugger history) advised Pontv eight years ago that Taiaroa's figures for the whole tour were nine tries and one conversion. This seems to dispose altogether of the potted goal in the Northern Districts game, and as Mr. Baldwin s statistics for the other seven matches of 1884 show Taiaroa's tries to total seven, the maximum number of tries that most renowned of all Maori Rugby players could have notched at Newcastle was a couple.