HOCKEY.

Auckland Star, Volume LXIV, Issue 113, 16 May 1933, Page 12

HOCKEY.

SECOND ROUND. TEAMS SETTLING DOWN. SOMERVILLE BEATEN. Again rather fortunate in escaping the prevailing bad weather, the Auckland Hockey Association -has every reason to be gratified with the outcome of tlie second series o£ the senior grade fixtures. Not owing to the individual successes of the winning teams, but on account of a noticeable improvement in play, though the conditions were hardly better than on the previous Saturday. Despite the attention given to the ground at Eemuera, in its present state it is very difficult to accomplish tricky stick work and short intricate movements with much degree of accuracy, therefore it was not surprising that a tendency existed towards their elimination and the substitution of more forceful tactics. No doubt play was speeded up, and the contest between I hose venerable rivals St. Luke's and Somerville provided a fast and interesting struggle of a kaleidoscopic nature, which was practically in doubt until the end, although St. Luke's led by two goals to one mid-way through the second spell, and eventually won by that margin. North Shore had a fright, and if thenopponents' defence had not temporarily collapsed during: the middle portion of the second spell, the result may have been much closer. Although they confounded the critics in their first engagement, Training College were somewhat disappointing against University, and suffered defeat by 4 goals to one, yet it must not be forgotten that University are capable of rising to the occasion. The positions of the teams in the competition are:— Points. Cli. P. W. 1,. D. F. A. Pts. St. Luke's 2 2 0 0 12 2 4 North Shore .... '& 2 O 0 i) 4 4 University 2 1 1 0 0 i> 2 Somerville 2 0 1 1 1 2 1 Training College ,2011141 Pupatoetoa 2 0 2 0 3 13 0

SOMERVILLE YIELp TO ST. LUKE'S.

History repeated itself in the contest between St. Luke's and Somerville. For several seasons it has been a struggle in which the St. Luke's backs and the Somerville forwards have played the most important i)art, and there was very little variation from that procedure, except that the St. Luke's forwards were more in evidence than previously. The result suggests that the teams were evenly matched, and there is not the least shadow of doubt that there was very little difference between them. It may be stated that Somerville revealed stronger shooting powers, and Waltham had more work than Vail. St. Luke's were just as often on the attack, but showed a noticeable weakness in front of goal, although they frequently approached the circle in a more open formation. Certainly the Somerville shooting was hardly up to its usual standard, and it seemed as if the run of the ball was not in their favour, except when Glanville broke away and scored the first goal. The Somerville forwards shot from all directions, but their luck was out, even allowing for the splendid defence of Jit. Luke's rearguard. When the attacks did not develop sufficiently from the right, Somerville were inclined to adopt their old tactics, and this had a tendency to concentrate the attack, whereas more freedom in shooting may have been obtained by attempts to draw tho St. Luke's backs. \ Although overshadowed by the superior work of their bifcks the St. Luke's forwards furnished glimpses of combined forward play, but they failed to make the most of the chances in the circle. In fact, there did not seem to be very much to cause Somerville any great amount of anxiety beyond the repelling of boarders. Really Vail had very little to do in goal, compared with the work of hie vis-a-vis, although on one occasion Somerville suffered four corners in succession. The St. Luke's forwards are working on the right lines in making play of an, open nature, but there is plenty of room for improvement in shooting. However, that may come with experience. Giles, on the wing, invariably centred at the right time. Grace was inclined to go too far, and then often shot from an acute angle into the side of the net. The others worked hard, with a certain amount of system, to the circle edge. They were hopelessly weak in the execution of corners. Robertson was the best and most aggressive of the halves. T. Clark was more reposeful, but very accurate. At full-back, Williams, owing to the nature of the attack, had his full share of the work, and came through the ordeal creditably. Wattain applied the boot freely in clearing the circle on tho Somerville side. Smith, though not so prominent as in the previous match, was the better of the fullbacks, while McNab seemed more at home in his new position. Tho halves were patchy, Hedges and Heard having a busy time in watching flank movements. Wilmott's task seemed to be catering for the centre of the forward line. Tlie change in the Somerville line was an improvement. Still, it did not work" smoothly. Probably tho St. Luke's backs were to some extent responsible. E. Watts was again at the head of most movements. Wellbourne made some good runs along tho left flank, but did not serve up centres proportionally. C. Watts was in better form. Still, his shooting was not so deadly as usual.

INDIVIDUALISM PREVAILS.

Although North Shore defeated Papatoetoe by five goals to two they did not have such an easy victory as the score denotes. At certain stages of the game they had to fight hard to maintain their grip of the game. Whatever chance Papatoetoe had of causing sensation was shattered during a short period in the middle portion of each spell, and it is difficult to account for the lapses beyond the fact that Anthony and Co.'s brilliance had a dazzling effect and they were through the defence before it was realised. In all the essential qualities North Shore were superior. That was to be expected, biit they did not make the most use of their abilities. Again it must be related that Reid had little to do on the left"flank, the bulk of the forward work going to the centre, yet it must be allowed that good progress was made and in those move-

ments P. Anthony and A. Anthony stood out prominently. At half-back Thornton was a hard worker and put plenty of energy into it. Both full-backs, Allen and Parker, were reliable, but at times experienced trouble in dealing with the flank movements. Papatoetoe have reason to be satisfied with their second performance in the senior competition with the exception of the two lapses. They played with more cohesion and in the second epell opened up the game more, yet there were indications of the hit-and-chase tactics, but the forwards worked better together in an elementary sort of way with visible advantage. With a player like Bay to lead it should not take long to consolidate a quintet to keep position, draw, the defence, and make good opportunities for lightning thrusts at goal. Hamilton, an ex-University player, made some good openings. The wingers, both named Smytheman, made ground on the flanks, but their centring could be improved. In the middle division Moore was the best of the halves. Kerr's work was hardly decisive. ■■• The two full-backs got through a lot ot work, McKenzie appearing to advantage in the first spell, while Lusby showed more confidence and performed better in the second half.

STRENUOUS PLAY.

The meeting of University and Training College produced 70 minutes of-strenuous rather than scientific hockey. 'Varsity prevailed owing to possessing a better understanding, whereas Training College, having many qualifications for a successful eleven, failed, as individual eSort dominated concerted team work. Training College possessed more speed and were in better condition than 'Varsity, but experience stood by the older team. The blues instead of racing

;-bout, hit the ball about and ke>t their opponents on the move. A 'Varsity attack always drew the opposition, but College advances could be foretold, and naturally lacked the sting so necessary. The blue and whites were practically a spent force upon reaching the circle, the forwards had no finish. Until the half line gives the vital support in that portion of the field little hope of success can be expected. After the game there was a

lot of talk about body- play. The fault« pronounced on both sides. Some Dkvmi were more conspicuous than others hi it can be easily checked by less induW of "turning on the ball." The natSf o ? the turf was also responsible for a numC of unexpected meetings of the players Th breach will no doubt be dealt with bv f)i referees more severely in future matches Eobinson was the best of 'Varsitv's fi,n backs. The half line did not come \m t expectations. Philpott, left wing, w£s » tower of strength. He made many onen ings that were not accepted by the innw forwards. Eoss wa3 nippy and showed alertness in recording the goals. The Col lege wing forwards, Brooking and Foreter made many fine advances forward, Pickena and Boswell were best of the halves, whill in goal Chadwick performed well at times

REFEREES' ASSOCIATION,

The second general meeting of the Auckland Hockey Keferece' Association waa held last evening, when the president Mr. (Harry Watts, presided over a good attendance. The chairman welcomed Mr. L. H Norton, patron of the A.H.R.A., and a member of the N.Z.H.R.A. Examination Board. On the .motion of Mr. Norton it was decided to elect Mr. C. F. Bollard to act on the association as delegate with Mr. L. Butcher <it the N.Z.H.R.A.'e annual meeting held on May 18. The N.Z.H.R.A. reported that ijf it received the sanction of the N.Z.H.A. it intended to adopt Major Bickette , manual (revised edition) as a standard and a guide for the N.Z.R. Association. Jfr Norton spent some considerable time dii going through the principal features of the manual, and incidentally mentioned that the Auckland association's ruling have always been on similar lines. He suggested that without interfering -with the name of -Jie association the membere should adopt the title of "umpire," as ie .Used in all other hockey spheres.