SELECTION OF TEAMS

Press, Volume XC, Issue 27306, 24 March 1954, Page 9

SELECTION OF TEAMS

SAFETY-FIRST POLICY ADOPTED

HAIG-BOWERS ISSUE (From the Special N.Z.P.A. Correspondent with the team) AUCKLAND, March 23. The most controversial aspect of the All Blacks’ world tour was the kind of Rugby adopted by the team as a policy. In effect', this reduced itself in New Zealand, to judge by the correspondence one received, to a question of whether the vice-captain, Haig, or Bowers should have been played at first five-eighths. The reduction, one feels, was an oversimplification of a complex matter. The team was told at home and abroad that results did not matter, that the important thing was the way the game was played. The selection committee, however, was bound to be conscious of the importance of victory. The committee had to decide whether it was better to play for safety first or disdain the consequences of defeats which might be suffered by the adoption of a different policy. For a long time it voted for safety first, and in fact it never quite shrugged off its affection for this. It will always be one of the contentious aspects of the tour whether the committee was justified in adopting this -nttitude. I am one of those who believe that the policy adopted for most of the tour was open to criticism. Better results were obtained by the Bowers rather than the Haig technique. Haig has had an excellent career, and none compared with him during the trial matches leading up to the selection of the team. It seemed to me simply that for a variety of reasons he did not develop his best New Zealand form on the tour. Bowers’s Greater Speed Nothing but the best would have been good enough, because the activities of wing forwards are now so considerable that the first quality close to and about the scrum must be speed. In spite of his weakness with the ball on the ground, Bowers had the advantage here, but the selection, committee, where there was, I think, some prejudice, was reluctant to acknowledge this. A factor that contributed to the retention of the policy of safety first appeared to be the instruction given to the players in the first days at Eastbourne that there would be no discussion of tactics at team meetings: the selection committee was to be the sole source of tactical trends.

The players themselves discussed tactics only among themselves or briefly in the team talks held by the team of the day. Had tradition been followed, and general inquests been held, in fact, .encouraged, after every game, the change of policy would, I consider, have occurred much sooner. Such inquests, especially if plain speaking is encouraged, are a most valuable safety valve, and one guesses that the Haig-Bowers issue would have been discussed in such terms as to affect the thinking of the selection committee.

It would be unfortunate if the whole issue of the controversy were to be reduced to Haig v. Bowers. As the tour progressed Haig quickened up his passing considerably, and if the match with England, the most important of the tour, is taken as a test, he satisfied most criticisms, for he was not caught by the English wing forward. He left him well behind with a fast pass to Wilson at second five-eighths.

Major Weakness Here, to my mind, lay the major weakness in the All Black backline and the major departure from the tradition of midfield play, which could be said to be the trademark of All Black Rugby. Wilson and Fitzpatrick, the usual second five-eighths, were instructed to kick a great deal more tffan they were allowed to pass. Only a handful of these tactical kicks ahead paid dividends—and hundreds were made. Hunter, 9 second five-eighths, scored 42 tries while touring with the 1905 All Blacks. Nicholls, the second five-eighths, commands the respect of British Rugby people, who still speak of the 1924 team as the finest they ever saw. . Oliver, of 1935, and Allen, of the Kiwis, are remembered for their constructive play. The 1953-54 All Blacks departed from tradition by the wholesale giving-away of possession. The reasons were unfathomable. One explanation was that the team could not penetrate by hand in midfield, and kicking was essential. Here the unfortunate effects of the safety-first policy were in evidence. Fitzgerald did not get an international because it was believed his defence was weak, and inarms of safety first this was the cardinal sin. Yet Fitzgerald was the one back in the team. Bowers excepted, who could cut through and who, in fact, was more adept than any player except Cliff Morgan, of Wales, at doing so. He chopped the Barbarians’ defence gloriously several times. ,A week later, when France might have fallen for the same polished technique, he was touch judge. It was ail very sad, and it illustrated in sum the defects of that policy of safety first which stemmed from the decision at Eastbourne.

MERIVALE CLUB At the annual meeting of the Merivale Rugby Football Club, the following officers were elected:— President, Mr R. W. Blazey; vice-presi-dents, 30 were elected; club captain, Mr F. G. Dick; secretary, Mr K. W. Haworth; treasurer, Mr M. C. Stonyer; custodian, Mr R. Smart; committee,-Messrs J. Pearce, D. Yaxley. G. Shaw, N. Leggoe, R. Richardson, M. Clements, K. McArtney, C. Blight; delegates to Canterbury Rugby Football Urtion, Messrs W. E. J. Maxwell, R. W. Blazey, F. G. Dick, W. H. Lodge; auditors, Messrs H. C. Blazey, W. E. J. Maxwell; delegate to Sports Protection Association, Mr W. Duggan; delegate to Junior Advisory Board, Messrs J. Selwood, C. Roberts, D. Yaxley, G. Rogerson, A. O’Roarke; appeal board, Messrs T. Brady, R. G. Drake, N. Carnegie, C. Roberts, W. H. Lodge. The following were added to the list of life members:—Messrs J. Fitzpatrick, M. West, R. Smart, S. Pendrigh. Opening day was fixed for Saturday, April 3.

RUGBY LEAGUE

BRITISH TEAM’S TOUR OF NEW ZEALAND ITINERARY CHANGED (New Zealand Press Association) AUCKLAND, March 23.

The Itinerary for the British Rugby League tour of New Zealand in July and August has been changed. The council of the New Zealand Rugby League took this step last night because of British I insistence on three tests. In the old itin- 1 erary it would have been necessary to' play two tests at Auckland on successive: Saturdays. There are still to be two tests at Auckland—but at the beginning and end of the tour. There will also be a game between Auckland and the tourists. The itinerary is:—July 19, arrive at Auckland from Sydney; July 21, v. a composite or Maori team, at Whangarei; July 24, first test, at Auckland; July 28, v. Wellington; July 31, second test, at Greymouth; August 4, v. South Island, at Dunedin; August 7, v. Canterbury, at Christchurch: August 9. v. Taranaki, at New Plymouth; August 11, v. South Auckland, at Hamilton; August 14, third test, at Auckland; August 16, v. Auckland.