HOCKEY CANTERBURY BEATS MINOR ASSOCIATIONS, 5-1

Press, Volume XCVIII, Issue 28951, 20 July 1959, Page 8

HOCKEY CANTERBURY BEATS MINOR ASSOCIATIONS, 5-1

The ground at Williamson Park on Saturday was slightly heavy and certainly bumpy and tricky for Canterbury’s first major representative trial of the season, against the South Island Minor Asaociaßens* team. It was, however,..fast enough to permit accurate trapping, good passing and some degree of dribbling skill to be achieved, but these virtues were seldom seen. Canterbury had no difficulty in winning by five goals to one, although the shield holder was far from convincing In the first half. Its second-half effort, which brought four goals without reply, was somewhat of a negative triumph because of the extremely poor play of Minor Associations.

The match never became really animated; and the best that could be said was that both teams at times, and especially Canterbury, threatened to move into top gear

without actually doing so. Seldom can a representative game have been so utterly colourless and so devoid of combined movement or skillful individual effort. The players gave the impression of wishing to seek anonymity and in this they achieved their greatest degree of success. A very fine \ goal scored by D. James for Canterbury in the first half after a long solo dribble was a welcome relief to the general run of play, but even this incident emphasised the general character of the game because James’s opponents allowed themselves to be outwitted with an ease that was almost naive. On a number of occasions the Canterbury forwards appeared to be concentrating upon relating their speed of movement to the requirements of sound trapping and accurate passing, and this was the most impressive feature of the match. The observance of these principles in the development of combination should prove to be an asset in the New Zealand Challenge Shield matches which are ahead, but a greater sharpness and speed of movement will be required against stronger opposition. The teams were:— Canterbury.—R. Harris; L. Lloyd, J. Abrams; K. Thomson, E. Barnes, R. Gillespie; D. James, N. Hobson, J. Kiddey, K. Cumberpatch, T. Thomas. Minor Associations.—J. Tyson (North Otago); J. Osborne (South Canterbury), A. Jensem (Southland); B. Mairs (Ashburton), R. Calkin (Southland), P. Robertson (Southland); C. Hampton (Ashburton), H. Eastwood (Southland), R. Weetman (Marlborough), J. Stirling (Nelson), L. Panting < (Gore). Although Canterbury had enjoyed a slight territorial advantage up to half-time the scores were level at one goal each when the interval arrived. In the second spell Canterbury asserted a definite superiority and scored four more goals against a defence which was very poorly organised. The Canterbury goalkeeper, R. Harris, was not greatly tested but made a few powerful clearing kicks. He was well covered by both backs. L. Lloyd and J. Abrams, both of whom played coolly and fed their forwards with careful and well-con-ceived passes. K. Thomson was adequate at right half, and the left half, R. Gillespie, was not troubled by the opposing right wing, C. Hampton, who appeared to be a hit-and-run exponent. E. Barnes, in the centre, played more closely to his forwards on attack than he has been doing in club hockey, but his passes were hurried and stamped with an obvious intention which gave his opponents no cause for doubt or hesitation. There were times when the halves should have retreated more quickly and more deeply, and if stronger opposition does not compel this the Canterbury defence will be sorely troubled. D. James made many inroads upon the Minor Associations’ defence, and his dribbling was of great value to his team. His centre passes were well placed, but at times he omitted to cut infield and shorten them. He was very successful in gaining unmarked positions, and this was of great value to his halves .and backs. N, Hobson, at inside right, combined well with James, although his passing was inclined to be erratic. At centre forward J. Kiddey used his stiekwork to good effect and played unselfishly, taking some care tn placing nis passes, a factor which greatly helped the line to move with some fluency on occasion. K. Cumberpatch was quite anonymous for the greater part of the match, partly because of the concentration upon the right flank attack, but snowed glimpses of his former ability in the later stages. On the left wing T. Thomas in his first game for Canterbury made some effective runs and showed a plteasing turn of speed. In general his centres were well placed. Minor Associations For the Minor Associations' team J. Tyson in goal showed good judgment in coming out to kick, and his kicking was fairly powerful and decisive. His covering of hard, angled shots was not altogether sound, however. Both J. Osborne and A. Jensem in the backs were reasonably capable if given sufficient room and time, but neither possessed enough stickwork to give any confidence in close play, and their task was not made easier by the failure of the halves to cover them. R. Calkin slogged it out in the centre and showed glimpses of stickwork, but the wing halves were far from adequate, both of them allowing the Canterbury forwards too much latitude. P. Robertson accepted the dummy from James with a regularity which must have surprised the latter as much as it pleased him.

The Minors’ attack was crippled by the failure of the right flank pair. Hampton’s hit-and-run methods were easily checked, but the main breakdown was at inside right, where H. Eastwood's indecisiveness made him appear to be playing out of losition. Tne Minors’ team was playng to him frequently, but the amount of time which he required for arriving at a decision often forced him into a hurried pass, and many of these were duffed. In these circumstances the two best forwards in Jhe Minors’ team, R. Weetman in tKe -centre and J. Stirling at inside left, were severely handicapped. Both showed good stickwork when opportunity offered, and both were very unselfish, at times too unselfish in view of the ineffectiveness of the right flank. L. Panting made a few honest runs on the left wing, but did not appear to possess much ability In returning the .ball to the' centre or in co-operating with bisinside forwards when blocked.

The match was very cleanly contested. and there was a noticeable and pleasing absence of body play. The Canterbury goals were scored by D. James (2). J. Abrams, K. Cumberpath. and K. Thomson, while R. Weetman scored for South Island Minor Associations. Umpires: Messrs K. Mortimer and S. Swift.