“Confused, Incoherent” Rugby Match

Press, Volume C, Issue 29588, 10 August 1961, Page 5

“Confused, Incoherent” Rugby Match

(By GEORGES BtTTHEJf, one oj France's feeding Rtigby writers, who is with the French team)

INVERCARGILL. Aug. 9. Have I become tod hard to please? This is the question I am beginning to 'ask myself. I rejoice that the French have gained, at the expense of Soulhland, the fifth win of their series, but I was extremely astonished to hear people say after the match that they had been present at a good game. On the contrary, I swear that I was bored for a long time during this match, which I had hoped would have been of higher quality, since playing conditions were so favourable, with the sun streaming down, and the field, a little heavy perhaps, but in excellent condition. Now what did we see for two-thirds of the match? Indecisive Rugby, an extreniely confused game, incoherent, which unfolded in disorder, without any organisation. Certainly much vigour, was shown, much energy was expended on both sides. Drive was displayed in quantity, but not much mastery nor authority. I had been told that Southland fielded a very fine team, that its forwards were Very powerful and that its backs, led by the Archer brothers, were experienced players. I had been told also that Southland played aggressive Rugby. But I saw little of this at Invercargill. . What I saw above all were those innumerable up-and-unders, which the Southland five-eighths indulged in toward the end of the match when they saw their markers well placed to develop an attack. What I saw were forwards full of ardour, full of strength, whose actions, however, appeared to me to be extremely ill-regjilated. and who tried to destroy, rather than construct. On the other hand, I was no less deceived by the French, who certainly undertook some very fine offensive moves, but who too often did not offer proof of their authority, and who frequently made unaccustomed mistakes. After the notable opening by the French, who scored two tries in the first 20 minutes, one gained the impression they would achieve a brilliant success with the greatest of ease. However, with only two minutes until full-time, the adversaries were still equal—6-all. Southland let victory slip from its grasp when about the sevenity-fifth minute o£ the match, McKenzie missed a penalty kick right In front of the posts on the twentyfive. If the superiority of the French was so long contested, is this to be attributed to the worth of Southland? I think, rather, that one must look toward certain weaknesses in the French team to find the real reason—in

particular to the bad form of its scrum-half, Pierre Lacroix, whb bore no resemblance to the magnificent Lacroix of the matches of the Five Nations tournament. Lacroix and Moncla, the captain of the team, seemed to me, besides, to make a mistake when they persisted in attempting .set movements from around the Scrum. These movements, which often played a decisive.part in the Five Nations tournament, have failed constantly during the tour. Why then fry them yet again? Finally, even the great Albaladejo himself, usually so adroit, suffered under bad passes from Lacroix, and made mistakes. Guy Boniface, who has not always been particularly inspired, in looking for a break-through from his position at inside centre, was not prevented by his position from making some brilliant offensive moves.. This is why the game of the victories French did not give me complete satisfaction. Happily, there was among their ranks a saviour. And against Southland this saviour was called Andre Boniface, that marvellous back;