HOCKEY Woolston Leading After Eighth Round Matches

Press, Volume CI, Issue 29851, 18 June 1962, Page 5

HOCKEY Woolston Leading After Eighth Round Matches

I In the eighth round of the ! Canterbury Hockey Association’s senior competition I Technical Old Boys surpnsj hngly held Harewood to a i draw, and this check to the i latter enabled Woolston to ! take the lead in the cham- ! pion»s»h'ip. Another well- ' placed team. University, had to struggle hard to gain the verdict over Selwyn. which is at the bottom of the ladder. The going was heavy at the Polo Grounds, but the surface at the University ground at Ham was in excellent condition. Results were: University 2, Selwyn 0. Woolston 5, West Old Boys 0. Technical Old Boys 1, Harewood 1. High School Old Boys 4, Sydenham 0. Competition points are: Woolston 7. Harewood 6£, University 6, High School Old Boys 5, Sydenham 2|, Technical Old Boys U. West Old Boys 11, Selwyn 1. HAREWOOD v. TECHNICAL OLD BOYS This match was played with great determination by both teams and at a fast pace, but technically its standard was not good. There was much body play and barging, and stick interference was rife. Technical’s recent improvement seems to have imbued its players with more confidence, and their resistance to Harewood reflected this attitude. To some extent Harewood had only itself to blame for its failure to win. For several seasons it has shown steady development, and this year there has been a higher level of stickwork, control and passing ability, especially amongst the inside forwards, than before. ,In this 'match it departed too far from the exploitation of these skills, and seemed imbued with an anxiety which was not warranted. The consequent deterioration its its play was especially marked in the forward line which showed none of its usual cohesion. The best of the forwards was B. Murray who tried hard to restore combination and order but without success. He played well himself and was always a threat to the Technical defence. D. Lloyd moved well enough on the right-wing, but appeared to be isolated from the inside forwards, and his efforts seldom resulted in attacks in the circle. G. Baldwin played a fair game at right-half, but D. Sheppard appeared to have little to do on the left. However, the Harewood defence was rather loose, and the halves must bear some responsibility for this. It was based primarily on L. Innes, who was effective enough, although he relied less than usual on his skill for which he substituted some degree of vigour. Had the Technical forwards possessed more combination they would have breached the Harewood. defence many times. I. Emmerson was again a I dependable custodian for TechJnical. for whom P. Kissell was outstanding in the backs. He (Played coolly and placed his passes with accuracy and care. His example to his team merited greater emulation than it received. The Technical halves were anonymous, and the forward line lacked its usual leadership, neither R. Best nor I. Parker showing top form. D. Lloyd scored for Harewood, and R. Best scored for Technical Old Boys. Umpires: Messrs B. Lloyd and W. Eastlake. UNIVERSITY v. SELWYN The main handicap under which Selwyn labours is the inability of its forwards to finish their attacks. They lack the close stickwork and control necessary for breaching the circle and gaining favourable positions for shooting. In many of its matches Selwyn has done well enough in field play, and it was able to hold University in this aspect of the game at Ham. University's passing was very poor, and throughout the first half its forwards wandered everywhere as if seeking an exit from a maze. Some spirited attacks from the right flank, consisting of A. Read and G Rothwell, and several opportunist bursts by J. Troughton at inside-left saved the day for University. A. Anderson was very safe in the University goal, and E. Jackson’s accurate passing at left-half was sufficient to make him outstanding in his team. K. Thomson was most effective on defence. Both Read and Rothwell showed control in their dribbling, and the latter played with much greater determination. In the Selwyn goal R. Harris blocked many shots capably, and M. Clements at left-back intercepted, passed and tackled coolly and competently. A Waters at centre-half and R. Thomas at left-half played adequately. and took advantage of the loose passing. M. Howell on the right-wing was the best of the forwards, showing useful stickwork and producing many good centre passes which the inside forwards were unable to use. The University goals were scored by D. Wilshere and A Read. I Umpires: Messrs M. Good and iD. Holland. ; WOOLSTON v. WEST OLD BOYS To a greater extent than in any previous game Woolston used its right flank as the channel of delivery of the attack to the opposing circle, and it dominated the match as a result. In addition it was able to play at a faster tempo without loss of control than West Old Boys I could match They were slower Ito the ball and in disposing of | it. and their forwards could [make little impression on the , Woolston defence. i Woolston’s right flank pair, N | Hobson and B. Judge, were I quite outstanding, their clever | dribbling and close combination producing many scoring [chances for their inside fori wards B. Monk took advantage of some of these and displayed [plenty of dash. With improve[ment in control he should score many goals for Woolston proj vided that the present tactics l are retained. R. Gillespie was i always prominent at centre-half, ■and the persistence with which :he fed the right was a factor in the team’s success. J. Hyndman plaved a useful game at i right-hack, clearing the'ball intel’igently. I The best of th? We«t Old Bovforwards were W. Thomson at ; mside-left and R. Thomson a ? i inside-right. The-e two lacked i support through inaccurate dpss- ! ing. and were forced too often i into solo efforts. The latter , showed dribbling ability, and ! the former deserves credit for i his persistence in difficult cirjcumstances. Peter C’ark a* i centre-half was the best of the [defence He possessed sufficient i control to give himself enough [time for placing his passes, but ; his colleagues were usually so 1 bustled that their clearances i were quite indiscriminate. It i would seem that many of the

West Old Boys players need to improve their stickwork if the general level of the team U to be raised. Goals were scored for Woolston by B. Monk (3) and B. Winks (2). Umpires: Messrs W. Morris and P. Beere. HIGH SCHOOL OLD BOYS V. SYDENHAM This was a scrappy game in which the winners did not produce very convincing form. They were, however, clearly superior to Sydenham. For Old Boys W. Browne proved a solid back and blocked Sydenham’s main avenue of attack competently, and in the halves A. Patterson and E. Barnes held their own w T ith the opposing forwards. Seldom did the vanguard move as a concerted unit. The attacks were mainly individual breaks, or probes with through passes whose effectiveness often depended on errors by opponents. I. Armstrong and J. Kiddey were useful opportunists in such methods, and R. Rogers and P. Blyth did well enough in launching their colleagues on their way. The stickwork of the Old Boys' forw’ards was better than that of the Sydenham forwards. and they moved with greater speed and snap. The best Sydenham players on defence, and C. Woods, R. were L. Lloyd and R. Fergus Ghanda and M. Bhana on attack. Goals were scored for High School Old Boys by I. Armstrong (2), W. Browne and T. Thomas. Umpires: Messrs A. D. Holland and D. Dickie. Lower Grades Senior Reserve.—Technical 4. West 0.8. 1; Harewood 10. Redcliffs 1; Wigram 5, B.H.S. 5; Burnham 2, Woolston 0. Second A Grade.—B.R.A. 4, University 0: Harewood beat Woolston by default; Sydenham B 4. Selwyn 3; Sydenham A 7, Teachers’ College 4. Third Grade. —Burnham 2. Redcliffs 1: Hornby 8. Selwyn 5; Ha re wood 4. Emulous 1; Technical 7. Rangiora 4. Fifth Grade. Woolston 7, Hornby 2.