RUGBY CANTERBURY PACK EXCELS IN MUD

Press, Volume CII, Issue 30177, 8 July 1963, Page 14

RUGBY CANTERBURY PACK EXCELS IN MUD

Forwards ’ Driving Play Beats Wellington

On a ground having some of the less appealing characteristics of an ill-kept cowyard, Canterbury beat Wellington by six points to nil at Lancaster Park on Saturday, in the first of the annual home-and-away matches. It was no day for the attractions of running and passing among the backs, but there was much merit in Canterbury’s victory 7.

Canterbury’s points came from a penalty goal five minutes after the start and a try 10 minutes from the end. The game inevitably resolved itself into a grim forward struggle, and if Canterbury deserved its win, the six-points margin was perhaps a little unjust to Wellington.

The performance of the Canterbury pack, however, rose steadily to a peak in the last quarter-hour, when the forwards’ concerted drive was splendid and exciting. And although it was wet-weather football, there was much movement, and the crowd of 6000 was better entertained than it had a right to expect.

Canterbury and Wellington are ancient rivals, and this match is always one of the most important on Canterbury’s programme. Perhaps Canterbury was a little fortunate to catch Wellington on so heavy a ground, for the visiting team was deprived of a probable advantage in the backs.

Before the ground cut up too badly, the Wellington backs looked lively and dangerous, but when the battle reverted to the troglodyte creatures in the scrums, there was little between the teams. Canterbury’s principal advantage—and it became more apparent in the closing stages —was the ability of its forwards to bunch and drive with the ball at foot, and to hammer ahead through the many rucks.

There were many dangerous Wellington forward movements, and it was not until the closing stages that Canterbury’s pack won a definite superiority, but the Wellington pack did not keep together to give its movements a full impetus.

Lived Dangerously On the slithery surface, the backs had few chances, although Wellington was more willing to live dangerously, with passing movements, than Canterbury. There were times when the Wellington backs made some progress with handling, but they were tew, and more often than not the almost inevitable dropped pass sparked off another driving foot rush by Canterbury. With so much play in the forwards, the ball was often near the touch-litres, and Dr. Craven's stop-watch would have been worked overtime to establish the findings he has been carrying in his much-travelled brief case.

The tally of line-outs rose steadily to 110, and with the 26 penalties <l5 to Canterbury) and the number of times the ball had to be put into scrums, the actual playing time must have been brief.

For all that, the match had many exciting moments. One of the highlights was the sort of escape and pursuit on which film producers lean so heavily: a few minutes before the end, the Canterbury second five-eighths, D. A. Arnold. pounced on a loose ball inside half-way, and three mighty kicks allowed his speed to keep him ahead of the defence for about 65 yards. It was the necessity to give the ball a final tap ■which allowed Wellington to deprive Arnold of the full fruits of this labour. Kicks Missed

It was no day for goalkicking. either. W. F. McCormick kicked a penalty goal before the ball became heavy, but missed with four other attempts from what would normally be handy positions —although one of them was close enough to hit an upright M. W. Williment had four unsuccessful attempts to kick penalty goals. Listless flags indicated that Wellington’s flrst-spell wind advantage was slight, and conditions were unchanged in the second spell. The teams were:—

Wellington: M. W. Williment; R. C. Sutton, I. N. Uttley, T. R. Heeps; G. N. Bowerman, C. S. Hogg; B. A. Cull; P A. Russo; W. D. Gillespie, I N. Mac Ewan, R. Meadows. W. R. Strang; D. P Bendle, C. Currie, K. F. Gray. Canterbury: W. F. McCormick: P. H. Clarke. P. A. Hutchinson. W F. Birtwistle; D. A. Arnold. B. A. Watt; M. F. Whitta; I. H. Penrose; N. Cornelius. J. Francis. A. J. Stewart. D. J. Graham; J. Le Lievre, D. Young, C. R. Hockley. Mud Wrestlers The ground was not quite as bad as it had been for the corresponding match last year, but it was very sloppy, and in a matter of minutes the players bore a strong resemblance to the mud wrestlers who retain one of the stranger places in the American pattern of life. But there was one player always easily identified: Canterbury’s captain, Graham. In the last year or two Graham, sometimes played at number eight by New Zealand, seemed to have lost his

attacking genius and to have developed a purely defensive technique. But on Saturday his speed to the ball and his resource made him Canterbury’s sharpest weapon. He was forever going forward for the tackle, or to start a foot-rush. And although Wellington won most possession from the line-outs —a doubtful advantage, in such conditions —Canterbury did well when the ball was thrown to the end of the line, where Graham was able to make a good many clean takes and start off forward movements.

Stewart, usually number four in the line, opposite MacEwan, had a hard day, but towards the end of the match he was winning the ball from his redoubtable opponent. Penrose did some fine covering until he was injured halfway through the second spell and his replacement, T. H. Moynihan, was largely responsible for Canterbury’s try. Furious Forwards The forwards drove forward in a fine fury, and when the ball came back, it was Moynihan who ran a few on the blind side and sent Clarke in. The Canterbury front row would have won the highest award for honest effort, and it gave the pack the hard core which made it so effective a unit.

With the Wellington flankers playing rather more loosely than Canterbury, White was more often under heavy pressure than Cull, but he played quite soundly. The backs outside White had few chances, although Arnold often showed up for his shattering tackling his opportunism, and his speed back on defence. Clarke made one or two typically determined runs. Birtw’istle’s defence was commendably sound, and McCormick gave a magnificent

display. His line-kicking was not quite as strong as Williment's, but he handled the slippery ball in a most masterly fashion. His taking of tactical kicks ,was remarkable, for he sometimes got to the ball from seemingly impossible positions. Williment made one or two handling errors, but he. too. gave a fine performance Utitley, on a dry day, would almost certainly have posed some problems for Canterbury. In the first few minutes, while it was still possible to handle and run with some confidence, he twice slipped past Hutchinson. On the second occasion he ran Heeps into position perfectly, but the wing lost the ball in going over the line. Cull Efficient

Hogg was not forced into defensive kicking as often as Watt, and he played a safe game, provided as he was with a remarkably efficient service from Cull The Wellington half-back flicked away good passes as if on a dry ground, and if he courted danger with the speed of his delivery, he made few errors, for such a day.

Individually, the Wellington forwards were all good, but in the unusual conditions Strang and Russo probably played a little too loosely. Canterbury demonstrated the merits of having eight men together, but the lesson was, apparently, lost on Wellington. However, both Strang and Russo, and to a slightly lesser extent Gillespie, were quick to break-dows and had Canterbury tried more often to use its backs, the Wellington men would have been all the more effective.

Bendle appealed as a strong worker in• the tight and a quick mover in the open and Meadows, a newcomer this season, did particularly well at number six in the lineouts. The phlegmatic Currie, whose contribution in all phases of the game was invaluable, won the distinction of taking two tight heads from Young and conceding none. Mac Ewan led his side determinedly and was, as usual, especially prominent in lineout play.