Canterbury Strong In Adversity In Rose Bowl Tournament Games

Press, Volume CIII, Issue 30445, 20 May 1964, Page 15

Canterbury Strong In Adversity In Rose Bowl Tournament Games

fJOULD Canterbury have won the Freyberg Rose Bowl at Hokowhitu last week? But for the want of a little boldness in chipping and a slightly higher ratio of success in putting, the answer might well have been in the affirmative. Chiefly because of these factors the side lost to Waikato on the second morning; had it won, as form suggested it should, the team’s phychological approach to the final match against Auckland would have been completely different.

To win the Rose Bowl a team must have four strings to its bow: six players of skill and adaptability, team spirit, luck, and a wholehearted determination to succeed. The winning team, Manawatu-Wanganui, was an excellent example in this respect. All its players were dedicated without being dour; they played in a state of total concentration and the Rose Bowl was a just reward for their efforts.

Canterbury had all these requirements, although a little more luck would have been welcomed. The players were mature and ex-

perienced, with an aggregate of almost 250 Rose Bowl matches behind them and there was certainly no lack of determination—each player showed his ability to fight back from two, three or even four holes down. There was a wonderful team spirit and a fine team captain in R. C. Murray, who did not need to resort to high flights of eloquence to impress on his men that for three days and for 108 holes of golf they must strive as never before. It was the need for a little more concerted application against a Waikato side with nothing to lose by going for its shots that cost Canterbury its chance. In this match the team won the two top games, lost the next three and halved the last. There was a wholesale need for the middle then to lift their games to a higher level, for although K. D. Foxton, E. H. M. Richards and T. E. Pfahlert played well, their opponents were obviously free from the men-

tai stress that creeps on those in leading teams. In such circumstances, par golf was only good for halving. Waikato won this important contest on the greens. Its players generally putted much better than Canterbury and this was sufficient to tip the scales in Waikato’s favour.

It could be argued that had R. E. Clements not three-putted the eighteenth green to drop his one hole advantage, Canterbury would have drawn with Waikato and thus been level with Manawatu-Wanganui at the start of the final round. But this magnification of an error can be twisted to suit almost any purpose. In this case it would be completely unmerited, for Clements was unrelenting in his efforts to win every match. Clements may not have finished with the best record for a No. 6 but he was probably the most polished player in that position. Apart from the first round he played with fine touch. On the second day, in particular, his play was an object lesson for any aspiring golfer. There were crashing drives, iron shots bf deadly accuracy and putts so soundly stroked that he required only 19 on 13 greens. He was three under scratch for the 32. holes he played that day. Pfahlert was a much better golfer than his record of two wins and four losses would suggest. The manner in which he won five of the first six holes against P. W. O'Neil to lay the foundation for the brilliant young Southlander’s only defeat in two Rose Bowl tournaments indicated a player of more than average capabilities. He confirmed this impression with a comfortable victory against the tough Bay of Plenty match play golfer, A. C. Relph. A little more confidence on and around the greens would have given the Ashburton player a much improved return. From tee to green Richards was an impressive figure, with his booming drives and crisp irons. But he had some wretched experiences with his putter in the middle stages; fortunately he recovered some of his putting form in time for his important match with J. M. Dorreen (Hawke’s Bay). All six players were grand fighters, but Richards fairly bristled with determination when in a tight spot. Foxton is regarded with respect by Rose Bowl golfers, for be has lost only 16 times in 48 matches. He confirmed his standing by rolling in some long putts against D. W. Maley (Southland) and by chipping and putting with such precision that I. S. MacDonald (Hawke’s Bay) fell behind. His form fell away against P. A. Maude (Waikato) but

his other loss, to K. Hankin (Auckland) could be attributed to the sheer brilliance of his opponent’s putting.

The talented. Timaru player, I. S. Harvey, had a disastrous introduction to the tournament by losing six of the first seven holes in his first, match and being well beaten by K. Downie (Southland). Thereafter he displayed great resilience, beating F. T. Gordon (Hawke’s Bay) after being three down and holding a one-up advantage against D. K. Boone (Bay of Plenty) for nine consecutive halved holes. A few of Harvey’s putts were very ordinary, but he hit the ball better frpm tee and fairway as the tournament wore on.

Murray was a most capable No. 1. Although he sank some long and difficult putts there were one or two inexplicable moments when short ones would not go down. Two three-putt holes against S. G. Jones appeared to sap Murray’s

confidence on the greens and a further three-putt episode, on the eighteenth, cost him the match against T. S. Leech. But his play against E. J. McDougall, C. B. McLeod (Northland), and B. T. Boys bore the mark of a true international. He attacked purposefully, with his iron shots to th green a potent weapon in his armoury.

The Canterbury selectors adopted probably the wisest course in choosing a seasoned team for this series of incredibly hard matches. But with an eye to the future, it was heartening to see the young Harewood players, J. A. Orr and J. F. Logie, eating, sleeping, and talking golf, absorbing the atmosphere and watching the champion? as they caddied for Canterbury’s two top men.