Close Gaines In Women’s Hockey

Press, Volume CIV, Issue 30740, 3 May 1965, Page 11

Close Gaines In Women’s Hockey

Features of the first round of the Canterbury Women’s hockey senior competition were the unexpected closeness of several games, and the generally scrappy play. The grounds were very bumpy and this had an adverse effect on trapping. A disturbing feature was the failure to penalise dangerously raised balls, unexpected after the rigid enforcement of this rule last season. Results:— Carlton 2, Annul 1. University 2, West 1. Harewood 1, Digbys 0. Rawhiti 4. Hinemoa 2. Aranul v. Carlton In this match there were occasions when constructive passing movements looked dangerous, but at other times both de(ences resorted to aimless hardhitting to relieve pressure. On defence, the halves of both teams were quick to cover, and many attacks were thwarted by the sure tackling and trapping of these players. At times the concentration on fast attacks caused the passing to be inaccurate, but the efforts made to use full forward line attacks were to be commended. ' For Carlton, S. Comer was very safe on defence, her fast retreating being responsible for the failure of Aranul attacks. E. White, at right-half, trapped surely and passed accurately to her right side forwards. The third of the halves, J. Witte, completed the team of quick cover defence.

D. Eddy used her speed and anticipation to advantage to cut inside her half and link with the inside forwards. In the last quarter of the game the Carlton forwards were pressing hard, but narrowly failed to score.

Both goalkeepers, J. Hart (Aranul) and J. Wilson (Carlton), made fine saves, with Hart perhaps called upon more often. A. Ruston covered and passed well, while K. McCormick did well to contain D. Eddy's runs for much of the game. In the forwards F. Thompson showed a pleasing awareness of her role as a builder of attacks, and made some effective passes, especially to the centre close on attack. J. Davies played with energy and determination, showing at all times a willingness to hunt for the play on attack. The goals were scored by A. Howman and R. Kuskis for Carlton, and by W. McNabb for Aranui. Digby's v. Harewood This game was played at a fast rate, which caused some deterioration of combined attacks. Both team* reMed upon individual breaks for scoring chances rather than on weltbullt attacks. Throughout play remained Indecisive and scrappy. Both defences handled the solo breaks quite comfortably, but against a more combined attack could be struggling. The young Harewood forward® were ably led by L. Rutledge, whose controlled, fast dribbling was rewarded by a well-earned goal. L. Watson, at centre-half, directed the play of the forwards with accurate, varied passes and covered much ground on defence and was well supported by M. Poulsen. I. Murray was sound on defence and her experience helped to stabilise the team.

The more experienced Digby’s team found some difficulty in the positioning of its defence which was inclined to bunch together.

S. Riches played well at centre-half, but too many of the clearances were misdirected. The forwards were well led by M. Morris and B. Turbott, who both showed penetration by virtue of their strong running. The only goal was scored by L. Rutledge for Harewood.

Rawhiti v. Hinemoa Play did not at any stage reach a good standard. The main fault was failure to relate control to speed, which resulted in the breakdown of most attacks. Another fault was the failure of both sets of forwards to retreat to link with their defences, who were thus forced into long and often ill-directed clearing hits.

In the Rawhiti team, J. Hayes made some penetrating runs and was always a threat. She received good support from N. Cunningham, while H. Turner

was useful in the circle. A. Rouse provided some stability to an inexperienced defence. For Hinemoa. E. Melrose showed thrust in the centre, while J. Capslick and R. Black were the mainstays of the defence. University v. West Last year’s competition winner, University, was rather fortunate to scrape home against a determined west team, tn an extremely scrappy game. University's main fault was poor trapping and this enabled West to gain the initiative. At times there was slow covering by the University backs which allowed the West forwards to make considerable headway before they were finally checked.

K. Pyatt, at left-half, was University's best player and her sound trapping, good positional play and excellent covering made a vital contribution to her team’s win. L, Otten, the left-back, made a fine debut in senior hockey, her trapping and positional play being of a very high standard. Her retirement through injury was a sad loss to her team. The University forwards were not as prominent as usual on attack because of poor trapping and a tendency to over-dribble. However, in the second half the inside forwards made a notable contribution on defence with determined back-tackling and clearances, K. McKerrow being particularly effective. West showed considerable speed to the ball and effectively harrassed its opponents. The best player was, L. Flett, whose trapping, tackling and covering were responsible for the failure of many University attacks. She formed an effective combination with her feO'.owback, K. Wilkinson. D. Donaldson, at centre-half, made some good interceptions in mid-field, and J. Usher, in goal, made some very fine saves. M. Fergus was often dangerous on the left wing. For University, A. ColviMe and J. Fisher scored, while L. Fiddle scored for West.