NOT WHOLLY IN CONCORD

Press, Volume CVII, Issue 31440, 5 August 1967, Page 19

NOT WHOLLY IN CONCORD

So far—and yet so near: the public opinion poll oh the players varied from the panel’s decision in seven places, but from the panel voting, and discussion, it was clear that very little separated the leading contenders for positions in the “Canterbury’s Best” team.

With more than 20( atries in the competition, there were votes for many players—Bs in all, for the 11 positions. The favourite, with the public, was the hooker, D. Young, but comparisons of voting figures could be a little unfair; where there were two or more outstanding candidates for one place, a split vote occurred. In total votes, A. E. G. Elsom led the list, helped by a substantial number of supporters for the wing position, as well as one as fullback and, rather strangely, one as a lock. In percentage of votes cast in a particular week, Young had the best result. From week to week, the number of voters varied quite considerably, but if a basic figure of 2000 entrants is taken, and the voting scaled up or down score ing to the weekly entry, the figures for the leading candidates were:— Full-back: K. C. Stuart 1160, W. F. McCormick 720. Wings: W. G. Argus 1220, M. J. Dixon 1062, R. M. Smith 940, W. Birtwistle 640. Centre: A. E. G. Elsom 1820, S. K. Henderson 88. Second five-eighths: T. W. Lynch 852, S. K. Henderson 846. First five-eighths: J. Hotop 1014, B. A. Watt 650, S. G. Bremner 190. Half-back: P. B. Vincent 1710, L. J. Davis 172. No. 8: H. C. Burry 1036, D. J. Graham 548, R. ; C. Stuart 199, S. F. < Hill 98, N. S. Roberts I 86. I Flankers: K. R. Tremain I 1598, D. J. Graham i 1016, S. F. Hill 758, 1 R. C. Stuart 142, H. C. ; Burry 125, D. H. Her- ; man 121, J. B. Buxton - 86. i Locks: R. H. Duff 1910, G. I N. Dalzell 904, S. F. I Hill 886, A. J. Stewart I 252. ; Props: B. P. Eastgate 1216, I E. Hern 1072, W. J. | Whineray 894, J. M. ; Le Lievre 674. Hooker: D. Young 1992, J. ; N. Creighton 6. ; In the actual number of I votes cast—and remember- : ing that some players were ; specialists, while others had ; the advantage of being elig- I ible for two or three posi- I tions—the order of public ] preference was: Elsom, ; Young, Duff, Hill, Vincent, ; Tremain, Argus, Graham, K. - C. Stuart, Dixon, Smith and I Burry. | The panel placed McCor- ; mick just ahead of K. C. 1

Stuart, and with similar reservations about the closeness of the contest. It had Smith for Dixon, Henderson for Lynch, Watt for Hotop, Roberts for Burry, Hill for Graham, Whineray for Eastgate. Both teams are splendid ones. Since “The Press” competition began, a similar contest has been started by the “Evening Star” in Dunedin. But it is unlikely that one inquirer's hope, that “Canterbury’s Best” should be asked to take the field against the pick of Otago, will materialise.