Auckland's Win Will Not Ease Relations

Press, Volume CVII, Issue 31449, 16 August 1967, Page 15

Auckland's Win Will Not Ease Relations

tTHE convincing win Auckland had in the “top six" New Zealand men’s basketball championship tournament at Dunedin last week-end seems hardly likely to ease the already strained relations between the Auckland provincial association and the national council. In spite of the obvious talent of its players, it is still unlikely that the New Zealand selector-coach (Mr C. E. Agnew, of Hamilton) will allow Auckland to have more than a meagre representation in his team to visit Australia later this season. And it is just as certain that another public outburst from Auckland claiming unfair treatment will follow. But Auckland has nobody to blame except itself for the situation it finds itself in. Every other major association in the country uses the internationally accepted man-to-man pattern strongly favoured by Mr Agnew. Auckland persists in using the old fashioned, if effective, zone method of defence and it is obviously difficult to place its players in a New Zealand team which uses the far more enterprising man-to-man system. And so by persisting with the zone Auckland is to a certain degree penalising its players. D. S. Norris, R. James and R. Arblaster would probably all be wearing a New Zealand singlet before the season finished if they had not been forced to specialise in zone play. All three are outstand-

ing offensive players and there are others who could be considered as welt Lack of representation in the New Zealand team which toured Australia last season was one of the things which contributed to Auckland’s threat of disaffiliation with the national body shortly before the current season began. At that time Nelson was the reigning national champion side. Auckland’s win in the national championship this season with the zone will convince it even more than ever before that It is right and the rest of New Zealand wrong in persevering with this. It certainly cannot be said that Auckland did not deserve to win the title. Its team work was outstanding. From Canterbury’s point of view the tournament was not an overwhelming succes but it did serve to remind its critics that it is capable of holding itself up well against the top teams in the country. It won one of its games, against Otago, and lost the rest, finishing bottom on points scored for and against Yet it was far from disgraced. Three of the five teams placed ahead of it in the final analysis only had one win each as welt The three teams in its section (Wellington and Otago were the other two) each scored one win and Wellington only gained a place in the final against Auckland because of its superior goal average. It could so easily have been Canterbury contesting the final and then it

could not have finished lower than second. The Canterbury players had a great desire to win throughout and the fact that both P. Ross and A Hounsell were fouled off in almost every game was only the result of the great pressure they were applying to their opposition. The ear infection caught by C. Morris, Canterbury’s sole national representative, and the leg injury suffered by M. Askew obviously upset the team’s chances considerably. But the trip was worthwhile for the win over Otago, the first in three games against the province this season. Hounsell played three excellent games for Canterbury. His determination was without equal and his rebounding was magnificent Rose hit the basket nicely

in his first game and he too added to his stature overall.

Askew played well until his injury and even afterwards was still a useful offensive player although he should never have returned to the court. With a little better fortune, Canterbury could acquit itself even better in the national invitation tournament which begins at Blenheim on August 28. In this it will meet the same five teams—Auckland, Wellington, Otago, Nelson and Palmerston North—and a dozen others as well.