Canterbury set stiff task

Press, Volume CXI, Issue 32679, 7 August 1971, Page 48

Canterbury set stiff task

(By our hockey reporter)

Canterbury’s hockey fixture with Queensland at Barnett Park, Redcliffs, tomorrow is invested with unusual interest. This season the visitors proved themselves one of their country’s leading teams by reaching the interstate championship final. Queensland’s captain, J. Mason, was a member of the Australian team which, won a sliver medal at the Olympic Games in Mexico in 1968, and he played with considerable skill against New Zealand in Australia last year. The team appeals on paper as a blend of youth and experience, containing a number of players who have gained initial selection in 1971 together with others who are state representatives of much longer experience. They can confidently be expected to express traditional Australian qualities of speed, fitness, stamina, firm, direct passing, and ability to harass in their play, which should represent some element of

contrast with the Canterbury pattern. Unfortunately, Canterbury will not be at full strength because seven of its players are members of the New Zealand team entered in the SouthEast Asian regional tournament in Singapore, and its outstanding inside-right, J. H. Christensen, is a doubtful starter through injury. But .Canterbury is not unused to this situation, and has successfully met such challenges before. It will use the occasion for the further devel-

opment of a number of young players of distinct promise who are already establishing serious claims for regular places. Canterbury’s burden will rest heavily upon the solid core of players comprising R. L. McHarg, one of New Zealand’s finest goal-keepers, P.' Clark, who has been in good form at left-back, apd the in-side-forwards, W. A. Thomson,- B. J. Aldridge and T. Burrows. If Christensen can play, their task will be eased to some extent.

Aiding and abetting is a group whose members have stood Canterbury in godd stead in previous matches,

with E. Holstein, at rightback, a half-line of youthful precocity in P. Ackerley.A. Ineson and A. Chesney, and M. Thomson on the right or left-wing, depending upon hamstring progress. Usually, the appearances of these players have been associated with more experienced teams. On this occasion they are confronted with a greater responsibility .because so many of them are-appearing simultaneously. ‘ ' Whatever die outcome of the match, the experience should be beneficial to them and should, therefore,. help to increase the depth of future .Canterbury selection. The task confronting Canterbury is emphasised further by the performances of the Queenslanders so -far on their New Zealand* tour. They have played several major provinces, inflicting defeats upon Whangarei, Waikato, and Wellington, and their only loss has been, to a full-strength Auckland team. Earlier in the season, the more mature Canterbury team overcame Auckland with difficulty and by a narrow margin, and Welling-

- ton has hadla draw with the I northerners. It would,, fiow,ever.he misleading ’to base I prophecy upon these various results, but it can certainly ibe concluded that Queens- . land is a formidable opponent ■ for ; any of New Zealand’s ' leading provinces. , In an essentially amateur . sport, the strength of inter- , national teams must be based , upon state, county, and pro- ’ vihcial standards, and these ■ in turn reflect the strengths ■ and weaknesses -of club play t or the effect of a specialised > coaching area. The opporf tunity, therefore, of compare ing a leading Australian state . team with New Zealand proI vihcial teams is of some <ig- ; nificance. J ; r > lit may even afford, a better , indication of the respective i standards of hockey gener- , ally in the two : countries ‘than a meeting between [ national teams. > The Canterbury squad for I the match is: McHarg, D. Stuthridge, Holstein, Clark, : I. Bishop, Ackerley, Ineson, r Chesney, Aldridge, ChristenI sen, W. A. Thomson, i Burrows, M. Thomson,' D. ■ Small, J. Bailey.