Solid forward effort not enough to lift Ranfurly Shield

Press, 7 September 1981, Page 34

Solid forward effort not enough to lift Ranfurly Shield

By

JOHN BROOKS

Waikato lays claim to having the country’s prettiest girls and most enterprising footballers, on the strength of repeated success in Miss New Zealand contests and the possession of the Ranfurly Shield

While the first boast might be disputed in Christchurch, the second was irrefutable in Hamilton on Saturday as ecstatic Waikato supporters celebrated their side’s 14-7 victory over Canterbury in the fourth shield challenge of the winter. Confident, vigorous and swift, the home team produced such a refreshingly imaginative style of rugby that Canterbury’s contribution looked lame by comparison. One spectator observed succinctly that Canterbury played more like a shield holder than a shield challenger. The score was a fair indication of the fortunes of the game, of opportunities grasped boldly by Waikato and of chances narrowly missed or lost by Canterbury. As Mr Mervyn Barnett, Canterbury’s manager, said: “Our boys put everything into this game, but Waikato proved a worthy shield holder.” But although Waikato’s display resembled rich tapestry compared with Canterbury’s sackcloth, Don Hayes and his men came tantalisingly close to success after a remarkably sustained effort throughout the third quarter and into the fourth. Most sides would have been demoralised by the ease and impudence with which Waikato rattled on two splendid tries on the flanks in the first half. Canterbury, however, replied by mounting intense pressure up front when playing into a strong and tricky wind after halftime, and this pressure even-

tually brought a try at 26min. This put the challenger only a point behind, but it was unable to maintain a firm grip on developments, and Waikato scored twice from goals in the last Bmin to seal its win. Yet the outcome might have been different had Robbie Deans not been abandoned by the law of averages just when he needed it most. One of his kicks hit an upright, and the other four flirted with the posts, only to pass outside. In the final analysis, however, Canterbury’s principal failing was that it did not invest its early play with the urgency which a challenger must display to have a good chance of success. The halftime scoreline of 8-3 to Waikato, after Canterbury had first use of the wind, boded ill for the challenger.“We failed to settle into a rhythm early enough,” said the chief Canterbury coach, Mr Gerald Wilson. “They threw their back moves at us and we failed to put them on the ground. And their support play was excellent.” The game was played on the ninth anniversary of Canterbury’s last shield challenge, but that historical tidbit contributed little to the red and blacks’ motivation. Waikato, on the other hand, was constantly encouraged by a vocal and unashamedly parochial crowd of about 13,000, the clanking of cowbells, and the sight of the petite Raewyn Marcroft, the home grown Miss New Zealand, sporting a red, black and yellow scarf.

Mooloo, that misshapen bovine who was born 30 years ago when Waikato first won the shield to start a popular trend in animal mascots for rugby teams, reappeared. There were many other expressions of local pride and community backing for the Waikato team in a 40-float procession in Frankton before the match. But the man chiefly credited with Waikato’s resurgence as a rugby power, the coach, Mr George Simpkin, was not at his effervescent best because he was in the throes of a heavy cold. Canterbury supporters wished he had breathed heavily on his charges at training earlier in the week. But before he dashed off home to a hot toddy and a warm bed, Mr Simpkin admitted he had harboured grave misgivings when Canterbury was applying its full body clamp in the third quarter. “We did not play it all that well,” he said. “We did not punch up the middle enough, because after a while Canterbury was waiting for us on the flanks.” “But I was pleased with the tries we got and the way we got them. This style really works, you know.” The Waikato coach was referring to his broad adoption of the Australian formation, which knocked the All Blacks off balance last year. Although Doug Phillips’s clearances from half-back were often ponderous and John Boe caught his passes flat-footed, Mr Simpkin’s “fast hand” technique had

the ball out swiftly to the wings. Totally ignoring the blindside as an avenue for advancement, Waikato used its full-back and blind-side wing as additional attackers on the open side, with the leggy flanker, Geoff Hines, often roaming free in centre field Canterbury’s defensive screen was reasonably well deployed, but the major failing was that the tackling was not positive enough to put attackers to ground. Consequently there was no shortage of support for the ballcarrier in Waikato moves. All of this added up to some spectacular dashes by the home team’s wings, Gary ■ Major and Bruce Smith, who have a private duel over who can score the most tries. Smith topped the New Zealand list with 14 to Major’s 13 last season, and with one each against Canterbury, Smith leads the current contest by eight to seven. Canterbury’s tackling was threadbare on these occasions. Ricky Allen missed tackles in both moves, and his disturbing tendency to aim for the head brought two penalties and cost one try. Waikato acknowledged that Canterbury had pressed it hard, but lacked the shock tactics expected of a challenger. That shortcoming reflected Canterbury’s long break from shield football. It really is a different ball game. For Waikato: Smith. Major tries; Litt penalty goal; Boe dropped goal.. For Canterbury: Scott try; Latham dropped goal.