RUGBY SIDELIGHTS.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 858, 2 July 1910, Page 12

RUGBY SIDELIGHTS.

THE Atl STEAL ASIAN DEFEAT. SOME POSSIBLE REASONS. (Br Off-side Mac.) Monday's defeat of tho New Zealand team in Sydney was tho fourth of a similar kind when a Jlaoriland representative combination has been beaten by a fifteen fipm Australia. Tho first three defeats, however, were administered by Now Welsh representative teams. These four whackings arc the only setbacks received by a New Zealand representative team since the matches -were first commenced twenty-six years ago. Tho 1881 team, which included such chain-, pions as "Jack" Taiarua and "Harry" •Roberts (curious.how the name of Roberts has synchronised some Rugby champions) had a clean sheet, winning nmn games with ridiculous ease. The next, team, 1803, was soundly beaten by New South Wales, after playing live matches in ten (lays. New South Walts also defeated New Zealand tho next year in Uhristchurch, and three years later the Macirilaiul ■ representative fifteen was again beaten in Sydney by New Smith .Wales, On this occasion the New Zealiuiders played four matches in eight j days, and travelled, in tho same time, as far as Orange and back again to Sydney. The 1902 New Zealand team had n clean sheet (aH victories) in New Kouth Wales, while in 1!)03, New Zealand and Australia played n draw in Sydney, Now, us a finale, we see tho New Zea-

land team beaten in a run of four hard I games in ten days, and during which time the visitors train-travelled 7GO miles (Brisbane to Sydney;. • Too Much Play. It is interesting to note the maimei in which excessive play, and continuous train-travelling, will debilitate tho physical and menial virility so necessary in any violent forms of exercise. The Native team in England possibly undertook a greater trial in this respect than lias ever been attempted by any Rugby team in the world. On one occasion they played something like fifteen or sixteen matches in thirty-one days. In the same period they had tremendous train journeys and it is solemnly recorded that malt symposiums were introduced in order to nullify as much as possible the wearying effccts of slaleness. The 1893 New Zealand team in Australia played a match the day (Thursday) it landed from the steamer. It followed this r up with a match on Saturday, one on Tuesday, one on Thursday (at Newcastle), and one again on Saturday, when it was hopelessly vanquished. Almost She same thing happened again with the 1807 team, which, however, was something of a mediocre combination, possibly a little better in the back division' than the present lot in Sydney. However, if our team has a ?pell now until Saturday (to-day), they should handsomely defeat Australia. Points of Back Play. Reading between the lines of the meagre cabled report of Monday's game, it appears that a contributory factor to tho New Zealand defeat was tho manner in which their backs neglected tho defensive back play. Gilbert, tho New South Wales wing-threequarter, scored two tries and ~Campbell, his next "inside," one try. _ Two of the tries w'ere scored from passing rushes, instituted by Wood, the New South Wales half. It is evident, therefore, that tho New Zealand backs were iveighed in the balance and found wanting. Either their tackling was woefully weak, or they bundled when Mitchinson was beaten by their centre, leaving the New South Wales "outside" threequarters a clear run in each case past Ryan. It is also evident that amongst them, Avery, Fuller, and Mitchell, allowed Wood too much latitude. As Mitchell was tho younger player, and essentially a three-quarter back, thero is a strong probability that he was a weak defensive factor, inasmuch as ho would be inclined to be out of his position. Agaiu, Burns is not a three-quarter back, and he could hardly bo expected to show tho intelligence and skill necessary for the position. Finally, tho report of the match shows that our forwards wero beaten badly at critical moments in obtaining , possession in tho scrum, and tired out at tho end of the "go," they had lost their animal vigour. Man for Man. Reverting again to the system of. proper. defensive three-quarter back play, ill stopping a three-quarter back passing the majority of practical critics agree that it should resolve itself into a caso of "man for mail." If this is done, the full-back may have to tackle ono mail, but . there is the strong, possibility that the attacker may bo torn down near the midfield bv a fast forward before he reaches the full-back. If the attacking centre races down the field and beats his vis-a-vis, it; is a suicidal policy for tho defending wing three-quarter to come ia towards him. Naturally that is what he wishes the "winger" to do, so that lie can shoot, the leather out to his awn "outside," who would then have a good chance of a run, while generally the defending full-back would have a longer run to nmke lvis tackle titan if he had to 1 face the attacking centre in the first place. The temptation for a wing threequarter to come in and tackle the opposing centre is very great. Young players .usually succumb to it, and it appears that this is what may have happened on Monday. Players, like doctors; may differ on the foregoing. Ellison, for instance, held that the man-for-man defensive theory was unsound, but it lias been strongly supported by practical trials, and has been championed on numerous occasions by George Smith, and successcarried into effect by him on fields in New Zealand, Australia, and Great ntain. A Black Day in '93. Last Monday's defeat brings back a memory of 1893, when New South Wales soundly walloped a stale and erippled New Zen-laud team in Sydney. The defeat was wholly unexpected in New Zealand, and tlie news was received as if it were one of the direst calamities 'that had ever afflicted.-creation. In a hundred or more towns and villages, the arrival of the cablegram was heralded as undisputed proof of the imbecility upon the part of some telegraphic operator, but the ludicrous po-rtion of d \vholo business' vvai tho manner |in _ which tho' New Zealand press, went | editorially into mourning over the subject. In almost every paper published on [ tho Monday morning,following tho match | the defeat was reviewed at length in the editorial columns, and propositions were I put forward by which the smudge on j New Zealand's Rugby escutcheon was to bo wiped out. There were 104 feet of leading articles that morning on the one subject. "Charlie" Marter, (now "Arawa" in the Sydney "Daily Telegraph"), who has spent more sleepless ..niglits over Rugby selections than almost any other man in New Zealand, took the defeat bitterly to heart. He almost drove tho then New Zealand Rugby Union into a state of frenzy, and there was a wild cry from all over the country for fresh bloocl in the shape of reinforcements: It is recorded that in consequence of a hundred telegrams from the AVest Coast, and the funereal gravity with which tho general public viewed the situation, that Cabinet was consulted, and approved that something should be done. At the instigation of itr. Marter, three' of tho most desperate forwards who ever wore jerseys in • New Zealand, Watson, Gray, and "Rob" M'Kenzie, and ono of the brainiest, R. Oliphant, wero called to arms (they should have been in the team from the first) and departed amidst the fervent hopes and solicitations of a' Rugbystticken multitude. In the final match, played in the mud, when Now Zealand won easily by 16 points to nil, these four performed doughtily. One of the features of the game was a left-foot potted goal by Jervis, tho Auckland champion, with a broken boot heel. The referee escaped out the back way, and that Saturday evening all Now Zealand breathed more easily, and felt that from a Bugby point of view it was still on top.