RUGBY CRITICISM

Dominion, Volume 21, Issue 14, 11 October 1927, Page 10

RUGBY CRITICISM

Sir,—Now that the titantic struggles for individual supremacy in the Rugby affairs of the Dominion are over, and having seen more than one match this season, particularly that stirring contest between North-South, I think a few words in eulogy of the national character of your reports relating thereto may be quite in season. In view of what appear to me glaring instances of parochialism in certain writings, your notes make refreshing reading, being in keeping with the name of your paper, truly of a “Dominion’ character. There are cases where outstanding brilliant players in the eyes of all who watch Rugby have been commented upon by a contemporary writer in such a way as to make one impatient of reading his notes further • Just a case in point here: A brilliant forward, A. Sonntag, of Otago—who, by the way, is not available for the South African trip—is noted as about the equal of three or four Wellington forwards, whom, I think, were named. Of course the writer in question is taking them separately, but would it really be much of a blunder if we construed it as their colective ability embodied in Sonntag. He asks for this, for he ignores the rest of New Zealand. Anyone knows that our forwards last year against Hawke’s Bay and this year against Auckland and Otago have not earned distinction. On his line of reasoning carried through the back division of the Wellington representatives, which be has a tendency to do, it would require to be accepted that we could beat the rest of New Zealand—very nearly. The critic under notice finds another player, a half-back, “immeasurably” superior to his vis a vis, which makes one wonder if he has looked up a dictionary about this word, for it would appear that the selectors were not responsible for their actions if he knows anything. After that great struggle between New Zealand’s best in the inter-island game, we should remember that star players are distributed over a wide area, although this year we could pick easily three brilliant teams, perhaps four, and I say this with a full understanding of the calibre of that great 1905 team, although I have not seen a Fred Roberts since for the half-back position.—l am, etc., , VIGILANT. Wellington, October 10.

P.S.—The selectors deserve great credit for strict adherence to form in the choice of whig-forward, or rover, for against one whom I greatly admired when lie was in form, C. Porter, they have chosen a super-player.

The latest comment is that Mr. Hornig is the “ideal” manager. The Auckland paper, in mentioning Mr. V. Meredith, hardly makes such a claim, but says that on their knowledge of him he Is eminently suited for the position, but Auckland also mentions Mr. E. Mackenzie.