Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

LACKING IN DASH

How Wairarapa Lost to Wellington

FORM OF THE PLAYERS

(By Telegraph.—From “Poster.”)

Masterton, July 27.

The state of the ground and the greasy condition of the ball ruined what promised to be a fast and open game between Wellington and Wairarapa. Both teams possess good records in provincial football for the present season as far as it has .gone, and in the course of to-day’s game they gave glimpses of what might have been expected had they been favoured with a dry ground and ball. • There was hardly the margin between the teams that the. score suggests, but Wellington made better use of their opportunities. Time and again Wairarapa would thrust deep In the Wellington territory, but their efforts lacked the final dash that would have crowned their fine forward rushes witi P'lnts. Wairarapa had nothing to learn from Wellington In rucking, but in the loose the Wellington forwards had better finish and frequently they called on their backs to carry on when they found their way blocked. Lamason Outstanding. Lamason thoroughly justified his inclusion. He was the outstanding forward on the ground, and he made many spectacular breaks clean through the Wairarapa backs, and often had them sorely bustled.

Diederich, Lambourne, and Reid were other forwards supporting Lamason out in the open. McPherson appeared to carry the bulk of the rucking work. Though Macdonald was spectacular in everything be did, and scored three tries, honours among the- Wellington backs go to Tindill. He proved himself just as capable under bad conditions as he was under favourable conditions. Ball and ground necessarily slowed, up his game, but he used discretion in his passing and played an ideal game for the prevailing conditions. His defence was superb, and the sleeping Wairarapa forward rushes held no terrors for him. The brilliant dpening he made on the.blind side for Lambourne to score Wellington’s last try crowned a splendid exhibition. Neal was itching to do something all day. but mainly the greasy ball foiled him. He further demonstrated that he possessed a useful pair of feet for dribbling the ball. Neal combined well with Tindill, and was always quick to seize on Wairarapa’s mistakes.

Part in Spectacular Try. Robins was a safe link in the chain. He received a few low passes from Neal, which he failed to hold, and these coming in promising Wellington attacks tended to mar an otherwise "sound game. His partnership with Macdonald in scoring Wellington’s spectacular breakaway try in the second spell will long be remembered.

Though Macdonald initiated and finalised the movement. Robins figured prominently in the intermediate stages, when he skilfully drew Roach before giving Macdonald a clear run in. It was a clever piece of play, revealing perfect understanding between the two Marist players. * • Killeen was useful with his feet—the right type of game under the conditions —and linked up with the backs in many movements. Macdonald played up to his best form, and had the ground been dry he would have treated the. Masterton public to a —eat display. In some of his excursions he was mercurial, and though marked by a sure tackler in IL Devine, he was always dangerous. His first and last tries were the result of his quickthinking and resourcefulness. The first was a clever exhibition of footwork and speed, while the second was the reward of sound anticipation and fast following up. ' Fuller, on the other wing, was' worth his place if only for his kicking. lie placed five goals, four conversions, and a penalty, and three of them were from near the sideline. Such - a performance with a slippery and mud-sodden ball was a first-class one, and proves that the Eastbourne player is a reliable kick under any conditions and a match winner. Cresswell was safe at full-back. He made some mistakes* but they were excusable under the treacherous conditions. The Wairarapa Meat. Wairarapa would have done better, just as Wellington would, under better conditions. Matthews, their half, while not up to Tindill’s standard, played a sound game, particularly in the second spell. Clarke’s injury at the outset severely hampered the Wairarapa backs. He was unable to do more than pass- the ball along, and limped round until near the end of the game, unable to help his side either in attack or defence. Considering this handicap Wairarapa performed creditably. Stringfellow was their mainstay. He retains all his old speed and some of his work in cutting out opposing backs was tinged with cleverness. The two wingers, R. Devine and Johnson, both reserves, gave glimpses of promising form, but did not make a great deal of profitable progress against- the sound defence of the Wellington team. Roach made a couple of costly errors, but'these could well be forgotten in view of the courageous game he played. Several times when things looked black for Wairarapa he saved cleverly, and often beat a couple of men in doing so. Keeble, McGregor, Flutey, and Reid were the best of the Wairarapa forwards. VICTORIOUS MAORIS Easy Win at Thames Valley By Telegraph.—Press Association. Paeroa* July 27. In fine weather but on a greasy ground the Maori touring team had an easy victory by 35 points to 6 over a Thames Valley fifteen. ... Showing vastly superior back play in the first half, the Maori backs repeatedly lined -out in passing rushes, and had easily the better of the play The Thames Valley backs lacked combination, and their passing was smothered: their tackling was! also weak ■ „ „ In the second half Thames Valley made more use of their forwards, holding their own in this division for the first part of the spell, but the visitors’ backs were too snappy ; they missed no opportunities, and handled the greasy ball well . Most of the Maoris’ tries were the result of combined back movements, the ball starting from the half-back and travelling right to the wings The first half ended up 16 points to nil in the Maoris’ favour, For the winners Watson scored three tries, Downs three, and Maitnim, Smith and Jackson one each; Potiika converted (our tries. For Thames Valley Laverick scored a try, and Henry kicked The game as a whole was too one-sided ro be interesting, but the Maoris’ combination impressed. They showed good team work, good pieties, and at times spectacular footfall

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/DOM19320728.2.90

Bibliographic details

Dominion, Volume 25, Issue 259, 28 July 1932, Page 11

Word Count
1,051

LACKING IN DASH Dominion, Volume 25, Issue 259, 28 July 1932, Page 11

LACKING IN DASH Dominion, Volume 25, Issue 259, 28 July 1932, Page 11

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert