Football.

Evening Post, Volume LXIV, Issue 83, 4 October 1902, Page 14 (Supplement)

Football.

RUGBY* [By Dropkick.] THE TOUR TO ENGLAND. The Hon. Secretary of the New Zealand Rugby Union has supplied me with a copy of the original letter sent by the Union's Management Committee to the English Rugby Union in reference to the proposed tour of a, New Zealand representative team to England. The letter is as follows:— "It has been decided by the Council of the New Zealand Rugby Football Union to approach your Union with the object of arranging a visit to England of a New Zealand representative Rugby team. There is a consensus, of opinion throughout this colony that the time has arrived for such a tour to be undertaken, and the arrangements connected therewith have been relegated^ to the Management Committee of the New Zealand Union. I shall therefore be pleased to hear at the very earliest date if your Union is prepared to receive a visit of a representative team of New Zealand players and what considerations your Union is prepared to make to bring about such a visit. I may here state that it will be absolutely necessary for this Union to allow its players reasonable expenses beyond those actually required for transit and board. The players of this colony are so situated that it would be impossible to get them away unless concessions were .made in the direction indicated. It is the desire of this Union that the tour should, if possible, be arranged for 1903, and I, should therefore esteem it a favour if you will plac? me in possession of definite information respecting terms, etc., at the earliest possible date. It is this Union's intention to communicate -with' the Hon. W. P. Reeves, Agent- General for New Zealand, and in all probability that gentleman will confer with j r ou regarding our proposals." The reply letters from the Agent-Gene-ral and the English Union's Secretary have already been published. The Union's attitude is that it cannot relax the professionalism rules nor guarantee any of the team's expenses, but will endeavour to get for the team a good list of fixtures and good terms from the clube. A prominent Rugby official, interviewed, said that the English Union's reply was satisfactory so far as it went, but of course it was absolutely necessary to^ obtain, more details as to the fixttires and an estimate of probable gate receipts and proportion thereof which, would accrue to the New Zealand Union. He believed the English Union would welcome a team from this colony and would do all in its power to arrange liberal concessions. The professionalism obstacle w,as not raised to any. great extent by the New Zealand Union ; it had apparently been prominently introduced by a gentleman visiting England who had taken upon himself to interview the English authoi'ities upon a proposal which was already under consideration. The interview referred to had already been published, but he considered' 'the letters now to hand put an entirely different construction on the attitude of the English Union to that suggested in the interview referred to. He had once thought that the professional law would provide an almost insurmountable obstacle, but his opinion in this respect had changed recently. During the visit of representative players in connection with the North and South Island match he had broached the subject of the proposed tour on more than one occasion, and, judging from the remarks which fell from many of the players, he was led to believe that they would be prepared to finance themselves. The Union would do nothing to injure the amateur status of any flayer. It had resolved to .request the vat-ious unions to ask their players whether they are prepared to make the lour on purely amateur Ikies. He believed that a most favourable response would be received, and a truly representative team, got together under those conditions. The tour would benefit football the worid over and help to combat the apathetic and paralysing influences threatening Rugby in this colony in ' recent years. Voluntary offers of assistance would go a great way towards providing the necessary finance for transit. Jp fact, a well-known local gentleman, an enthusiastic Rugby follower, had- already offered to assist to such an extent as would remove any barrier of transit finances. Mr. J. R. Henderson, -who managed the New South Wales team that toured New Zealand, occupies a good many pages of the New South Wales Rugby Union's annual with his account of the trip. We in Wellington kno^ our M'lntyre and know he is a good man once he gets the ball secure, but when Mr. Henderson labours the point that M'lntyre is "one of the strongest football runners I have seen," one has some doubts as to the writer's experience or his judgment. Of the Wellington match, he says :: — v"ln forward play our only disadvantage appeared to be that we did not iasc' enough in the loose. Talk a about the English forwards' call for 'feet' in the loose — it's child's play compared to what we saw.'' (They should surely have seen Cross, Cooke, and Co. in the interIsland match.) A great deal of the notes on other matches is devoted to' casualty lists of the visitors, and descriptions of New Zealand's "'giant forwards.'' Mr. Henderson says that a New Zealand-New South Wales representative contest, pla;/ed on a Sydney ground, would be so interesting that Sydney&ide enthusiasts would walk miles barefooted to see it repeated ; but if played in New Zealand, Wales would have to send sound defensive backs (sure tacklers and good touchlineis), and forwards of weight and determination. TTinclly, }ir. Ilci-.rlcifju thinks that over-cultivation of passing is ihe cause of his team's weakened defence, for he says.-— "The result of the tour accentuated the weak point in Australian Rugby, and that is defence generally, and more particularly by the backs. There is too much of the 'tiggey touchwood' element about our defence of recent years. Tackling appeal's to be a lost art '(with few exceptions), due probably to passing being overdone; players frequently pass before being within tackling distancer A few of the 'on your own' scamp of players would probably teach our players, ho\v to tackle, and consequently remedy this regrettable weakness. 1 ' A reversion to first principles is a somewhat drastic remedy for over-civi-lisation. There is a proverb about extrcmes^ But IQO3 will give material for another comparison. Pressure of space compelled the leaving over .ast week of the following Ellifonian dicta : — When a full-back should run : "It is safer for him to be held with the ball than to have his kick charged down or marked near goal ; and i\ hen playing against a, strong wind with a wet, heavy ball, it pays him bolter to run as far as lie can than to try v risky kick." He should always punt in define?. Mr. Ellison seeiny to noic ii ialling-off in individual briUhuiey, jjrobnbly due to the fact that the unit in combined passing attach tends to be not quite so important us in more individualistic days He writes

that last season's back play was generally good, "but there were very few really dangerous men, none of the Jack Taiaroii, J. Wivrbrick, Whiteside, Ryan, Madigan, James, or Armit class. Most of the backs depended entirely on a good pass, a good opening, and speed for their scores; instances, Smith, Buckland, and Co., the only exception perba-psj being Wood, of Wellington [now of Christchurch), a. clever dodger." Other dicta: "Kick to gain ground, and run to score. — Kick the ball dead rather than force. — Never wait oh your goal line to tackle. — Screw scrum towards touchlines, in defence. — About fourth out is the best position for your clever touch-liner. — A place-kicker should keep his oyes oil that point of the ball he intends to kick, not on the goal-bar. — It should be illegal 'to charge marked kicks, free-kicks, or kicks at goal ; also, to stop a rush by failing on the ball." Also, the punt has long been the defensive kick, and T.R. •would also like to see punted goals.