SOCCER

Evening Post, Volume CIV, Issue 7, 8 July 1922, Page 14

SOCCER

RESULTS OF THE TOUR

DASHING GAME AT AUCKLAND

LOCAL DOINGS.

(By "Vanguard.") v Australia 3, Wanganui 1. Australia 8, Nelson 2. A Wellington 3, Australia 0. Australia 2, Westland 1. Australia 4, South Island 1. Australia 2, Otago 1. New Zealand 3,.Australia 1. Canterbury, 3; Australia, 1. New Zealand 1, Australia 1. Australia 6, Taranaki 1. Australia 1, Auckland 1. Australia _,< South Auckland I,

Tho Australians are holding their ends up with credit,'for though the Taranaki match could not havo been a particularly serious game—since Association football is comparatively new to the province—the Auckland, match was ]a keen and brilliantly fast game, whith ended in a decisive win for tho visitors, the more creditable to them since they .played on a shockingly bad ground, the worst they havo had the bad luck to strike sinco their tour commenced. Up till quite recently Taraaialri, Would have nothing of Soccer; Rugby was tho only gamo that folk would go to sec, but the few enthusiasts have obviously been ; doing good spadework,, and. when the turnstile tallies, were made up at Pukekura Park after tho matcli,. a count of. just bne hundred short of four thousand.. was made, and tho cash boxes were turned out to a. tune of £250. t Tho attendance at the Auckland ma-tcluwas. disappointing, 3000 or' so, but the weather was bad in the forenoon and threatening during the afternoon, and there was.a bad clash of' fixtures of other sports. The North-South Rugby game, i four senior League, and two senior Hockey matches wore played.that, afternoon, and the result was that no remarkable, gate was, taken on any ground., .. The playing surface' quickly became greasy and sloppy, says the Auckland Star, but the Australians accommodated themselves quickly to the conditions, and gave a. capital exhibition, marked by clever foot and head work,.and, dashing concerted play. .... , . ' 'There was, it is clear from that sum-, mary, little of the continual stonewalling that took . away l from the interest, of the Second Test.) ;'■. In the first spell/ the Star continues, the. visitors took no chances, and'played steadily, Brown scoruig two. good goals. The Aucklanders put up as strong a defence as possible under the circumstances, and though Innes, Dacro, and particularly Knott, .who.; scored Auckland's goal, were prominent in patches, they were unable to make a big imY pression. Haycock did not play., up to expectations. In the. second half, the visitors gradually took command, and excelling in every department, Brown and Maunder each scored a good goal, and were outclassing the opposition in the concluding stages. ! Every man of them played well, and Colvin, and Hooper improved for Auckland towards the finish.

The first three goals of the game were rattled off in great style. ' The Australians were combining beautifully, and from a centre by1 Maunder, 'Batty fumbled tlie ball, and Brown following up fast, bumped himself • and the ball into the net, giving Australia the opening score : Australia I, Auckland 0.

From the- kick-off, Australia was back again, and Batty cleared -from a ball that went high. The; play, of the, Australian forwards was . .excellent, their .footwork and i co-operation ' being good, to : see, though the ground; was in, a terrible, condition. Cumberford was putting in pretty work.. He got away, beat Colvin, but shot . wide. . From a loose rush at midway! Hooper and Knott were badly beaten by Fisher, Who .essayed a long but unavailing shot. The Australians came at it again. Dacre got the ball and centred cleverly to Browri, who took on the full and completely beat Batty, making the Australians well in hand. "Australia 2, Auckland 0. The visitors again assumed the offensive. Thompson beat Haycock, but his shot was well outside.

A second later, Hooper raced avay, across and gave Knott' a 1 fine pass, which the latter drove, into the net amidst great acclamation from the spectators. It was a .magnificent piece of work and surprised the visitors. . Australia 2, Auckland 1. :': ■' •'

The ground had become a regular quagmire at this stage, and this was evidently impeding the Australians. Auckland looked dangerous again until D. Cumberford brought' relief "to .his side, which advanced to the attack, but a shot went well wide. Thompson, who was playing in conspicuous style, beat Haycock, and had a shot' which hit the post and was. cleared by Colvin. Auckland retaliated well, and • were making tilings lively, when a foul 'ag'ainsjjr Australia was well placed by Corrin, and hot work' eventuated around the Australian goal . until the. backs cleared. The. Australians gradually worked up, but Dacre got possession, took the ball on downfield, and sent to Innes in good style, but the shot went behind! ,

The Australians got clear, however, and, carrying play well into Auckland's territory, Brown cross-kicked towards the net, but Batty brilliantly filched the ball away when falling. Auckland repelled, the aggression,, and some good play came from Doyle, who sent his forwards away to the attack. They were pulled up by " hands " against Thompson. ' Auckland, with Corrin prominent, went downfield, and the Australians' goalie conceded a corner, which was resultless. Play hovered in neutral territory for some minutes, and.afoul against Dacre assisted the visitors, whoso good combination was no less interesting than Auckland's individuality, in the mud. Auckland now advanced again in good stylo, Knott sending across to Innes, who centred for Cartwright to clear, with the Auckland front line right on top of him. . Give-and-take play was succeeded by a foul against Maunder, but Australia averted trouble and cleared by a series of passing, bouts, which put Auckland on the defensive. ; Auckland had a brief respite, but the Australians attacked, and Thompson centred, but Brown was caught off-side. The ball now'travelled quickly to the other end, Knott taking control and putting the ball between the two full-backs, but was bloctad badly. Auckland were pressing when half-time' was called. , .

On resuming, Auckland went to the attack^ Dacre sweeping down and touching to llooper, who kicked wide. The Australians took tho scene of operations to beyoiid the half-line, where J. Cumberford exhibited clever footwork. Neesham put the visitors back again, passed to Hooper, who sent to Sims, the latter missing the ball. The Australian forward line got going, and by pretty play were closed up. .Dane swung the leather across to Brown', n-ho kicked straight into the goal-lnoulh from the twentyfive line, and completely, beat Ratty, who .slipped in the mud. Australia 3, Auckland. 1. " A "' ' '

'riie ".A'fiHsir." now kept things busy, and Aucklund livened up. Innos received

the ball in mid-field; and centred across to Dacre, who had followed round on the right, and the action baffling the defence, he had a shot, which went over. The Australian left-winger got his side into line in a good side-line effort, Thompson centreing dangerously. 'Corrin1 got the ball fully on his ;toe and the Australians were sent back.. The Light Blue forwards retaliated, and , Dane kicked behind. ,From. ensuing .play. Hooper took the ball downfield, and landed to Dacre, who beautifully put across to Innes, but Cumberford touched the ball out. From a piece of close work Corrin, from well out, took a fine shot, which Cartwright cleared. Australia were now frequently in, the ascendant, until good combined work by, Auckland sent them back and the result was, a corner, which Innes placed a few inches wide.

Auckland took a hand and Innes and Dacro showed up to groat advantage, and tlie latter outwitted D. Cumberford, and had a shot which struck the post, and Corrin almost' sent it in. A morn hi', later Corrir took a long shot, but tl?..- Australian team combined in a drive down field, and. Corrin saved cleverly in the goal-mouth, taking- the ball from Brown and sending it out of danger to the outline. The Auckland team was now being dominated by tho visitors, and though the local 'backs showed •fiaslies of good play, there Avero some palpably, weak spots. From some pretty work, Gibb set his forwards going With a splendid "pass'to Dane, to Brown, which was well cleared by Batty. The t Aussics ctaie again, and in a combined I movement Brown again shot, tho ball hitting the bar. ■ It came back into play and Maunder, following up fast,, found Batty, out of goal. Australia i, Auckland 1. Auckland again became assertive,, but their movements were not at all'finished in comparison with the machine-like operations of tho Australians. Once or twice they broke away, but tlie Australian defence was never. seriously worried, and the game ended 4-1. The manrier in which the Australians picked up in the second Test and their rather, easy defeat of \the Auckland representatives, should certainly, guarantee a big .gate at Auckland to-day, when the biggest game of tho tour, the third Test, is- being played. THE FAIR CHARGE. The Australian tour has brought out quite a few important points, and no doubt the Australians have learned something from New Zealand teams, but the biggest point made clear is that the New Zealand interpretation of the fair charge rule, already several times referred to in this column, ris open to ! question. There were many who questioned the interpretation long before the I Australians came across, and the. matter has b6en brought'up in a casual manner during the last two or three years, but. as a result of the rather strong objections of the visitors, and in view of the fact that the second Test was spoiled as an exhibition of football by the consistent blocking, obstructing,.and charging, the question has come to the fore. The W.F.A., at a recent meeting!,■-, decided to approach the Referees' Association with a request that either Rule 9 should be amended or a different interpretation placed upon it, in order that Soccer might profit. To me it does not seem that any alteration of the rule should be made. Rule 9as it is> is good enough for Home teams, the finest Soccer players anywhere, but it is likely enough, that the '■• reading given it at Home is not the reading here. The Australians say; flatly that our reading is wide of the mark, so do quite a few New Zealand referees, but others are quite as emphatic in holding up the New Zealand-ruling, notably Mir. C. E. Fordham,'chairman of the N.Z.F.A. As long as that marked difference .of opinion holds, there will be dissatisfaction among playersi and: referees, and the decision of the Wellington Referees' Association.that a sub-committee, Messrs. Salmon, Ford--ham, Downie;' and Wells; should wait upon the.W.F.A. to'frame a motion to be brought before the' New Zealand Referees' Association is certainly wise.. •A Those who favour a reading that Would minimise charging and obstruction make the following points: The publio wants the fast, open, passing game. Rough play, which may be quits unintentional, takes away from the game, A man should be charged only when.he is playing the ball, whereas at present it was not unusual to see such a movement.as this: A (black) has the ball, B (white) as closing up to intercept him. j C (black) charges B yards away from A to prevent his interference with A. B does not like the movement at all, and may' or may not keep one eye on the ball and the other on,C as the game goes on. ' Mr. W. G. Bryce, who certainly knows something about Soccer, does not like the '■ blocking game if canned too far. and said at the referees' ineeting that the game was not football even if the reading did not overstep the wording of the rule, ft was not playing football, it was stopping others from; playing football;■ Of the. games he saw, he had not seen unduly rough play on Wellington grounds. . ,; Mr. F. Campbell agreed that the charging, was being carried too far, and that there was a danger of intentional rough pla.y—by way of retaliatory movement—creeping in. He had seen the game played at Home, and there the ball and not the man was played. Obstruction was right enough, but the obstructing player was liable to be charged in the backhand that might lead to Dad feeling. All that was necessary, he considered, was that referees should be rather stricter. |- Mr. Colin Webster spoke of the rulings of a referee recently out from England and the-manner in.which he had pulled players up from the very commencement. I. The point was made by Mr. J. Downie that'at. Home it was recognised that a back had, the right to charge a forwardwhen the goalie called out that'he was ready to ■ take the ball.

The Chairman, Mr. B. L. Salmon, cited Cutty and Pickford on Rule 9, Pickford's book containing the following passage: "Charging that is neither violent nor dangerous has always been allowed, tho.ugh not hitherto expressed in the laws. The International Board has made this addition, and referees should carry it out. Let charging be of the good, honest, type, and not degenerate into rough plaj'. Charging an opponent who, has the ball, or who is causing an obstruction, or who is going for the ball; or in some way manoeuvring to gain an advantage, is permissible; but charging when there is no reason for it is not. There should be some reason for a charge, and a reason having a bearing on the points, as, for instance, of ridding an opponent of the ball, of preventing him getting it when,he is making the effort,"of clearing him out of the way when jhe is trying to obstruct, and of stopping him from getting past in order to take a pass, or interfere with someoneelse. The charge should be delivered with the shoulder only, and the fair weight of the body; neither stooping nor jumping, nor 'below the belt,' so to speak.' And the law continues: 'Aplayer shall not be charged from behind unless lie is intentionally obstructing an opponent.' "

Others present .though, that a sudden change in the reading of the rule might lead, to some trouble and perhaps tho ordering of players off the field,, but. as slated above, finality was not reached arid, .the, matter is to be considered further. "

for Influenza, lake Woods' Great Pep. permint Cure.—Advt.