ROUGH ON NEW ZEALAND.

Evening Post, Volume CIV, Issue 49, 26 August 1922, Page 14

ROUGH ON NEW ZEALAND.

The reason-for. New Zealand's lots of the second Test against New South Waka is said to be (by one Sydney critic, "W.M..R.") ,that the visitors "played the man, not the ball." From the various other accounts oi the match, the opinion of«''W.M.R." would appear to be highly coloured. Cause for such comment as made by that writer would scarcely have'parsed the notice of others who know something of Rugby, and the fact that nothing Very serious has been heard from other quarters suggests that "W.M.R." has given an exaggerated accouht of what actually'took,place. Ajiart from the quality of the '»New South Wales side, the All Blacks were handicapped in othe>'respects, notably a strange interpretation of some <of the rules, 'but it U safe to say that in endeavouring to overcome the obstacles they would not stoop to euch illegal practice* as alleged by "W.M.R." Before quoting the article by that writer, it may not be out of place to mention that lait year's .New South Wales team which visited New Zealand showed points to Wellington in the way of rough play. The article referred to is as follows:— • . . ; . ■..

" New South Wales won the second Rugby Union Test against tha New Zealand All Blacks, at the Sprfrt* Ground, yesterday, by 14 points to 8. And they won- it purely because they played the ball rather than the man. The All Blacks expended a good deal of their energy in charging their * opponents when they hadn't the ball, ana in aimlessly kicking in the nicks when they had the chance of getting'the ball to" their attacking line. Nothing quite so bad has been' seen this season—in the direction of playing the man—at New Zealand's exhibition in this match. That is not football: And it is the very cause of tha visitors' defeat. Probably Brownlie was the wont offender, as he was.in the game last Saturday; but be was closely followed by Bellis, Shearer, and Calcinai among the forwards, and Steele, Hickey, and Dickenson, of the, back division. Late in the game •cllis* was carried from the field suffering from, slight concussion of the brain; and it was all due to his tackling of Norman Sm^th after the latter had got rid of the ball. It was a palpable breach. Brownlie, too, has a. lik&g for illegal tackling and jumping at a mart who has kicked, the ball, but his particular penchant is for shooting his hand into another's face.

''The jeferee.should have taken drastic action. He certainly did award New South Wales a penalty try because of Hickey's shepherding, but he would have had the support of the large bulk of the 14,000 people present had ha cvdered a couple of the visitors off the iuJd./ This sort of play. was the only tiling that marred an otherwise flue game. The home back* threw the ball about splendidly at the beginning . and completely, outplayed their opponents. Still, their passing lacked variety, and that was the reason they did'not cross the .opposing line. The New Zealanders were penalised several times for offside play, and from two of these Stanley kicked goals. Beyond those goals the home side did not score in the first half of the game. All the time New Zealand were getting the ball from the scrums and the line-outs, but could do nothing with it. In the case of the scrums the home breakaways, particularly Elliott, were round upon Nicholls, the opposing' half, like lightning, and constantly caught him with the ball. New Zealand got the ball from the line-outs with monotonous regularity, . but i the forwards, ignoring the existence of the attacking line, simply hung oh and tried to hustle through. Thus ;the visiting backs were starved. Seldom were they seen in passing movements, and; therefore their chances of scoring were reduced to a minimum. The All Blacks' only score in tho first half was a converted try by Richardson, the best forward of the pack, who received the ball from Nicholls and bustled his way over tho line. Richardson, by th# way, was the best forward because be. played the game and did not waste time, an trying to incapacitate his opponents. He is a. fine player. "Thus we see that New South Wales had' a lead of 6 points to 5 at half-* time, though they did not cross New, Zealand's line. That was where the visitors'\ offside play told . against them Belli* was, chiefly responsible. As wingforward he wes continually committing breaches. A wing-forward is of no use unless he does. Thus he is a. menace to the .game. He must be always pointing, on the referee to justify his place, but if 3. referee knows his business the wingforward might as 'well be off the field.. Moreover, he is not. only withholding from the other forwards his support in the scrums, but he is spoiling the game from the spectators'' point of view. If the Rugby Union desires to Tiold public patronage it should do everything possible to discpurage this method of play. The second half of the game was undoubtedly in favour of the home side. They stormed. New Zealand's line time a,ft*r time and threw the ball about with great accuracy, albeit the attack! often failed through' lack of variety. Only one reverse pass was seen,throughout the whole of tho game, and then it nearly brought a try." The prettiest piece of play during tho afternoon was bvought off oy the visitors. It was initiated near' the home goal line from a scrum. Nicholh secured tho ball and, feinting to pass to the open side, i«-

verted and sent the ball to Steele on the blind wing. Steele cut in past Raymond and then beat another player, scoring in the corner. This save New Zealand a two-points lead. But after that they did not score. At this point Bellis was conspicuous. He lost his temper and threw the ball down in disgust. He was vigorously hooted. > Later on Hickey brought a penalty try against his side for shepherding Stanley. Stanley, with a great kick, converted it, placing the home team in the lead by 11 to 8. Shortly afterwards he kicked a penalty, and put the issue beyond doubt. Sheehari played the best game on the ground. His clever cutting-in and accurate passing gave his supports an undoubted advantage on many occasions, while he kicked with great judgment. Of the forward! Elliott and Davis stood out above a pack that worked like Trojans against their more weighty opponents." / '