RUGBY FORMATION

Evening Post, Volume CVI, Issue 125, 23 November 1923, Page 11

RUGBY FORMATION

"PLEASE BE ORTHODOX"

ALL BLACKS TOUR TO ENGLAND

SHOULD A CHANGE BE MADE?

Apropos of the tour of the All Blacks to England and France next year, an opinion has been expressed at Home that the English Rugby Union might represent to the New Zealand Rugby Union the advisability of having a team formation similar to that adopted . in England and other countries in which Rugby is played. Changes have been discussed in Rugby circles in New Zealand in recent years," the scram formation being the main subject. No alteration has been suggested by the controlling body, but the chairman (Mr. S. S. Dean), as a delegate, moved a,t the last annual meeting of the New Zealand Rugby Union for the abolition of the wing-forward and the adoption L of the 3-2-3 scrum. It was then that some decided opinions about the matter were expressed. A statement to the effect that the wing-forward was an obstructionist met with some opposition, although some of the delegates regarded him as a useful part in the game. The proposal by Mr. Dean was ruled out of order, but a motion recommending the, referees to a strict interpretation of the rule regarding the wing-for.ward was adopted. There is a possibility of the question of changing the formation being raised again at the next annual meeting of the New Zealand Rugby Union. It is understood that several of tha members of the 1905 New Zealand team are of the opinion that the wing-forward should be abolished before .the team leaves for England ,next year. It has been suggested that the * wing-forward should be played as extra or stand-off half, but other ideas about the matter will no doubt be forthcoming before the question is fully discussed, aa it most likely will be. After the tour 'of the 1905 team, Mr. George H. Dixon, the manager of the team, had the following to' say in his review of the tour; ■ "The keynote of the New Zealand game is' undoubtedly the method 'of. scrum formation. We have simply adopted the well-known industrial principle of specialisation in the formation of a football scrummage. ... Seven men, properly packed, are quite the equal in pushing power to eight of equal individual weight, and the facilities for obtaining possession 'and quick heeling are infinitely greater with the seven. Outplacement of the backs, too, makes for increased efficiency both in attack and defence. It may not be out of place to state here that in no .■ single match of the tour were our forwards beaten in scrum, work —not even at the end, when the constant strain was beginning to have its inevitable effect—and to this fact I attribute a good deal of our sue-

THE "EXTRA-HALF."

"The one feature of our game which came in for v lot of adverse criticism was our extra-half. The term wing-forward is a misnomer. After our first few gamesin England, however, the critics bewail to realise-that Gallahur was not the heinous offender they had hastily imagined him to: be, and we heard little more nbout his methods until we visited Wales. : .In all my experience, ■ !■'< have; never known a player to be so''violently' ,'.nd unjustly attacked as was Gallaher by tlie -Welsh. papers after. the international match. 'The cliief burden of their complaint was that he put the'ball into the scrum'unfairly, viz., with bias. One writer, if I remember rightly, went so far as to say that he put so much screw ,on the ball that it screwed right out of the back of the scrum, through a prepared channel, without once being touched en route. It would be impossible to imagine a more absurd statement than this. In order, if possible, to remove the false impression created, we suggested to the Welsh Union that in our remaining games in the principality,' the referee should be asked to put the ball into the scrum on every occasion. This suggestion was not adopted, and "the-vituperation continued. In tho Cardiff match, an opportunity arose for proving our bona-fides in the matter. After O'Sullivan's retirement in the very early stages of the game, Gallaher went into the scrum, and we played the rest of the game without a wing-forward at all.' Furthermore, the Welsh half invariably put the ball' into the scrum subsequently, and yet we continued to obtain possession more frequently than our opponents, and actually won' the .game with only fourteen men on the field. This happening should have given pause to the most biased of critics, but not one of the Welsh writers even mentioned it in his report of the match."

1905 CAPTAIN'S VIEWS.

The views as the captain (D. Gallaher) on the matter were expressed as follow: "All over the British Isles they play not one wing, but two, in the majority of cases, as their halves are wings pure and simple. If we had only had the forethought to call ours a half-back, it would have prevented half the controversy on the subject. With our style of back play, and the formation of the pack, ;a wing-forward or extra half-back —you.may term him what you choose — is absolutely essential, because, with our quick clean ,h,Qoking of the ball, half would be unable to put the ball in the scrum, and yet be round in time to receive it behind, as the English halves invariably do. Jn our case, it would beat him every time. . . . The four three-quarter line, as compared with the three as played by us, will always be a much-debated question between Home players and ourselves, and the merits of' the 'different systems: will continue to be discussed wherever football is played. However, I firmly adhere to the wisdom of our method of play. I may be biased in its favour, it is true, but still I think the result of this 1- and previous tours have proved to us tliat we have good reason to put the utmost faith in our b\vri particular «tvle -of play-" , . . . ." • J. W. Stead, .vice-captain, pointed out that sporting critics and old internationals cried aloud at which they called the introduction of unorthodox tactics in our games. "In fact," he said, "it was with rather a patronising air that we were told how handicapped we would be with only seven forwards against their eight. Then our quick hooking was quite opposed to their idea of dribbling the ball out anywhere amoup the forwards' feet. Yet, we found the Welshmen, ever cute and ready to adopt anvthin>r new, trying our formation for "a month before they played it successfully against us in the Welsh international. I think the seven scrummers and a winger will bo the general thing, next year." The foregoing opinions will no doubt be of value in view of the likelihood- of proposals for a change before the team leaves for England next year.

AN ENGLISH OPINION.

"Mercian," writing in the "Athletic News," has the following to s&y about the five-eighths formation:—"The last time the All Blacks were here they introduced us to the five-eighths formation. I know, of course, that they pluyed three three-quarter bnckß, and that they had their full quota of forwards, biit

at any rate the formation was outsidi what might also be described as the un written rules of the game. It will surely only be logical if Leicester, Bath, etc., are to be reprimanded by the Rugby Union for not observing these unwritten rules, for the New Zealanders toNtie told before they arrive that they must please be orthodox. It is possible that too much attention has been paid to a subject which has very little' chance of ever finding a sponsor to bring before the Rugby Union. It is more than likely that a good many members of that body, like a good many members of the public, are not enamoured of the five three-quarter-back game, but there, is a very big difference between holding those views and going so- far' as to prohibit clubs following' their own tent, and playing as' many backs and forwards as they are perfectly entitled to do by the rules of the game." y*»