SOCCER

Evening Post, Volume CVII, Issue 104, 3 May 1924, Page 18

SOCCER

f«Y "VANGUARD"!

The weather luck of the W.F.A. for Basin Reserve fixtures is proverbially atrocious, a joke,- except from the points of view of the association, the players, and the intending "spectators, which leaves not very niuch humour in it. It ■ was particularly unfortunate that • last Saturday should have turned out so badly disposed towards, the Navy v. Wellington match, for very keen interest had been worked up in the fixture, and a great crowd would have rolled up had the rain held off. Considering the all-round unpleasantness of the afternoon from half-past two onwards, it was remarkable that spectators ' turned out at all, but the grandstand was crowded in its seating tiers and packed to the very last inch of standing room below the balcony. There was some doubt for a time as to whether the match would be proceeded with, but iv any case the downpour was heavy enough to keep those who were present under shelter till the Wellington team took the field. The Navy men were a few minutes later, but still in time—foi1 the rain. Off and on during the first spell, conditions changed from downpour and wind and mud to merely wind and mud, impossible weather, but the second spell was played under more reasonable conditions, merely a little wind, and a very great deal of mud to balance matters. A match played under such conditions was not a fair teat ofgood football, and upon a reasonably dry and steady field—as contrasted with the skating rink effect of the Basin on Saturday—the Navy men would probably have played quite a different game. It appeared that the going was too heavy for them, and that they tired considerably . towards . the end of the first spell, the Wellington team, from repeated experiences of the Basin undei very similar conditions, seemingly standins up to the mud and weight" of the sodden ball rather better. Fleet found their neat touches, a feature of their game, practically useless on the field as it was, and for the first half-hour or so lost advantages accordingly.

LIGHT AND HEAVY.

Furthermore, in the clash of styles, the light touches of the Naval team, and the heavy rush and bump, methods of the Blacks, the visiting team drew second place time after time, not thai the Navy men would not hays been very fully able to return in kind had thaS been their game, but that in the Navy football is played with a ball as more important than the man. The surprise of some of the visitors at the Welling ton style of heavy work was more than merely noticeable, but what must hava surprised • them a good deal more was that the referee was not impressed when they pointed out what was what—from their point of view—and the whistle did not blow. What's what in Navy football and what's what in New Zealand football, are apparently quite different quantities. To carry the principle ol the heavy game to extremes, the team which was able, though still keeping within the fairly broad rides of the game, to charge and bump and thor-. oughly knock off their pins a majority of the opposing team, would invariably win' its matches, climbing high on the championship ladder, very popular with \itealf, very heartily disliked by every other team in the competition. • That,is not to suggest for .one icomenb that the Navy men are complaining, ■ but is merely to emphasise a difference in tactics. | SECOND AND THIRD 1922 TESTS.

The "playing-the-m.au" controversy waxed lively in Wellington a couple of seasons ago, when members of the Australian team raised loud protest against what they considered undue weight in field charges. That controversy waxed particularly hearty following the second lest at Athletic Park, the "knock-out competition," as quite a few styled it. In the first Test at Dimedin the Australians were surprised, in the second they overcanie that surprise, and played New Zealand's game with considerable enthusiasm and interest. Those who read the rules governing charging broadly spoke of that second Test as an exhibition of "real Cup tie form," but what of that:' The average spectator, perhaps from a lamentable ignorance of liner rulings, summed the exhibition up iis 'Pretty rotten," which was undoubtedly quite ungentlemauly, but as a candid expression of opinion was pardonable.

. calling lip of ancient history is is likewise pardonable to emphasise ray present argument. Cup-tie form or not that exhibition at Athletic Park did no good for Association Football' as far as' popularity with tho public was concerned, and the game must have public backing to succeed. People who had not previously taken any interest in Association football turned out to that match, and decided there and then that they would not trouble about future Association fixtures, either club matches, interprovincial, inter-colonial, or inter-na-tional games. thi? ci Uye'p" / he lats31 ats3 of the second <™d thud lests there were arguments plenty, a n dj . whether or not as .1 result 1 +i°- Se, £ SCUSSIO"s, the fact was that c' e t'fd.Tost, played at Auckland, was d«?v1 , A'lckla"d P«Plo who had not Piously turned out to Soccer matches undoubtedly took away pleasant impressions ot the game. It was a tremendoustL un??" XiV 7 er? muoh faster thajl tf* c P;V; k ™»t«l', strenuous and clean sport—with * football.

, AN OFFICIAL ADMISSION.' tl,f°N°y i" S\ UP°" tile Australian visit, hi. i\.^.j,.j\. and iocal assoc j ationa t -he, r several heads together and agreed > ?ni, HlVy ellar Sin? shoukl ;' f" Ulm S w "s a. fair thing, .and so ou ;>-«' so on and.thereupon issued advice nn 6| ereef ."^M «s to what was considered ,air enough and what was "ft. .Surely, there was an o/fieiil -id 4 s Carried o th-,l ° U,' C few wtoU* i'en«unit, s cLII h,r, U1\ tho lle* n'linSs !lild a>™ « c " "n C^ o t0 -Slloiv "P *S°i*- i"d this

NAVY MEN IN THE FIELD THE FAIR CHARGE RULE AGAIN IS THE NEW ZEALAND READING COHRECT?

columns of the piling-up effect of gentle returns between opposing players ; suffice jit to say that one or two individuals 'in local club forward and half lines have already this season worked up quite nicely-proportioned snowballs, well packed and heavy, for the other fellow to throw.

There is seomething wrong with New Zealand Soccer, for visiting teams, visiting players individually and spectators who enjoy fast, clean, and strenuous football—with a. ball—remark upon it. Probably the English team, when it arrives, will register still another protest. If those who raised complaints were of the lily-livered type, if there were kidglove footballers, then their complaints could be put on one side without serious consideration, but just by way of an experiment anyone who may harbour ideas that either Navy men or Australian footballers are kid-gloved by nature or inclination, is referred to any member of the crews of Hood or Repulse, fighting weight not being a matter which need be considered, or to any member of the crew of H.;M.A.S Australia.

Maybe I am on the wrong track altogether m my argument 'that the fair charge rule is badly overdone on New Zealand football fields, maybe not; but it is a question into which the N.Z.F A might very well seriously inquire. I may be accused of having exaggerated the main features of the 1922 "knock-out competition." Very well, put it down to an excess of enthusiasm over a reasonable enough cause. j A "HOME" ENTHUSIAST'S VIEWS.

Here is a letter received from ''Corinthian, ' a thoroughly live wire in Association matters in Wellington and an enthusiast whose knowledge of the game embraces a very much wider field than 'Wellington or New Zealand alone :— "Being a lover of the round-ball game, I on Saturday, in spite of the pouring ram, went to the Basin Reserve expecting to see a clever exposition of the Soccer code. I, with many others, came away sadly disappointed. Certainly considering the weather and the state of the ground, one could not expect too much, but that was not the reason why so many were disappointed. Within a few minutes-after the start one could see that the style of game played by our A'aval men would not suit the style as played by the Wellington reps. Although the Naval men were on the heavy i side, they did not use their Weight, but relied on clever football to get the ball, and in consequence the rushing tactics and playing-the-man style of the Wellington team quickly put them off their game. Time and time again, the naval men, when showing clever footwork, were simply rushed off the ball, not by clever' .play, but by sheer weight. "Now, let us compare- the men and tactics. The Navy full-backs did not do nearly so much hard kicking as the Wellington backs, and often robbed the Wellington forwards of the ball without interfering in any way with the man, and instead' of booting hard, usually placed the ball to advantage. The Naval halves also played clever football, but the vigorous style of the Wellington halves put them in the shade. The Navy forwards had a gruelling time of it; they were often bowled-over in a stylo they arc not used to. On one occasion their centre-forward becatae quite angry, and rightly too, for in jumping for the ball a Wellington half jumped right into his back, and the referee took no notice of the occurrence. "The Naval backs often, by a step or two forward, placed a man offside, but the referee was not used to that style, so the Wellington men often gained by"My reason for Writing these few lines is this: The style of football as played m Wellington is all wrong, and the game will not become popular with the public until such time as a player is made to understand that he must play the ball all the time, iand, instead of relying on his weight to' get it, must do so by scientific methods: Our rushing and bullocking methods are not going to suit the Chinese team when they come here, so the sooner those in charge of the game realise that fact the better, unless they wish to see a repetition of the second Test match over again." NOTES ON SATURDAY'S' PLAY. Burke and Cope, the visitors' fullbacks, played quite the best football of the afternoon. An. excellent display of back play, the impossible ground and weather conditions notwithstanding, but they repeatedly,." in stopping Wellington attacks, fed far down field over their own forwards to the home team's halves. That was largely due to the fact their forwards were not there, and could not get there with the going so heavy, but on a fast ground, a better balance would probably have shown itself. Burke and Cope (Hood and Repulse) were certainly the mainstay of the team. Parsoiis (Hood), in goal, had next to nothing to do during the first twenty minutes, for the halves and backs handled repeated attacks in great style. Later on, the goalkeeper had his smart turns, but his afternoon was not heavy by any means. The scarlet from his Chelsea red jersey ran quite remarkably, but that was"purely incidental. The visiting forward iine is a thoroughly solid combination, the two outsides, 'Skinner and Harrison, and the centre, Roberts., all from the Repulse, being a great trio, with Demelweek (Hood) and Hooper (Adelaide) reliable inside men. The halves, Dobson (Acle- ' laida), Andrews (Hood1), and Jones (Adelaide) play a neat game, but not so neat in mud and rain. Heavy work was more in order under Saturday's conditions, which fact Harrison, Roberts, and- Skinner recognised, with profit to the Navy team generally.

Kwing has played better football limn he (liil vii Saturday, but, goal mouths were anything but lively, after the first ten minutes churning up, having a tangle-foot effect, .for Parsons also, that took away from speech' work. Taylor yliised a mllim' ditoippomimg gamo,'not being ftgle tft iwdulge iv hiu" .usual lop£

distance work, but was nevertheless sound. The M'Kenzie-Taylor back combination had advantages of the TaylorGibb, the greatest, of course, being that of long playing acquaintance. ' In the half-hue Thomas played a lively game, working hard ,to keep Campbell and Ballard going. Lennox was sound, but M'Girr was not at his representative best. The left wing consider, ably outweighed the right, Smith and M'Elligott, but the latter put in a deal of thoroughly useful work. The bankers raised voices in tones of marked surprise when lie missed an open goal from four or five yards out, but in nineteen cases out of twenty no one but a 100 per cent, efficient left-footer or a forward with exceptional luck would have baud- j led a ball that whizzed in from the left | at such -an angle. However, M'Elligott [ quite made up for that missed goal, if it was missed, by working for the open- , ing from which Ballard headed in. Stocks played a consistent game at centre, but ; was at no time particularly in the limpligbt. THE PENALTY KICK. A writer in the "Athletic News," under the heading of "A Big Blot on Football," talks very straightforwardly to certain backs at Home who have de- : liberately broken one of the essential rules of the game, taking a chance of . the referee noticing the breach, and a second chance that in any case the penalty given Nvould fail. He says :—' The simplicity of Association football - is often insisted upon by the leaders of • the game as one of its greatest charms. - That the pastime, in its main features, ' is obvious, and, therefore, appealing to the- average, cannot be denied. Nor would we advocate any change which would introduce complications of real difficulty. But those who are ■• the guardians of the game, the International Board and the governing bodies of each country must place justice,, the purity of the play, and the_ encouragement of the art even before simplicity. Of late backs, and others engaged in 1 ihe defence, have been guilty of acting as a second goalkeeper, of using their -hands when the custodian is beaten, and. preventing a certain score.

This, of course, involves a penaltykick—which may or may not be converted. This is cheating and taking the risk of discovery and punishment under the mistaken idea that the back, or other defender, has to resort to any low dodge, any mean' trick, any contemptible expedient to " save the goal." There is no difference between cheating at cards and cheating at football. But the Football Association, having no power to appoint a Shadbolt person to_ administer the cat-o'-nine tails, sits with solemn mien, and passes the follctwingi resolution:— ' . ■

"The Council of the F.A. places on record its views that the action of a player, in preventing the scoring of the goal by a deliberate infringement of the laws is emphatically contrary ■to the spirit of the game, and is certain to bring it into disrepute, and is most reprehensible."

This is an expression of piety and does not hit anybody where it will hurt. The player takes the risk of . the penalty-kick, because the spot drive has been, known to fail, and because he. thinks his action is justified by the end in view. This is false argument, and a farrago of. nonsense:

The footballer who cheats his fellowplayer out of thi just reward of his skill and toil ntght just as well pick his pocket of the bonus that would probably drop into it but for his despicable act.

If men are going to play a game, they should abide by the rules or be adequately punished.

Twenty years ago, in the columns of this newspaper,l we advocated that the penalty-kick should be given a scoring value. Our opinion has never changed. To endow this kick with a decisive value would entail altering the Laws of the Game, which decree, that a goal only counts'in deciding the issue. But we would give the penalty-kick a scoring value, the same as the try in Rugby football. That still- retains simplicity. It will be urged that this would be severe. ,But nothing can be too drastic that saves a national and a spectacular sport, the passion of the people, from an indelible stain. Twenty years ago we ' eniphaised that one penalty-kick in every three does not produce a goal. The cheat takes the chance of a failure. If he knew that the penalty-kick, whether converted or not, carried a value next to a goal, he wonld be very chary of stooping to defeat a foe. Further, we still believe in points for goal values, and would award the highest points of all for a penalty-goal. Goals from open. play may be brilliant, a glorious climax to art and craft, but the purity of play should be the cardinal principle enforced by rule. Let the punishment fit the crime. Out upon a ruffian who would resort to any device to save or win a game.

With such a. change, passed by the International Board, backs would refrain from cheating because their side might be beaten by one goal and one penalty"kick to one goal. Why not? Directors would see that penalty-kicks were not given away.

Again it seems necessary to draw attention to some of the rules of the game * which every player and supporter should' be well acquainted with. One rule that always causes discussion and argument, and on which a surprising amount of ignorance is shown, is that relating to a ball out of play. The rule is quite distinct, and says: " The whole of the ball must have passed over the goal-line, or touch-line, before it is out..of play." Nothing could be plainer, and yet repeatedly the claim is made, and again, for out of touch, when the ball is on the line, or partly over. The whole of the ball must be over the line before a goal is scored, or the ball out of play. The ball may roll along the touch-line or goal-line, and still be in play. The practice of claiming for the throw-in when the ball goes inlo touch is too prevalent, and is unnecessary. Any linesman worth his salt ami knowing his rules will give his decision, which should not be altered unless tho referee sees fit to do so.

In cricket an umpire must not give a decision unless appealed to; in football it is not correct to appeal, but to leave tho initiative to the referee. . When a referee s»jes an offs:ice committed he will promptly hk.w his whisle without an appeal.