Association Football HONOURS TO AUCKLAND

Evening Post, Volume CXVII, Issue 18, 21 July 1934, Page 22

Association Football

HONOURS TO AUCKLAND

By "Vanguard."

"Personally I think Auckland should have- won. On the day and on the ground they were the better side." This is how the manager of^the Wellington team, Mr. J. M. Coleinan, sums up the Auckland-Wellington I\A. Trophy match last Saturday, and opinion in the northern city is "the same. At the meeting of tho management committee of the "Wellington Football Association this ■week, when congratulations and thanks were extended to. Auckland, appreciative reference- was made to the splendid entertainment the team had received and to the excellence of its behaviour both on aiid off the field. • ■ :■. . !:: :

The game was a fast and exciting contest from first to last, and the, large attendance had every reason to be satisfied witli the game provided, says the "Auckland Star." While the result—2 goals each —perhaps flattered Wellington, who were kept extremely hard pressed practically throughout the second spell, it was sufficient for Auckland to-retain-tho trophy and look forward to the next challenge,~when Canterbury will come north for the first time, since 1926.

Starting off with fast and aggressive play, Wellington, .had the best of the exchanges from the outset, and ,it seemed to take tho homo side a long time to settle down.- The brisk, versatile methods of tho visitors were at once disarming and upsetting to the Auckland men. In this stag© of the game the weakness with ...Wellington;

was the- failuro to combine to thrust homo their attacking movements, and the -clever anticipatory play of Gerrard had a good deal to do with this. When Leslie opened tho seofing for the visitors it was no moro than the southerners , deserved-; on play,, but afterwards the homo'side brightened up considerably and took more than;their share ;of the attacking. A draw': at the interval was a fair reflex of th&V: play and represented the' evenness "of the exchanges.'=. :•'.- . : -::. ■■ 'fe'.t^/i'-'■',■'' v Auckland started;|the '-.session in:great style/ and- ttiey\ never let up for the whole of the spell. While Wellington did not take the home team's aggressiveness with submission and were' of ten seen in dangerous attacks! it seemed, all the way through" that the Aueklanders were sure to win. When Angus sent a neat back-heel pass froim Punsinbre'tb the net to give the holders the lead, it was really a belated success, but there was a lack of finishing thrust in the home game that was responsible for not extracting tho full reward from many clever outfield pieces of play.

PKAISE FOE WELLINGTON BACKS

But Wellington kept on doggedly trying to equalise matters, which they dia per medium of a penalty, and the closing stages were full of thrilling incident. Howeveiy.time arrived ere either side could put the issue beyond doubt, aiid a sterling contest resulted in Auckland resisting the challenge. The reputation for forceful, vigorous, robust play which camenorth with the visitors had its sequel in the tactics Auckland adopted for the day, and their playing almost entirely to the right wing. Also the instant passing of the bail from man to man was strategy chosen1 wisely to break down the strong' tackling of tho Wellington half -back line.. These tactics paid and the home side showed some very, spectacular movements in attack, making the ball do the work, and keeping tho opposition constantly on the- run. Close up contact was avoided/as much as possible, and I this was a safe precaution, which told i£s tale, ere the game finished, on Camp-, bell and Hanlon especially, who were obviously tiring. ..... McVeaiij Mahoncy, and Haines were tho best portion of the visiting side. Tho goalie certainly had several narrow escapes, but ho showed .fine discretion at times. in anticipating attacks. It was with tho backs that the honours ■ went on the day. Mahoney and Haines never gave the home forwards any rest, and the speed on recovery and tho deadly tackling of each was outstanding. They never lagged throughout ,tho game. Tho half-backs had to cover:a; great ■■amount'of ground, and all three played hard, determined football, but: the ball was-kept away from them,and 'this:upset their spoiling as well as'constructive tactics. Campbell has .7 played many better games .in. AucklaiuL Hanlon was byno means a failure, and-neither was Jeffrey, but as a line the Wellington men were out-, manoeuvred. The visiting forwards were\ not so strong as the rest of tho team/ Xieslio was indifferently supported, but Bhovyed rare-dash and a. decided conception of the game of the centreforward. Condon and Kershaw were * not given a chance-to settle down to an effectively constructive game, and the opposition was too strong for them. Hawken played a promising" gam© on the. left wing, as also'did Watson on the right, but there was not"that combination and understanding in the visiting vanguard that- was seen in Auckland's. The game all through never had. a dull moment and was- well seeing. . ;, ;