Rugby Football

Evening Post, Volume CXVIII, Issue 60, 8 September 1934, Page 22

Rugby Football

By "Dropklck."

Making due allowance for the improvement in the standard of Bugby football-in Australia, the performance of New Zealand's latest team left a good deal to be desired. In the selection, too, as was pointed out some time ago, there was room for improvement. The system of selection was criticised by the writer long before the trials took place, it being pointed out that the method by which players were placed on trial was a good deal short of that necessary in the finding of the best possible talent. It savoured too much of the quota system, and, moreover, it accounted for the playing of players in positions for which they were not best suited. Further than that, the opportunities given to some players were far too limited. Where the system missed badly, however, was in the fact that some players worthy of being tried out were not even given that opportunity, and it is here that trials in -the future must be conducted upon: lines, which will make room for all who are worthy. If one centre has two strong players for one position (say, two full-backs or two half-backs) both players should appear in the trials, rather than have one completely overlooked and an inferior player from another centre included. This season's experience has stiown very clearly that a very complete system of trials must be conducted next year for the selection of the teams for. the tour of the Home countries. Performance has shown that the standard of New Zealand Bugby has slipped. This backward trend was anticipated when New Zealand's traditional formation was thrown overboard. The Dominion's national game is not what it was, and the time has arrived for a thorough review of the position brought about by the changes of recent years. True, the New Zealand team in Australia this.season was handicapped in various ways, but even so the evidence was strong that high standards of the past are not being maintained.

NEED FOR EFFECTING IMPROVEMENTS

TRIALS AND STANDARD OF PLAY

WHAT'S WRONG

In the following letter a correspondent ("2-3-2") raises points about the Rugby game today with which many will agree, especially the urge for a return to the 2-3-2 formation: —"I have followed Bugby sinco 1888, my first recollection of a big match being when Stoddart's famous team toured' New Zealand. Many changes in the rules have taken place sinco -then, particularly in connection with the scrummage. And What an absurd thing the scrum has become! Last' Saturday in the Auckland-Wellington game we actually saw a scrum formed no less than four times before the game was allowed to proceed. How long are we to stand this state of affairs? Personally, I think the referee should promptly penalise the initial offender. Apparently a great deal of trouble emanates from over-eagerness of players endeavouring to get away with some unfair advantage. Again, how frequently do we see the scrum collapse, and after a senseless scramble the referee blows his whistle and we are treated to a repetition of tho former tangle. This makes one long for a revival of the 2-3-2 formation. "There is one other point I wish to refer to, and.that is—What constitutes a mark? As I understand the rule a player has to take a fair catch with both feet on the ground, make a mark with one heel and claim the mark, all. simultaneously. There is grave danger' of the. player being seriously injured