On the Hockey Field CHALLENGE FOR THE SHIELD INDIA V. CANTERBURY MATCHES IN HAWKE'S BAY MEN'S COMPETITION "AN ODIOUS THING"

Evening Post, Volume CXX, Issue 12, 13 July 1935, Page 22

On the Hockey Field

CHALLENGE FOR THE SHIELD

INDIA V. CANTERBURY

MATCHES IN HAWKE'S BAY

MEN'S COMPETITION

"AN ODIOUS THING"

The Wellington Hockey Association has challenged Auckland for the N;Z. Challenge Shield, and will in all probability play after Waikato and Poverty Bay have attempted to life this trophy.: i

The selector (Mr. P. A. Joblin) has been requested to select by July 15 18 players to go into training for the match.- It will be remembered that, last year's shield team was soundly beaten by Auckland. However, the association has decided that the players are to have at least six weeks' training and coaching and to this end is endeavouring ;to obtain a suitable hall where, after light physical training, the players will be able to practise stickwork and field movements. Every effort will be made so to equip the final team that - they will reverse the score of last season.

In connection with the comment published in the hockey notes on the All-Iridia-Canterbury match, a correspondent, "Sauce for the Goose," writes as follows: —

"I was interested to see in 'The Post' last Saturday an objection lodged by the chairman of the Canterbury Hockey Association in connection with 'The Post's' report on the All-India v. Canterbury match. Inter alia, the chairman said that there was nothing in the game to justify the accusation of 'wild and vigorous play' on the part of the Canterbury team; he also said that the Indians described this particular match as the best they had had in the tour up to that date.

"I saw four of the matches against All-India—v. Horowhenua, y. Wellington, v. Canterbury (at. Christchurch), and the second Test at Wellington. At Otaki, and again at Wellington, I myself heard the Indians: say that each match in 'turn was 'the'best, they,had had to date'—what else can a polite visitor say when' his hosts ask him what he thinks of the game? he can think a lot, sometimes! In connection with the Canterbury match, I can assure you that you need make no apologies for wounding the feelings of the good people at Christchurch. Let me give you a couple'of the more : outstanding instances of deliberate fouls put into execution against the Indians, and winked at by the umpires. Wells, All-India inside-right, was just ready to have a shot at goal, when the Canterbury' left full-back made a flying tackle that knocked Wells clean off his feet. Although Wells is no flyweight, and although this disgusting breach was made practically in the goalmouth, the penalty awarded against Canterbury was not the penalty bully which was so obviously indicated: not even a penalty,, corner, but a long corner! Why,'l ask you? However, worse was to follow. The second incident was during an attack by Canterbury. The three inside forwards charged down on the Indian goalkeeper, knocked him over, and while two sat on him, the third.attempted to score a goal. The attempt was foiled by Naeem (Indian half), and apparently the umpire noticed immediately some breach by Naeem which I did not see (although I must admit that I was not in the best position to see). He awarded a penalty blully against Naeem, which the latter won. The point I wish. to. emphasise is that a goalkeeper is just as much entitled to protection from 'charging down' as is any other player, and 'charging down' is specifically prohibited by the rules, yet this glaring instance was apparently not noticed by the umpirelet us be charitable enough.to. suppose that he was blowing his nose at the time and unable to see clearly.

"You can take it from me that the information given you by your representative was substantially correct —it was a very wild game as far as Canterbury was concerned, and their 'intimidation tactics' had a marked effect on the finer points of the Indian strategy and tactics, which was probably the reason why Canterbury played as they did." ■ ? •

"Criticism of umpiring in any sport is an odious thing, and one not indulged in by true sportsmen; therefore the mentality of the correspondent signing himself 'Sportsman' (whose letter appeared in last week's hockey

SELECTING THE .WELLINGTON TEAM

notes) speaks for itself," writes "ExNelson" to "The Post." "No umpire goes through a match without making some errors, but for 'Sportsman' to state that the Indians played against 13 men is totally unwarranted and grossly unjust. There were quite a number of local hockey supporters with such a poor idea of the standard of New Zealand hockey that they were prepared to give quite a number of goals in in their support of the visitors. If 'Sportsman' is numbered among those gentry, it is just too bad, but it is his only excuse for such an unsportsmanlike outburst. \

■ "'Sportsman' evidently did not grasp the fact -that' the*-Indians were opposed by ah eleven '■ battling hard 'for their-country's prestige in; the realms of hockey; and: that it was owing ■to the ; determined-efforts: of' the New Zealand team that the Indians became bustled and made infringements, for which they .were lightly penalised. As a matter of fact the visitors were fortunate - iri! escaping vsome penalty bullies in the first: half. : Regarding the penalty bully.'near ;the end of the match, anybody with > arty knowledge of the rules must appreciate the fact that the umpire gave the visiting goalkeeper two chances,',whereas he would have been quite justified'in awarding a penalty goal when the Indian made a breach in bullying the second time.

"It was also' a matter of regret that the president of the Canterbury Association should have been compelled in the interest of fair play to pen a reply to most unfair and biased reports appearing in the hockey-notes of June 22. Regarding the game between India and Canterbury, Canterbury made a great showing against the Visitors, so surely we should give them credit for their effort instead of (as some local followers have done) making slighting references, as to the fairness of the tactics employed."

Invitations have been received from theHawke's Bay A-ssociatiotraria'the Napier sub-association,. to send teams to play at Hastings and Napier respectively;. A tentative datei August 3, has been arranged, and should that day be accepted* a. senior B team to play at Napier arid a senior A team to play at Hastings' will be selected in the near future.

. The following is the position in the men's competition after last Saturday's matches: — Senior A. . ■ • Goals Ch. P. W. D. L. Y. A. . Pts. Hula 0 7 2 — 35 13 18 Karori A ...... 9 6 3 — 39 ' 21 15< Wellington ... 8 4 2 2 12 13 10 Hutt 8 2 4 2 19 17 8 Wesley 0 3 1 5 14 27 7 Karori B ..... .0 14 4 14 19 6 University 7 2 1 4 20 10 5 Technical ■ '9 — 1 8 12 30 1 Senior B. liuiu .'.,.... SO11 30 12 II! l'etune .8 6 — 2 IS 8 12 Hlllt S 6 ..— 2 21 12 12 Wellington ... 8 4 2 2 10 12 10 Technical .... 8 3 3 2 21 H 9 Karori ...... 8 3 ' 2 3 25 24 8 Wesley I ...... 82 2 4 JG 22 « University B . 8 12 5 20 20 3 Wesley II 8 1 — 7 8 28 2 University A . 8" 1 — 7 13 38 1 University A and B default 1 point each. Junior. Hutt ... 7, 7 — — 21) , S 14 Hula A ..' T 0 — 1 35 '■» 12 Hnia B ...... 7 G —' 1 29 14 12 Wellington ... 7 3 1 3 9 20 7 Wesley 1 ..... 7 2 1 4 24 20 ; 5 Technical ....8 1. -2 5 19 19 4 Potdne ■• .-7 2 —' , 5 11' 18' 4 Wesley II ....'." 7 1 15 12 28 3 Univorsity .... 7 — .1 6-. 10 36 — • University default-1 point. "•■■'■ ■■" '■ ■■■ ■■■'. ■; '-■■' Third. ' ' .'.' Karori :;,.... 8 8 — —. 38 12 16 Technical ..... 8. 6 1 1 38 19 .13 Wesley' 8 :4 — 4 IS 27 S Hula - 8 2 : 2 4 16 20 G Univorsity .".;. 8. 2 .— 6 IS 24 3 Hutt 8 — 1 • • 7. - ■ 8 34 1 University default 1 point. Fourth. Wosley II .... 8 8 — — 26 C 16 Karori 8 6.1-1 317 13 Technical .... 8 3 2 3 15 19 8 Wesloy I ..... 8: 3 1 4 16 21 7 Wellington ...'■ 8 1 2 5 15 23 4 University : .... 8 — —'8 10 37 — Intermediate. Hula 8 8— — ■ 50 4 16 Technical A .. 8 5 1 2 30 23 11 Karori ..;... 8 3 14 43 18 7 Technical B "..' 8 3. 1 4 14 37 7 Wesley ...... 8 2 1 5 17. 24 5 Technical C .." 8 — — ; 8 5 62 — The followinR; are the points In tho Club Championshlp^IIula (6 teams), 75; Karori (6 teams), 65; Wesley (9 teams), Cl; Technical (8 teams), 53; Hutt (4 teams), 35; Wellington (4 teams), 31; Fetono (2 teams), 16; Univorsity (6 teams), 11. ...