Grand Display by Forwards

Evening Post, Volume CXXIV, Issue 40, 16 August 1937, Page 5

Grand Display by Forwards

SPRINGBOKS GALLANT IN DEFEAT

' Stocks on the New Zealand Rugby market show a sharp rise. The reason for this is the magnificent performance given by New Zealand's latest Rugby football representatives in carrying off first Test honours against one of the greatest sides South Africa has sent on tour. Magnificent is the word for what a New Zealand pack, reduced to seven for almost two-thirds of the playing time, accomplished in paving the way for victory. It was a football battery in full blast. But the gallantry of the opposing forces was an important factor, too, in making South Africa v. New Zealand, at Athletic Park, on August 14, 1937, one of the greatest Rugby battles of all time. The Springboks were gallant losers. " Never before has Athletic Park accommodated so huge a crowd, and never has Rugby enthusiasm been so tremendous. Nor has the cause of such high-pitched enthusiasm been brought about so strikingly as in the amazingly spirited play of the New Zealand forwards, who played like.a set inspired—the more so when one of their number was taken from the pack to replace an injured wing-three-quarter. Fourteen men did New Zealand's job in the latter part of the first spell and throughout the second half. And did they make a job of it? Forty-five thousand voices—not excluding the visitors from South Africa—had the same answer as they left the scene of an epic struggle that will live in their memory and be handed down as the Rugby Test of the century. It would be remarkable if there were,such another. ■ .' New Zealand's win was by 13 points to 7. In each side s account there was a try and a field goal, the margin of victory be- , ng represented by two penalty goals.

With all the keen anticipation of the match, there was strong evidence that the affliction from which New Zealand Rugby has been made to suffer had not been shaken off. The game was not what it used to be, and the winning way of the Springboks in provincial matches—where opposition sometimes is greater than in Tests— seemed to increase the doubts in quite a large sphere whether New Zealand had the material and ability to meet the more advanced type of Springboks. The few days given the players, with their entirely new set of international backs, to get together in final preparation for the big encounter, did little more than offer food.for the germ of thought. But things happened in those few days to .show that the.New Zealand selectors had chosen wisely, and there was a revelation when that New Zealand team stepped out. The forwards played the game of their lives, astounded everybody, took charge from the beginning, never let up in a terrific struggle and demonstrated, with the aid of the valuable and essential division behind them, that when it comes to a day of reckoning New Zealand can still stand the test. WILL TO WIN. , Tactics, of course, played an important part. J,he mighty Springbok "pack had to be. shaken. Highly-skilled in scrummaging and proficient in the art of. gaining possession, whether in ' the scrum or on the line-out, it had to be reduced and pinned down to some extent. A stupendous task, in the light of what is known of South Africa's Rugby spearhead—but the All Blacks were ready to tackle it manfully; in fact, they were right on their' toes. Rarely has' a pack entered into so great a contest with the will to win shown by the New Zealand, set on Saturday: Jumning right into action, they made the play—made it not only for themselves but for the backs, too. In the tight'they held together as a pack; in the loose they hunted as a pack. The pressure was on against the but they battled with grim determination,1 •■ and in the loose they hunted like tigers, harassing the opposing force to a considerable extent. The main thing was to get on top; and that is what they, did. So it was that the

STATISTICAL DATA A record taken of the scrums during the match showed that South Africa won 23 and New Zealand 18; six were, indecisive. Thirteen penalty kicks are shown, as having been awarded to South. Africa and seven to New Zealand. South Africa got the ball in 33 of the line-outs and New Zealand in 29. There were 29 line-outs which were indecisive. '

huge concourse, naturally patriotic, was made to. bubble with enthusiasm and excitement. The further they went the more spirited those forwards became, and when one of their number was taken away their performance was the more surprising. Springbok supremacy in hooking and on the line-out was challenged, and from the.time that the New Zealand pack was reduced to seven men the battle for possession became also an "even go." And it was "go," and no mistake. The New Zealand backs followed the lead of their pack in giving of their best. Not so quickly oft the mark, they gradually settled down to play the game demanded of them. It was hard; their greatest task, was to stop the opposing set, and they tackled just as keenly as their opponents, who are notably strong on defence and in backing up. Then, top, there was the aid necessary to the forwards in preventing them from becoming a spent force, and the judicious kicking was of great value. Then, again, there was the all-im-pojrtant accuracy in goal-kicking, and Trevathan's boot was a wonderful asset. It gave New Zealand a start, took the All Blacks to the lead again after the Springboks had drawn level with a spectacular try by the fleetfooted Williamc, and, in the second spell, after New Zealand's one try by Dick, it supplied the fine field goal wliich completed New Zealand's account. The scoring had one other addition—a snappy field-goal by White for South Africa. SPRINGBOKS AFFECTED. It appeared from the outset of the match that the Springboks were suffering from the tenseness of Test atmosphere, and they were caught off their balance. Still, as they steadied up, they became a real force. Territorially, they were down, but in their spirited bidding they had moments when the tide looked as though it might be turned.' Greatest of these moments | were in a period .late in the first spell and again when tremendous efforts were made to reduce the gap in points The showery weather made the ball greasy and this was not to the Springboks' liking. They had reckoned wrongly so far Is conditions were concerned It was left until almost the last minute for a decision as to whether Harris or Craven would be the fly-half. Craven was given the job, as he was in the first Test with Australia.

It was a tactical error, as it turned put. There was not the certainty that conies of having Craven at the base of the scrum firm? the ball long and hard to Harris. Much fumbling occurred, though Craven undertook his job valiantly.

■- It is part of the Springbok plan to get the tall through to the wings-fast wingers are developed for scoring purposes—and unfortunately for them.this was upset. Even so. White, as one of the centres accomplished much under a ha .dicap in the endeavour to have things1 righted. Where, too, the Springboks appeared to sl'p on tactics was in hot playing' more to the New Zealand wing which had been weakened.

Nobouy was missed by the Springboks more than Brand, their famous full-back. The same sense of security was not there as is the case when Brand is playing. Turner, one of their best players, was rather off his game, and off in kicking, too. Brand undoubtedly would have made a big difference, just as it is possible that Mitchell, for one, would have made the New Zealand side greater.

HOW THEY FARED

PLAYERS & PERFORMANCES

It was a big blow tn New Zealand when Cotaden was injured and was taken from the field on a stretcher. Ward-, who came out of the pack to take his place, was sot a difficult task not only because the.position was strange to him but also because his opposite was the South .African speed merchant, Williams. Indeed Ward had an unenviable task, but he did his best although he did not inspire great confidence in his ability to check the South African winger. On one occasion in the second spell when he went for Williams high and failed to stop him and Williams then went on. to beat Taylor, anything might have happened had not Dick raced over from the other wing to put an end to Williams's run. But on the credit side must go Ward's earnestness and the pass he sent back, when hard-pressed near the touch-line, to Trevathan; he elected | to keep the ball in play instead of booting it out and it was this pass which enabled Trevathan to turn, take sight of the goal-posts, and pot his magnificent goal. .Unfortunate';. though the injury to Cobden was"; it enabled New Zealand, continuing with fourteen men, to demonstrate the efficacy of the former New Zealand seven-man pack against eight forwards. • even though on this occasion New Zealand had no wingforward as in other days and the scrum was packed differently. To be a forward short as New Zealand was when Ward dropped back to fill Cobden's place was, of course, a distinct handicap, but the seven New Zealand forwards who remained rose to the. occasion magnificently. Their heeling in the set scrums even improved and out in the open they played hard, fast, and lively football. The captaincy of the New Zealand side did not rest heavily on King's shoulders; the responsibility he carried'did not affect his play one iota. He was one of the outstanding men of a very good pack, each man of which did well. The Simon-Trevathan combination behind the New Zealand pack _ went well. Between them they constituted the pivot of the backs. ■ Apart from the ten points which came from his boot Trevathan played an invaluable part on defence, his kicking to touch being of great assistance to his side.- ' • ': .. ■•■ ' j Taylor, at full-back for New Zealand, enhanced the good opinion formed of him in the New Zealand trials at Wellington. He gave a good | exhibition of full-back play, being as safe as the proverbial church. Greasy though the ball became after a time, he was able to take it cleanly and safely; in fact, at times the ball could not have been better taken if there had been an open sack there for it to drop into. 'Although unable to produce the brilliance on attack shown by him in the inter-island match . vecently, Hooper, nevertheless, was well in the picture as the New Zealand second five-eighth. . He was up against solid defence, but, notwithstanding, he made some nice penetrative runs and was not found 'wanting in defensive qualities.1 " ' ". • ■', '■„■-■ When in the second spell .Craven endeavoured to make a break through the centre^ by cutting in between the New Zealand five-eigntns, botn; Trevathan and Hooper went for him and Craven was very effectively stopped before he could get rid of the ball. Craven, who captained South Africa, was not seen at his best at fly-half. His defence was as sound as could

be wished for, but both he and de Villiers, the scrum half, often lacked that little extra snap on attack which makes all the difference between the success or failure of a back attack. It seemed that better results would have: been achieved with Craven as scrum .half and possibly Harris at Although in the match against Wellington, Turner, when he took over from' Brand, showed that he is a fine goal-kick, he was unable to repeat the performance on Saturday. The impression left was that the team would have been happier with Brand as the last line of defence. Although a useful full-back, Turner is a better winger or' centre.