“A NEGATIVE GAME”

Evening Star, Issue 22070, 2 July 1935, Page 10

“A NEGATIVE GAME”

NEW ZEALAND RUGBY DOES IT REACH OLD-TIME STANDARD? RESPONSIBILITY OF 1035 ALL BLACKS “ As far as 1 can gather from current form, New Zealand' Rugby football is now a negative game. The ■majority of the teams I have seen in action since my return to, the dominion seem to have been on defence rather than on attack. The •spoiler is rampant.” . . These were some of the opinions expressed to an ‘ Evening Star ’ reporterthis morning by Mr W. D. Clarke, a New Zealand-born resident of Yorkshire, who is at present on a holiday visit to his native country. __ •“ You who have lived in New Zealand for the last .20 or 30 years may not have noticed the change that has come over- your Rugby,” said Mr Clarke. “ But I, who has been living in the Home Country for over two decades and have renewed my‘acquaintances with the game here more or less suddenly, can have no hesitation in stating that the form of our footballers has slumped badly. By this I do not mean that there ,is any deterioration in the human material. Make no mistake about that._ The young fellows of to-day are just as solid and fast and plucky as the older generations of .players. However, I do think that the wrong spirit has crept into the manner in which the game is played.” , , » PLAYING THE MAN.”

Elaborating on this theme, the visitor explained that there seemed to be too much of the “ the man element,” instead of the old-fashioned system of “ playing the ball.” Although sound defence was, of course, necessary, it was neither essential nor legal that a man should be tackled before he bad possession of the ball, or that'defenders should risk, the off-side rule penalty by “ camping on a clever attacking opponent. Such/tactics as these were not, he hoped, the general rule in the dominion, but he had seen enough of them in some of the so-called big games to disgust mm. “ It may be that the New Zealand forwards’either will not or cannot learn to pack a 3-2-3 or a 3-4-1 scrum ” continued Mr Clarke, “but the fact remains that their scrummaging is not good. In the old days scrums used to be firm, solid, and businesslike. Now they are haphazard and loose, with forwards flopping about aimlessly or railing down at the least provocation It certainly is not like New Zealand football as I once knew it.” STANDING TOO SHALLOW. Questioned as regards back play, the visitor went oh to say that the craze - for bottling up the opposition appeared to have led to a system of standing up too shallow* or close to tho other rearguard. What with the attentions of loose forwards and rival hacks who wore on them almost as soon as they received the ball, the fiye-eighths today had little chance to develop. _He could remember seeing in the old days backs who swept up to take their passes at top. speed and who, if sheer speed ■ were not sufficient, generally had a trick or two up theib sleeves as a means of attempting to fool the opposition. .Except for an occasional “ dummy, there ■ was very-little trickiness in the back play nowadays, and - passes were too often taken by players standing flatfooted. It was a depressing spectacle. ALL BLACK PROSPECTS^ • “I gather, then, that you are not very sanguine about the success of the 1935 All Blacks?” remarked tlje reporter. . ~ ' ~r “ I would not say that,” replied Mr . Clarke. “ Once the 1935 team has landed on British soil and has played a ' few matches together, I think it should do very well. 1 believe the selectors have tried to choose forwards of the honest, hard-working type, and have selected backs who are capable of improving with combined practice. In * my criticism of New Zealand Rugby I do not wish to be interpreted as saving that the play is altogether weak. The main point I want_ to bring put is that it is far from being attractive. • The next touring team may strike tough games in the internationals. _ It is a pity it has no Cooke or Nicholls to ‘ startle the natives.’ ” . ' Mr Clarke went on to state thatlfche 'All Blacks of 1935 had a big responsibility ahead. It was sad but true that, while New' Zealanders as a whole were very popular in the Old Country—perhaps more popular than any other visitors—the dominion’s Rugby footballers were not admired as greatly as they could be. This was not on account of any personal shortcomings', but rather because of the over-grim spirit in which * they played their harder games. It would have been quite all right, how- ' ever, if this grimness had been confined to legitimate hard play, but it . was a regrettable fact that, during the 1924-25 tour, at any rate, there were instances of illegal tactics which, coming from a team so good otherwise, did not create a favourable impression. He had heard it said, moreover, that the Springboks of 1906 were more popular than the All Blacks of 1905, and at the same time thenrecord was nearly as good. However, he had no first-hand personal knowledge on that point. The New Zealand Army team, which won the King’s Cui) in 1919, were regarded as “ stout fellows ” and were very well liked wherever they went. “It is to be hoped that the new side, while on tour, will ignore any undesirable subtleties which appear to have crept into New Zealand Rugby,” concluded Mr Clarke. “ I honestly believe that the men chosen are big enough-to do so, and lam sure they will have a most enjoyable trip.”