SPRINGBOKS IN DOMINION

Evening Star, Issue 22954, 11 May 1938, Page 4

SPRINGBOKS IN DOMINION

VISITING CRITIC'S REVIEW TIMARU CROWD CITED AS PARTISAN Frank criticism is the keynote of most of the pages of ‘ South Africa’s Greatest Springboks,’ an account of the tour of the Springboks last year in Australia and New Zealand, published in New Zealand. The author, Mr J. E. Sacks, one of the South African newspaper correspondents on the tour, gives a valuable retrospective view of the entire trip, taking a perspective which it would be impossible for a New Zealand critic to assume (remarks the ‘Press’). For this, and particularly for liis frank criticism of New Zealand and South African players, his work is of the greatest interest. “ ‘ ONE-EYED ’ TOWN.” Of alleged partisanship in New Zealand Rugby crowdsj Mr Sacks noticed only one flagrant instance; _ that was at Timaru. “ I have noticed,” he writes, “ in overseas newspapers a suggestion that at times the crowds in New Zealand adopted a most unsporting attitude towards Springbok performances. However, this suggestion is most unfair to the exceptionally enthusiastic sporting public of that Dominion, and certainly not warranted by the facts. In the whole tour of New Zealand Timaru was the only ‘ one-eyed ’ town encountered; here the crowd’s attitude was most unreasonably partisan. But everywhere else the Springbok triumphs were most generously acclaimed and sincere tributes were paid officially and unofficially to the attractive football which they played.” ‘‘NO TINKERING WITH RULES.” There are significant phrases all through the book for those who argue about Rugby reforms. One taken from the introduction, and written by P. J. Nel, who captained the Springboks, reads: “But an equally proud result was our success in convincing New Zealanders—in their own _ country—that there is no need to tinker with the rules or seek special amendments in order to make the ' game attractive.” Discussing the Springboks’ methods Nel also says: “Our intensive baeking-up methods had their inspiration in the work of the New Zealanders who toured South Africa in 1928. To the Wallabies, who were in South Africa in 1933, we owe much for reminding us of the thrills of bright and, open football, though we endeavoured not to play with the same degree of recklessness, for wo made many fewer mistakes.” FORWARD SUPREMACY. One early section of the book, presumably the work of the author, deals with ‘ Reasons for Springboks’ Outstanding Successes,’ and claims that “ the Springboks have set up a record achievement that will prove very hard for followers in their footsteps to emulate.” It is also claimed that the bright football in Australia and New Zealand was made possible by the supremacy established by the South Africans’ pack in almost every game played, and certainly in every game they won. The back play of the New Zealanders is criticised in that, generally speaking, it lacked variety when compared with that of the South Africans, “ who exploited almost every possible form of attack.” Two handicaps blamed to the New Zealand backs are: Neglect of the chain passing system in getting the ball out to the wings, and lack of proper backing up by the forwards. It will be difficult for many keen critics here to agree with many of the conclusions about the tour, except with the initial one of the author, that “ New Zealand Rugby Union officials, players, and critics are unanimous that in their opinion the 1937 Springbok side proved the greatest football combination ever to tour that Dominion.” That in itself is a tribute to the South Africans which all New Zealanders make, and also a consolation to the vanquished.