ANOTHER WIN

Hawera Star, Volume XLVIII, 20 October 1924, Page 5

ANOTHER WIN

FOR ALL BLACKS. YORKSHIRE DEFEATED. BY 42 TO 4. HART IN GREAT FORM. BY CABLE—PRESS ASSOCIATION—COPYRIGHT. LONDON, Oct. 18. Twelve thousand attended the match between New Zealand and Yorkshire, which was an easy victory for the All Blacks, the final score being:— All Blacks' 42 Yorkshire 4 The New Zealand team was as follows: Full-back—Nepia. Three-quarters-;—Steel, Svenson, Hart. Five-eighths—Paewai, McGregor Half—Dailey. r F^, rwarcls — P ar]cer (wing), Irvine, Me Cleary, M. Brownlie, C. Brownlie Richardson, Masters, Stewart. Yorkshire’s kick-off was the commencement of a New Zealand attack, for the All Blacks at once pushed the county team into its own territory where a sustained attack was unsuccessful for quite a. while. Steel was the first to threaten the home team’s line, but was prevented from crossing in the nick of time. Then Hart got away with a great run, but he, too, was stopped before it was too late, Yorkshire could not break through the All Blacks’ attack and were kept solidly at it to hold the visitors, but in this they were successful for some time. Then after seventeen minutes’ play Richardson found his way through the defence to score a try, which Nepia eould not convert. Five minutes afterwards, however, Yorkshire were penalised in tlieir own territory and Nepia kicked a fine goal. Steel at this stage was compelled to retire owing to his ankle.giving out. The All Blacks’ attack was continued with increasing vim, backs and forwards alike creating anxious moments for the defence. Passing movements were effective in keeping Yorkshire in their own half, and then from one of these Hart scored. Nepia’s kick was successful and the score was: 1 — All Blacks 11 Yorkshire .... 0 A period of even play followed, both teams infringing the offside rule and being penalised repeatedly. Yorkshire had a share of success when the forwards carried play into the New Zealanders’ territory, where Lumby secured and passed back to Myers, who dropped a. splendid goal, but this was to be their only score. Dailey, working well behind the scrum, got the ball away smartly and the visitors registered another try (scorer’s name not cabled), Nepia failing with the , kick. Yorkshire again pressed strongly and nearly added to their, score, when, obstruction by Richardson. gave Smith a shot at goal, which narrowly missed. It was not long before Yorkshire's attache was repulsed, and when from a scramble the ball came into the hands of McGregor, the Canterbury back snapped the chance to cross the line, Nepia converting. Almost immediately the All Blacks’ full-back, who was having a day out, landed a great goal from half-way and the spell ended with the New Zealanders substantially leading, the score being:— All Blacks 22 Yorkshire • ; 4 In the second half, though Yorkshire secured most of the ball from the scrum, the New Zealanders seized every advantage from their speed, stamina and weight, wearing down the Yorkshire pack, which was the backbone of the team. With the All Blacks once more on the attack splendid passing between Hart and Parker gave McGregor an opportunity to cross near the posts, and Nepia had no difficulty in improving the score by another two points. The New Zealanders’ backs were now , showing brilliance and the ball travelled from man to man with admirable accuracy. Hart finished one great bout by scoring his second try and Nepia converted. Then Dailey successfully “dummied” his way right through the opposition and transferred to Hart, who had a clear run in. Nepia’s run of success continued to hold good and he converted this, and Hart’s fourth try, which was scored .just on time, making the final score: — All Blacks 42 Yorkshire 4 The game was not particularly fast, but was very hard. The gratifying feature of the New Zealanders’ play was the vastly improved goal-kicking by Nepia, who converted six out of eight tries and put two penalty goals over the bar. The smartness and thoroughness of the All Blacks was in marked contrast, to Yorkshire ’ s laboured and dilatory’ movements. The best backs were Dailey and Hart, while Richardson. Stewart, M. Brownlie and Masters were the best forwards. COMMENTS ON THE PLAY. (By “Spectator.”) A good win was expected,’ and in this New Zealanders were not disappointed, but few were optimistic enough to hope that the team would pile up over 40 points or that Yorkshire would fail to cross our line. On this point it is interesting to note that so far on three occasions a potted .goal has appeared in the score of the opposing teams. Yorkshire forwards" are reported, and this wa6 anticipated, to have been the backbone of the team, and one rather disquieting feature of the report is the statement that in the second spell they secured most of the ball from the scrums. This is probably due to the advantage gained by the tliree-two-three formation. It appears that not until the superior speed, stamina and weight had worn down the opposition did the New Zealand backs get the openings necessary to put into effect their passing rushes. The report, it may be added, does not mention the position in the first spell, and seeing that only four tries were scored before half-time, they must have been up against the same trouble in not getting the ball as much as they could, wish. "With a weak back team against them it is, of course, not of so much moment, though quite serious enough, but when they come to meet a brilliant three-quarter line, with clever backs in front of them, they will be right up against a stiff proposition. One must assume that the selection committee are fully alive to the problem, which is one that also fronted the team of 1905,