TEAM CHOOSING.

Hawera Star, Volume XLV, 16 May 1925, Page 9

TEAM CHOOSING.

COMBINATIONS OF ESSENTIALS

Choosing a cricket eleven is not a very easy job, but it is child’s play compared" with that or choosing » Rugby ilifteeii, declares .Colonel i'huJlSp Trevor, 'C.B.K., m tbe Daily Telegrapn. In both instances the weather js a iactor in the case, and in. both cases it is practically always overlooked, despite the fact- that in summer and in winter the only certainty acout Englisii weather is that it (is uncertain, il wonder if the keenest and most experienced observers of cricket and llugby coulcl make an approximately ’accurate list of the good bad-weatne r players at both games. We all know that .Rhodes can bowl on a sticky wicket, and Hobbs, of course, is our greatest batsman, because, like “W.G.” he can still be dominant wnen the ground is helping the bowler. Has that probability Deen recognised in team-choosing in Rugby ? 1 should say that it has not. The Welsh backs (Gwvn Nieholls and Co.) justly earned a reputation for being able to play accurately jn tne much In those days it was a shade of odds on W ales m any weather, but it was long oclds on tnem n it, were wet. Yet both at cricket and at football there is a tendency (and I think, an unjustifiable one) to say that bau weather obliterates real distinction. Personally, 1 take the very opposite view, though frankly admitting that L should be in real trouble if a sued to choose to-day a bad-weather Rn gland lifteen.

In some eases I should possibly know whom to leave out, but should iiud it difficult to justify by reason or argument the inclusion of the men I should put in. It would seem, then, a s if I were now in the role of Satan rebuking sin. But need we ad go on sinning Y That is the point, fiave we yet taKen enough trouble to find out which are our most reliable wet-ball (.and greasy turf) Rugby football players ?

There is far less excuse for a cricket selection committee erring than lor a Rugby one. The policy of having a policy is admitted at cricket. Youi requirements at the game are known, and you have to find the men to do the things you want done, You must have a fast* bowler—that means a last right-hand bowler, lor there are not any fast left-hand bowlers. You must have at least three slip -fieldsmen, two of whom must also be , good outneldsmen You must have a good coverpoint. Incidentally you would begin choosing vou r cricket eleve n by writing down your absolutely best wicketkeeper, and it you hedge and work in a man who can bat and “does keep wicket, you will, I hope, get the thrashing you deserve. You must have a slow lefthand bowler. You must have at least three other bowlers of sorts. You must have two No. 1 one at lesat of whom can make real scoring strokes. It does not do to encourage the bow.ers who begin the match (or the innings) bv sending two men who, however steady and stolid, are want to make heavy weather of .it. If you concentrate on these points the rest of your batting, more or less, takes care o itself.

Let us nay honour where honour is due. The* British Test match cricket eleven which recently visited Australia Was magnificently equipped in these essentials. The fast howlers • weiy Arthur G-illigan aiid Tate—for late, in - method and effect, is more a last bowler than a fast medium one. Hearne is an offturning howler who also bowls the googly and the legturner. Kilnev is a slow left-hander, and Woolley is another. Hendren is a “slipper”'and an outfieldsman. Chapman can field anywhere. Hobbs and Sutcliffe are two No. 1 batsmen; the former is the greatest of cover-points the latter a “slipper” and an outre dsman. Strudwick is the best wieketkeeper in the world, and whether you

have Sandham or Why sail does not much matter. Both can bat the field.

Now, put the names of all these men down and you will find that incidentally to ten of these eleven me n the making of a three-figure innings in a first-class match is no novelty. I cloubt if we have ever before put into the field an eleven in which all real essentials were secured. The M.C.C. knew their requirements, and they got together the men who would provide what was wanted.

Could we not take a hint and try to do something similar at Rugby football? Our policy will, of course, be attack. All but a very few very oldfashioned fo'k had decided before the New. came that attack- — attack in combination —was nine-fenths of the game, and those who will not now be converted are past praying for. Would not our selectors be justified in first choosing their plan of attack and then choosing their men to carry it out? Both ah cricket and- football circumstances will more often than not necessitate having alternative plans of attack. Combined practice is essential to make any football plan of attack effective.

Two or three years ago you would not have left Davies or Pershaw or Wakefield out of any. fifteen. That, was not altogether because they were individually great players—or, rather, a man is not a\great player jn the modern Rugby field, unless he can adapt bis game to that of his comrades. That does not mean that he is ever called upon to play down to them but rather that his greatness will enable him so to carry on as to make them come up to him. I feel sure that omy selection committee could wisely be entrusted with the duty of policy-making, and with the helD of the captain they selected they might choose their team in the light of the policy on which they had decided. But early jn the season must they be given full control. At cricket the individual is supreme. It matters not how faulty are their comrades. Hobbs can still bat and Tate can still bowl. For all that, cricket selectors lay stress on team work, and they contend that team value increases enormously with team practice. But at Rugby the individual is a comparatively unimportant factor in match-winning. Take a good "University side, not one member of which wears an international cap, trains it,, let it have a distinct policy and series o! plans Then pit it, against., a scratch fifteen of internationals, and it will he a surprise if the team of all the, talents wins. In the future selection committees will have larger powers and consequently greater opportunities. At present they are concerned only with personnel, and they are at the disadvantage of having to take matters as they find them. The time is coming, I hope, when their task will be to shape their ends, and having done so, to shane their players to attain them.