THE RUGBY GAME IN NEW ZEALAND

Hawera Star, Volume XLVII, 15 September 1928, Page 12

THE RUGBY GAME IN NEW ZEALAND

Lessons of African Tour '/ Dr. R. G. B. Sinclair’s Views X" ' ' Too Many “Shiners” in Scrums— I , * Looking for Press Publicity Tn the following interview, Dr. R. G. B. Sinclair, of Hawera, discourses interestingly upon present-day New Zealand Rugby tactics, with special reference to the lessons, which, in his opinion, have been learned as a result of the All Blacks’ South African tour. He allies himself with the critics of the older school, in condemning the fast, loose forward game, and. in criticising the new kick-into-touch rule, contending that the methods and rules which have been adopted in this country with the object of brightening the game and improving the play of the backs have faded in their objects. Opponents may be found for the theories here put forward bv Dr. Sinclair, but it will be conceded he makes out an interesting case for the tighter forward game; nor will there he found anyone to question his qualification to express an opinion on these lines. From 1919 to 1923 Dr. Sinclair played for Otago ’Varsity, a team which consistently delighted the public with its spectacular and open play. He represented Otago in 1922 and 1923 and gained his All Black cap in the latter vear playing for New Zealand in his usual full-back position. He plaved in one of the earliest combined union games, staged as preliminary trials for the 1924-25 AH Blacks, and it was thereafter an open secret that he was regarded by the selectors as a “certainty” for the overseas touring team; to the disappointment of many South Islanders he had, however, to announce, before the final selection, that he was not available.

“To be asked what lessons I think •we> nave gained, or snouxu- gam, xx om tne tour ox our team to- ooata Airicn is, 1 am airaiu, to set me oil in an attack. on our meal rales and on the usual method ox team selection ontamiiig in iN-e-w Zealand to-day,'’ said nr. Sinclair. “Footo-aii news reporters must also come in for a snare in the attach. “Tne kick to toucn rule was introduces by the Auckland Rugby Union to combat the inroads of the .League game, and was adopted in, I think, 1922 by the xNew Zealand Rugby Union. Tne 1 cnampions of this rule insisted that it would brighten up football throughout tne country, would make the game more attractive to the public, and so would increase the gates. It was said that straightway there would be a general and marked improvement in tUe standard of back play. Personally, I have so far not ■been able to detect any one of these improvements, but rather the reverse, and I am firmly convinced that, brilliantly successful as I think the African tour to have been, had we stuck to the old rules we should have done much better. “My objections to the kick to touch rule are these —firstly, that it spoils proper forwards play, and secondly, that it spoils, good inside back play. To explain is to go back to tbe first principle of football —command of the ball is essential. New Zealand . forwards to-day break far too quickly from set scrums and from tbe tight work, the idea being, ‘now the game is fast and open, let us be out and harry the backs and, incidentally, get honourable mention in the newspaper's.’ “Now-, almost every football coach m ilie world, I should say, insists firstly that his scrum should be properly packed, and secondly that no forward shall leave that pack until the ball is out of the scrum. He insists that if the scrum- is packed properly then every forward should be able to see the ball all the time it is in the scrum-, so that there is no excuse for breaking before it is out. Yet how often to-da.y do we see a side hook the ball and then lose it, just because-in their eagerness to be up and awav the men in the back of the scrum had taken their weight out and allowed their opponents to, push- their own serum off- the ball and so gain possession. A local enthusiast told me yesterday that the thing which struck him most about the New South Wales v. Wanganui game was the fact that New South Wales secured- the ball from every scrum, one of their three front row men being so clever that even when Wanganui hooked the ball he, could, by shooting both legs right into the Wanganui scrum, get his feet over the ball and bring it back. This- was advanced as an argu•ment in- favour of the three-two-three formation, but I am inclined to think that the Wanganui lock and front row men were the whole day imploring their back and side row men in no uncertain term® to give them some weight.

praise is given to the ‘shiner.’ A story apropos of tnis illustrates it very well, x cannot vouch lor the truth or it, out I have no doubt it is true. “During the last scries of trial o-ames Alley was talking to a couple- of newspaper men. One ol tliem ■told* luni that- lie did not think he (Alley) would be selected, as he never did anything to catch the selectors’ eyes, and ceitainly was never mentioned in the ■papers. To this the big forward replied that any footballer would know that these newsmen did not know what they were talking about-, but that ir they liked he would show them that afternoon that he, too, could be a ‘shiner’ if he wished. The newspapers next day were full of Alley—-‘Alley the best forward on the ground, and so on. This speaks for itself. “Except for A. E. Cooke, who is said to be the best ever, we do not seem to have a brilliant inside back in the country. This is- to my mind because we have now transformed our halves and five-eighths into mere link men by allowing the forwards to get to thorn- too quickly. The- usual fiveeighth to-day is a sort of glorified Robot, an activated dummy. It he receives the ball from 1 his half-back all he can do is- throw it on to the next man. If my memory of Gallaher and Stead’s ‘Complete Rugby Footballer serves me right, the unorthodo-xy of the back play of our 1905 team lay m the fact of their inside backs being men who made the openings, a® opposed to the English style of play, in which the ball was sent straight, out- to the wing three-quarter, who made his own plav and. scored if he could, today one seldom hears the term selling the dummy,’ and certainly there are no inside hacks playing in Taranaki todav who consistently sell the dummy and who are marked down by other clubs- as men to be very closely watched on this account. Yet a few years avo it was a common expression and a common occurrence. ‘Punch’ MacDon gall. who played for Otago about 1920, was an artist at it, and it was astounding how, in spite of his reputation. he -would with apparent ease beat such -a great defensive player as Dr. ‘Fred’ Perry, who will be remembered as being most unlucky ip uot being selected for the 1924-5 English tour. DEARTH OF CLEVER INSIDE BACKS. “Before the war we had such, men as Jimmy Duncan, who practically mtroduced the five-eighths game, Hunter, Stead and JVlynott. Alter "the wax we had Fea and Ifwerson; in the Army team Fea and McNaught, while to feed these men we had Freddy Roberts, Teddy Roberts, and Charlie Brown, beloved of Taranaki memory. In the younger generation of players we have only Cooke. ' The disparity in the numbers playing good inside hack games then and now is too great, and I blame our present style of play. It seems to me that the teams- whose tradition is back play—and these are the- ones we like to see —still continue in their oldstyle, while- the other clubs get steadily worse. . . “Even tbe full-back has not gamed bv being able to open up the play more. This certainly is more done by full-backs now, but was introduced by Reg. Bell in 1921. Bell that year ■scored a try from full-back in one of ■the All Black-New South Wales tests in Sydney. He had previously popularised that style of play in club matches ;in Dunedin.

“There is a. photograph in the ‘Johannesburg Sunday Times’ of De Villiers getting away one of hi® famous ‘dive’ passes. The whole Springbok pack is down, and the strain on- all their leg® can he plainly seen. Four New Ze-aland forwards are STANDING UP. No wonder we were beaten in the scrams. Mr. R. B. Tennent, of Dunedin, an old Natal representative, told me a few months ago that New Zealand would be beaten for the ball, because in the whole of Africa the first thing the -selectors thought of when considering a forward- was ‘ls he a pusher?’ PRESS WRITERS BLAMEWORTHY. “I must say that I consider the papers have helped largely to bring this state of affairs . about. Few; reporters seem to realise that it is the forward one seldom sees who is doing the work that matters. Far too much

“My comments on selection, can all be summed up in the repetition of a conversation I had with H. D. (Mona) Thomson in June last. He said that in his day a team was selected first for defence; then, if it were possible, the brilliant attacking .but poor defensive player was put in, if a safe place could lie found for him. But ‘shiners’ were not wanted in the -scram!”