FOOTBALL.

Hawera & Normanby Star, Volume L, Issue 9000, 24 January 1906, Page 8

FOOTBALL.

NOTES ON THE ENGLISH MATCH.

The only possible verdict at the Palace' (says an English paper) is that it was a disappointing game, which was all the poorer by reason of the conttaet of the. great game at Invcrleith and Dublin. On Saturday both sides played poor football. ■ The New Zealand backs were very, moderate in attack against ah indifferent and disintegrated defence. Much of the passing was wild ; while the wings often dropped the ball without any apparent reason. Scotland aad Ireland would not have defeats to mourn if the New ZeaJandera had played as they did at the Palace. The great feature of their play was the ability to get the ball shown by the forwards, the excellence of tv& latter at the lines' out, and their dash in the loose. As . for the backs they hardly looked like the same divisions, except for their pace — they cannot lose tßafc in a week — and were liable to lose their heacte if at all bustled. Fortunately for the coloniai -record, they were not bustled. The English forwards made an occasional rush, but for the most part expended their energies in (solid shoving — without getting the ball. Now and then they made a rush, but they displayed little dash and were never together. Possibly the New Zealanders felt that the issue was not in doubt. Be tliat as it may, their play was below the usual standard.

After closely watching the New Zealaoiders, I have no hesitation in saying that an aggravated and wholly unconscionable adherence to the principle "play to the whistle" is the ruling motive of their game. This may not, and in deed does not, represent a very high athical ideal, but there can be no question that all sides who play on this principle are bound to be successful. The degree of their succoss wil. of comae, depend upon their speedy slrilJ, stamina, and so forth, upon their ability, that is to say, to give physical expression, to the principle; but oth.tr tilings being equal, the prudent "punter" wUI put his money oh tha side playing on this plan. I speak, of course, figuratively. "Pas 6, whether you pass forward or back, and the odds are that in at. lriast one out of ten forward passes will escape the eye of. the referee"; that is the principle, or rather the lack of principle, which characterises sides playing in. this spirit. "Always go on" ; "Never hesitate because you know you have infringed the law"; "Remember that it is the referee's businew to stop- you and no part fo your business to 6top yourself or give- him a hint by hesitating."

These are three different ways of expressing the same principle. The system may be at fault ; we may have given too much prominence to the laws of the game to th r i killing of the true spirit; we may have split too many straws and he.ld too many "conferences of referees'* (almost sublime comedies !) ; if so, we are now paying the penalty. Scientific, unfair play is one- of the temptations of the modern game. Unhappily, the maoi who is found out no longer looks ashamed ; he merely looks foolish. If we could make him once more look ashamed, all would be well, for it is quite possible to play the modern game in the same 6pirit as the old game. The New Zealandors play to win, they ignore the laws because there is a, referee to administer them ; if hei fails to do so — and ona refeTee is a quite inadequate detective foree — so much thei worse for the other side to whom the law allows the same license and "conscience wide as haJl" by putting the whistle* of the referee in the place of the "still, small voice." Foul play is in a different category omd cannot be justified by the necessities of any .system of play. That the New ZtialandeTs forgot themselves at Edinburgh when " within the danger" of defeat is, in there were extenuating circumstances ; they had a lot to lose, «nd are, after all, only human. "Anger is a brief madness," and it was a very severe test of equanimity to which the- New Zealanders were subjected during tha last ten minutes of the memorable match of November 18. I have dwelt on this matter at some length because I know it is topical in Rugby circles.

Photos of McGregor, J. O'Sullivan and Mr Dixon are given in tlu 1 English papers.

d. McGregor, new Zealand. Ye're a Irraw lad wi' a ball, Wee McGregor And of tries ye made a- haul. Wee) McGregor! At the Palace that's of glass, When ye bundled through the mass Of my countrymen — alas ! — Wee McGregor! Did ye not feel half ashamed. Wee McGregor (Though ya're hardly to be- blamed, Wee McGregor), When your total tries weze four ? Or would ye Ea' bagged more Had the concourse, cried "Encore!" Wee McGregor? By yourself you'd madei a team, Wee McGregor, For your running in a dream, Wee McGregor, 1 myself would go with gke To a match— l'd do and dee. Sure a certain victory, en. 7 , - , Wi * McGregor, isfcay behind, and show us things, Wee McGregor— How you tt}\ though you've no wings, „ „ Wee McGregor. 0 tie professor in our land Of the game you understand ; Don t say "no" to my demand, att „ But "°* tti >" McGregor. We would try our best to learn, .„ , , , Wee McGregor, All the dodges a la- fern, _ r „ . Wee McGregor, lou could choose your own rewards E'en the best the land affords— ' kay, we'd send you to the "Lords," Wee McGregor.