RUGBY FOOTBALL

Manawatu Standard, Volume LIV, Issue 210, 4 August 1934, Page 5

RUGBY FOOTBALL

MANAWATU v. WAIRARAPA. THE TURN OF THE TIDE. (By “Cross Bar.”) A perusal of the Rugby records discloses that while Wairarapa held a playing superiority over Manawatu and Manawhenua (during the period of the combination) until 1931, when the honours were shared,' home and home meetings having been productive of a win to each. The outcome was the same again in 1932 and 1933, and now Manawatu have won at the first meeting for 1934 with a return fixture at Masterton to follow. The records show that there is little between the two unions, and whether Manawatu can swing the pendulum, which at present hangs in the balance, remains to be seen. The advantage meantime rests with them. Sine 1930, in -which season Wairarapa registered two overwhelming reverses upon Manawhenua, big scoring has been the order of the day and even when defeated Manawatu have been capable of entering double figures. The record of the meetings since regular inter-union engagements came into being in 1927 is as under: 1927. —Manawhenua 18 —16 (shield

WEDNESDAY’S CONTEST.

The selector is to be commiserated with in his fruitless search fcr rearguard members who can produce attacking powers together with a reasonably sound defence. It has . been apparent of late that Manawatu lack solid tacklers, the low tackle being all too seldom seen, whereas it should be the exception to see a rearguard member attempting other than a low, hard, tackle. Hawke’s Bay ran up 22 points against us, Wanganui 29 and Wararapa 20. but it must be conceded that 11 of Wairarapa’s points came from Hemi’s kicking, while Chase supplied 10 of Wanganui’s total by his ability to kick gaols from tries and Folia s furnished four points per medium of a field goal. However, it was evident at Feilding on Wednesday that there is a general Jack of speed in recovery. Once beaten, the rearguard members are far too casual in getting back in an endeavour to assist a companion or in a desperate hope to check the threatened score. Brown was introduced by the selector into the side in the hope that an improvement would result, and the young Feilding full-back certainly did tackle, indeed he halted Himona on one occasion with a tackle which left the Wairarapa five-eighth badly shaken. While his kicking was lacking in range and direction in some instances, and ho was inclined to wait for the bounce, he should improve with greater experience. Wasley was expected to stiffen up the line, but the wily Stringfellow proved to be too many for him in the second spell and as a result Moffatt was drawn infield from his wing too frequently when the dark greens’ unorthodox tactics gave to them the extra man. Moffatt registered a crossing which many a winger. -would: not have got and even though he appears to be a little reluctant to go in hard, be should be worth a further trial.

Bradley was the outstanding winger on the field, for the Old Boys representative gave everything a go, his fend making G. Bocrth look very foolish on occasion, and Wairarapa changed their wingers over at tho interval. As

it happened, Bradley saw little of the ball thereafter and Booth was a, A to make amends by capping two movements wherein Stringfellow had made the openings. While Bradley effected only the one crossing, he played a material role towards two others, his work being the brightest feature of the home rearguard. It was anticipated that the club partnership between J. Finlay and Dewe would have beneficial results, but while Finlay proved himself to be a valuable unit by supplying six points from penalty goals early in the gome, his kicking slumped thereafter and he was able to add the major points to only one of Manawatu’s six tries. Irvine appeared to be at sea as a result of Finlay standing so deep and the movements went off far too slowly. Dewe was never on his game; indeed the handling of both the fiveeighths was far from being all that could be desired.

Waldin proved to be a worthy leader of the green and whites, his activities paving the way to assaults repeatedly, while he dropped back to the assistance of his rearguard very opportunely, not once, but several times. Devine, who was opposing his old fellow players and had a brother in the Wairarapa five-eighth line, was a host in himself. He got into the heavy work freely and his display reached great heights. He was an. outstanding figure.

Although Manawatu secured a fair share of the ball in the set scrums in the first spell, they were out-man-oeuvred in the second half when the Wairarapa rake won possession with monotonous regularity. The absence of Waters from the lock position might well have played a part to that end, for when the Massey College forward did not resume after the interval owing to his having sustained a kick on the knee O’Dea took his place. While the latter is a very promising player, he is too light and lacks the strength to hold a big, weighty pack together. All too frequently it crumpled up in the melees and the tall opposing forwards barged straight through. It is unfortunate that Manawatu are at present minus the services of three of their big lockmen, McKenzie being in Australia, G. Mitchell (Feilding O.B.) compelled to give the game best this year, and Henry temporarily hors-de-combat. Millard, who partnered Waters in the centre row, has still a little to learn about the position. While he showed up in the open on occasion, being the possessor of quite a turn of speed, his head was showing up all too often in the thick play. However, in finding big men for the position the selector is confronted with difficulties, and whether he will take further steps to effect changes prior to the game with Wellington can only be surmised. Our inner line certainly requires more thrust than it has, while the development of the unorthodox should also be given attention by the coaches. Wairarapa realised the value of the wide pass across-field, althoiigh they were outplayed in the orthodox type of play, and the tactics had the green and whites on the run in the closing moments; indeed, the ardent home supporters quite welcomed the final bell.

NEPIA’S LAPSE

FAILURE TO PLAY. EAST COAST COMPLAINT. TOICOMARU BAY Aug. 1. George Nepia, ex-All Black fullback, who was one of the selectors o the East Coast Rugby team, and who disappointed his public when at the last minute he excused himself from travelling .to Napier, after having selected himself in the team, was freely criticised at a subsequent meeting of the East Coast Union Nepia s selection of the 1934 East Coast team also created indignation when it was seen that after a North v South match he had selected the whole North team with the exception of two players. One South man, Crawford, also an ex-All Black, and Nepia himself filled these two places. Nepia was the North selector. Nepia placed himself as full-back, and at the last moment refused to travel. His action had a sequel when the manager of the touring team reported on the tour to a meeting of the East Coast Rugby Union. Mr Larsen, the manager, attributed the team’s failure against Napier and against Wairoa to the fact that Nepia himself had failed to travel, and had selected unfit players. It was not until half-time in the Napier match that Mr Larsen solved the mystery of the backs’ poor showing. He then discovered that P. Atkins and T. Morete, both playing as fiveeighths, had suffered injuries before they started on the tour. Atkins cpuld only use one arm, and Morete had a knee injury. Mr 11. Poananga, assistant manager of the team, tabled a written report in which he strongly criticised the selection. The union considered the following motion, which had been carried by the Tolaga Bay Sub-Union: “This sub-union wishes to express dissatisfaction at the selection. . . and attribute the team’s failure to record wins to (1) Lack of sound selection; (2) the fact that injured players were allowed to travel; and (3) the selector himself failed to travel after putting his own name in the team. We consider it high time that a decided change in the selection of East Coast teams should be made.” Mr Larsen moved that Nepia’s services as a selector be dispensed with, but Mr Rickard moved an amendment that Nepia should appear before the union to explain his actions, and that decision be deferred until then. He maintained that Nepia’s failure to travel did not reflect upon his ability as a selector, and that the motion was unfair.

On Mr Rickard’s suggestion Mr Larsen altered his motion to read: “That the union have no confidence in Nepia as a selector.” The amendment was lost by five votes to three, every member voting, and the altered motion sponsored by Mr Larsen was carried by six votes to two. Mr TV. Morete is the new East Coast co-selector elected.

game). 1928. —Wairarapa 25—20. Wairarapa 31—10. 1929. —Wairarapa 12—10. Wairarapa 37 —16 (shield game). 1930. —Wairarapa 29—3. Wairarapa 32—7. 1931. —Wairarapa 29—17. Manawhenua 26 —22. 1932. —Wairarapa 22 —16. Manawhenua 27 —6. 1933. —Manawatu 17—8. Wairarapa 19—17. 1934. —Manawatp 26 —20.