THE AUCKLAND WAY.

Manawatu Times, Volume XLVIII, Issue 2433, 26 July 1924, Page 7

THE AUCKLAND WAY.

GEORGE TILER SEES THINGS AND GETS ONE ON THE MOB. LUDICROUS CRITICISM OF ALL BLACKS. [Per Press Association.] AUCKLAND, July 24. Mr G. A. Tyler, a member of the 1905 All Blacks, in an article, in the •‘New Zealand Herald”, says:— Weakness All Along The Line. “The weakest team Now Zealand has ever had; weak in scrums, weak on defence, and lack ng in pace, sums, up to the present All Blacks team after the match on Eden Park yes-, terday. The scrum work was such that, out of 23 scrums the All Blacks hook- ■ cd the ball only six limes. Though: there were some good forwards, good j scrummers were lacking. The way, in which the pack buckled when the weight went in showed that there was something' wrong with the formation. There will have to be a great, improvment if the team is to be aj success, but it is doubtful if the mater-j la I is there for a first-class comb na-' tion. The weakness in defence is emphasised by reference to the scores that have already been registered against the present combination compared with the original AH Blacks. The latter, in 81 matches in Britain, had only eight tries scored aga’nst them, while the present AH Blacks already have 11 tries against them! for five matches. Three tries • were j registered aaglnst them in the first! half of the game yesterday.

Selection Criticised, "The method adopted in selecting the team was wrong. Only 2o members should have been chosen before the trp to Kew South Wales, and when weak links had been found other players could be siVected to meet emergencies. It is a shame that men like Paewai, Mill and McGregor should be chosen while such players as Johnston (Wellington), L invan Wright and Matson (Aucklnad) were turned down. Matson is about the best back in Auckland this season, Any of the four players mentioned would strengthen the defence. Another fine player who has been overlooked and passed by is Lomas (Auckland), a first-class hooker and a good forward. In each of the three matches he has beaten Irvine. But the greatest injustice of a l l is the exclusion of Wright. He undoubtedly is the best half-back in the Dominion, and is the ideal type. "In addition to the weakness of the forwards in scrumming. the backs yesterday were lacking in initiative on attack, and their defence was weak. Their tactics were monotonous and ineffective. Notwithstanding the dlsp’av of yesterday, there are players in the Dominion qualified to form a j good team. It has been suggested that I a coach should be sent with the All; Blacks; but p’avers won’t l ! sten to i a coach. We never did. A man like j J. Moffltt should be included to strengthen the scrums and educate the Xjack.”

THE RETORT COERTEOES. TYLER'S CONVENIENT MEMORY. AND UNFAIR COMPARISON. (By “Ponty.”) George Tyler Is arguing on wrong: premises. He should not at tins stage draw a grossly unfair comparison between the 1905 and 1 924 teams on the former's British record and the latter’s Australasian one. In 1905 when the AH Blacks were | beaten by Wellington the New Zealand team made so poor a showing- as to give cause for grave reflection os to what would happen to them if they met with strong' Home teams on a wet turf. Mil at Happened in 1003? Despite the wonderful record of the New Zealanders on the 1905 tour how many people are aware (and why does (; e ore-e Tvler forget?) that the great All Blacks won only one of their lost four matches in Australasia!!! They tied their last match in Sydney lied their first game at Dunedin after return to New Zealand from Australia. won at Christchurch and lost at Wellington, on the eve of embarkation. Facts, cold, hard facts. Mr Tyler* Errors of Selection, Lomas (forward) and Wright (Auckland) would appear to have been unlucky to miss the tour fto say nothing of Knight who was ‘‘beaten” out of a game on Wednesday), but does Geo. Tyler ser'cmsly contend that there are more duds in the New Zealand 1924 than in the 1905 combination? Can he point to as many 1924 players as useless to the side as a dozen of the All Blacks 1905? This w-iter has already pub'ishod statistics Showing that fifteen or sixteen oi thoi party of 27 were kept on the contiuu- ; ous overtime list because the manage-; ment was afraid of losing games by {nclud’ng the passengers on the side. Was Wednesday's Match a FunTest? It is generally admitted that the Aucklanders played a fine game, individually and collectively, on Wednesday when they won 14—3. It would appear that the eleven points margin did not by any means flatter Auckland on the day. But they have been recognised for two seasons as a formidable combinalim In fact any side -with Ifwerson on it would be entitled to respect. Leav'ng out of consideration the asinine policy of the N.Z.R.F.U. in pushing the All Blacks to certain defeat without giving them a chance to recover from the effects of a rough trip, it is doubtful if the New Zealand selection committee could have chosen a weaker side against Auckland. (For instance, Bad«dey and McGregor had not played together as New Zealand representa-

lives). Yet George Tyler goes past that and refers to a player (Paewai) who did not play at all! Such criticism of Paewai should In justice have been made at, the time of the an nonneomont of names of the final thirteen New Zealand players. And for George Tyler to hold up Johnston (Wellington), Kirwnn (Auckland) and Matson (Aucklandl as budfbng All Blacks greatly discounts the value of his criticism. The Coach, i What George Tyler says about the j coach merely serves to confirm Ike I statement made by a loading adminis--1 strator five weeks ago. Players wont i listen to them, which is no doubt the I reason why the N.Z.P.K.U. decided beforehand to send Home this year an International delegate instead of a coach. The Prospects. While the rearguard will have have ! their work cut out to rise to the . heights of Roberts. Hunter, Stead. Deans, and Wallace, at any rate they |will undoubtedly develop into a flue division on tour, particularly when they get to understand each other’s i play better. White and Blue-itis!

The whole fact of the matter is that Auckland is so “one-eyed” that they will not be satisfied until the New Zealand team consists of fifteen Aucklanders and fourteen “also starteds.” Several people who saw Wednesday's match assert that there was no national spirit shown at Eden Park, that the Alt Blacks wore not given the semblance of a hearing, and that there was only one team on the paddock at all stages of the game. One on the Nob for George. To show that George Tyler should have been tlie last man in the world to have adversely criticised, under the conditions pertaining in the Auckland match, the hooking of the New Zealanders it would appear the following was the All Black’s forward team in 1905, defeated by Wellington:—Hookers: G. A. Tyler, W. IT. Mackrell; look: W. Cunningham; supports; G. W. Nicholson, O. E. Seeling; back-row: F. T. Glasgow. W. Johnston; winger; D: Gallaher. Tell it not in Gath! Six of the beaten forwards were Aucklanders! And Ernie Dodd and Eric Watkins took the hall from George and his mate with monotonous consistency!