ANOTHER LUCKY VICTORY

Northern Advocate, 21 October 1935, Page 6

ANOTHER LUCKY VICTORY

VISITORS PACED DEFEAT

'‘PRIMITIVE” LINE-OUT WORK

“NEVER SHOWED DISTINCTION.”

[United Press Association-By Electric Telegraph. — Copyright,l (Received 10 a.m.) LONDON, October 20.

The special correspondent of the United Press Association states that once again the All Blacks faced defeat. Following .Unwin’s great try, the Services . forwards attacked fiercely. One rush swept the visitors 30. yards downfield, but they managed to. stave off attacks. The game must go down as another lucky one for the All Blacks, who seldom looked formidable. The best attacking movements were individual efforts, and much better things were expected of the backs, who were not impressive, while lack of combination among the forwards surprised a small army of London newspaper critics. Although the previous fault of slow packing was somewhat remedied in the second half, the team owes a lot to Hadley getting so much of the ball in this spell. Spectacularly, the game, was one of the poorest of the series, play generally being ragged and loose.

Where ‘Forwards Failed.

There was a frequent absence of thrust in the combined back movements, while one weakness of the All Black forwards was that they were too quick in breaking after winning the ball, allowing the opposition to pour through and overwhelm Corner. The same failing had been noticeable in previous games due to the forwards endeavouring to outspan in readiness for attack. Oliver did his utmost to keep the backs on th# job, but often the men were out of position, which was inexcusable. Gilbert generally was sound and brought "off some great line kicks. He was called upon for much defensive work. Tindill was not convincing, while Caughpy was but a shadow of his former self, although his tackling was sounder. Pepper, King and Hadley were the best forwards. Kendrew, Webb and Watkins were outstanding in the Services pack, while the team missed many chances by wild passing. Newspaper Comment The special correspondent of the United Press Association states that Sunday newspaper critics generally regard the All Blacks’ play as unimpressive. The “Observer” opines that considering the All Blacks had become acclimatised and were fielding approximately their best team they were disappointing. Although safer in giving and taking passes than the Services team, they attempted only obvious movements. The forwards heeled over slowly and the line-out work for such tall forwards vsas primitive. The “Despatch” says the All Blacks still do not pack sufficiently low, and wheel crudely. Compared with the Springboks, they are children in knowledge of employing the 3-4-1 formation, which should be dropped. The “Sunday Graphic” says that far from being a great side, the All Blacks never showed distinction.