OUT DOOR SPORTS AND PASTIMES

Free Lance, Volume XIV, Issue 692, 4 October 1913, Page 21

OUT DOOR SPORTS AND PASTIMES

By Touohlino.

Rugby League Football.

fHERE are many who, like myse.f, . have had it .told, them times > . withoutnumberthat, if a comparison is made between Rugby . Football and Rugby League Football, the latter will be; found to be superior from all points, / and more particularly in the interestYit arouses amongst and the • entertainment it provides, for the : spectators, andthe pleasure it gives tie players. Those; who hold these, views are welcome to them, but,, after watching Northern League teams —and representative ones at that—at work' on three successive Saturdays under the pleasantest" of conditions, I ani conservative enough to believe. that the charms of Ru'gby far outweigh tljoße of its younger sister code. ; The outstanding feature of the League game is the pace at which the ball travels about from one, end of "the field to the other, but for this feature to grip the (spectators/ the participants in the game must all be fast, they, must be able to take and give a pass with precision,' and they inust be well trained. If these conditions do not apply, the game develops into a hybrid arrangement during which the spectators rather find •amusement than This thought was . brought convincingly home.to me many times during last Saturday afternoon at the -Newtown Park, on the occasion of the match between the Auckland and Wellington representative teams. " ' , "The League game is so open and fast that 'the pointing player- has no oppqrtunities, the. abolishing .;of the line-out dispenses; 'with ...rough play altogether, and the kicking direct into touch is done away with because the ball is brought back to where it was. kicked from for a scrummage." These are some of the stock sayings; that -have been dinged into our ears of late, years, but I will guarantee that there were few round.the Newtown Park last Saturdaywho wiU subscribe ; to them. ■ Illegalcharges were noticeable right through 'the game, .and many of the. players must be still feeling the effects of tne bumps they received from their opponents. And the ball was kicked into touch : almost unfailingly, when no other means of getting out of the trouble, presented itself. I am convinced, however, that the standard on which to judge a game is one in which the finest exponents are engaged.; Many times during our ordinary; Saturday marches the exhibition of l Rugby- football falls a long way below what an ideal' game should be, and often a similar state of affairs happens in some of our interprovincial matches. But there( are instancies which I could recite in which the playing of the Rugby game l has roused the spectators to the highest pitch of entnusiasm, mainly because its unexpected happenings liave .brought out .to the' full the qualities of the playera both as individualists and as members of a combination.And thisi. .1; claim;. ierthe standard 'on whiqh the game of Rujgby should be compared with the League code, and I am satisfied that if it is it will dome out triumphant under any test to which it may: be submitted.: As the Maori chief would say. "I have spoken." ' • # * .■ : * The magic words In a sporting sense, "Auckland ; y.. "Wellington, t did not succeed in drawing more than two thousand adults to the Newtown Park last Satur- ■ day afternoon,. and this in face of the fact that the weather was. absolutely of the best, the ground was in fine order, and that the Park that contains our Zoo is a pleasant place to- spend the

week-end afternoon in.r It may lie that th©feportiilg public hay© had their fill r of football thjs yeaij= and this; may- have accounted -for the falling-off in the' attendance with-an; Auckland-Wellington sporting event as the -cause celebre. I may be"wrong; but I fancy.under similar conditions there would, have been fully five times' as .many_people present if'the game ..had been a vKugby clash, .even so late ;n the football. year as it is. "Which prompts the statement that the Rugby game is not inany "way losing its hold on the sportsi-loving in Wellington, despite what many people : may/ say to the-con-trary. ;■"■.■-' . '=■-.'.- :■•■'," '■;'//■'■ Y- : ; '.- ,;.■■•.■■;•■.

. And /the Wellington Rugby - League management and , players hare' haa a §ood time during the three weeks. " uch a remarkable run'of fine weather in September I cannot call, to mind during my connection with sport in Wellington, the weather itself being . almost enough to tempt people to spend their; Saturday afternoons in the .Newtown Park, regardless of whether there was ; isomethihg to - see when they got there. The League people undoubtedly had luck on their side as far'as the weather is concerned. • Evidently the lessons of the game, as sought to be taught by our recent :New South Wales visitors, have not . been learnt by either the Auckland or, Wellington. representatives. . To .succeed at League football, the men in possession of : the ball must, keep their grip of it: what--ever' happens, and never by any means kick the . ball to ;a - man on the opposite side, for fear he should take it irito- his head to start a passing v rush therefrom. But these- Aucklanders and Wellington -• men invariably kicked the ball, or when they did try passing rushes more often than . otherwise the passes would strike. , some butter-fingers, and the attack would be turned aside ere it properly , developed. There were exceptions to this statement, it is true; but many times, and often during .the game did $hings happen as. I have mentioned them. \ As a display of League football this match Was nothing to write home about; for the main reason that the majority of the 1 players were mere tyroß, and with hardly a superficial knowledge in many cases' of what was* expected of them;: Many a /promising piece of play went astray because of the Amateurish efforts of the players. . A fly half-back who kicks the ball instead of passing it to his followers is a poor exponent of League football, and this failure on the part of Auckland's outside half' accounted .in a great measure for the defeat of the visitors. . # ■■ * ■. .# The resulted in an unexpected win for. Wellington-by 33 points to 18. The winners' score was made up of two tries by Bradley, 'two » tries bv Kelly, try each by Whitley, Spencer, and House, four goals by George and two goals by Campbell ; arid for . Auckland, -Seagerv? Mitchell, Murdoch and Cook each scored a try, . Webb kicking three goals. Wellington deserved' their win, for they® were, undoubtedly the stronger ■ side on the day. But. both teams were weak, and probably it would be a fairer ? critic-v ism to sav that the/Aucklanders were' the weaker individually and collectively. * * ' •» Among the visiting backs the ofrly oiie who created a really favourable impression was Webb, the scram-half. \He worked hard right through the piece, and 7 made, his passes from the back of the. scrummage very' neatly,' but he .was a long way removed from the class of Coyne; the New/ South; Welshman here the other day. My main reason for this conclusion is that Webb rarely had..his backs galloping when he made his transfers, and therefore many fine opportunities went begging because the opposing players travelled faster than the : ball after it left Webb's hands. • Cook made a couple of dashes up the side-line,. scoring one good try, but he seems no hap-r pier than when he played Rugby in Wei-, lington for the St. James Club. Kennealley gave me the impression that there are possibiUti(2s in himJ.that may cause him to be a near future, but none of the other backs call for any special comment. ; Auckland's forwards, however, were a good set, Rukatai and Mitchell being the most -notfceable. The - Maori led >;th% :

side ; ; and went great-guns ~ fipmljegiiir ning to endi, \ . , " '• ;* '\ r Whoever selected the team had a very poor conception of the possibilities of the players when they made Bradley play outside of George and House.This pair, are' both centre threes 'quarters Vwith nothing like the nip in their play that , there is in Bradley's, who r is an dutside halfr-back- first /"and fore-* most.- Still the; ex-St. James player was the best back on the ground, but he would undoubtedly. have been more in evidence if he- had been played in his proper position. . . Kelly wa6 played wing three-quarter? and. shaped in good style, much better than he had .done in the middle of the field the, previous v two- Saturdays.House, George and Whitley got throughtheir- work' right well, but Barber was inclined to run toe far occasionally. He opened up the game to good effect many, times, however. Spencer was the best among the forwards, but Wilson (who was played as - extra halfback in the second half) t and Parker were not far behind the veteran. Charlie Murphy, the old Melrofee eighth, was referee, but he let a lot of things pass that were very auestionable. All the, same, he had the players well under control, and; none of his decisions were questioned.

{Continued on page 22.)