RUGBIY WING-FORWARD.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXV, Issue 20087, 26 October 1928, Page 20

RUGBIY WING-FORWARD.

POSITION IN GREAT BRITAIN.

COPYIMG NEW ZEALANDERS. ATTEMP TS PRACTICALLY ENDED. With a purely domestic Rugby season before us \ fre have a splendid opportunity to take sto tic of our assets and deficiencies before being called upon to meet any overseas ol fixations, says a writer in an English pa per. A lot depends upon the mental attitude in which problems are tackled, aril a sine qua non. in the mattor of reading ourselves for external opposition, is a resolution that success shall be attained > f * ,IC lu, ' k of t,ic K ar "° s0 decides, by methods which are natural and congenial tto existing Rugby methods in the four countries.

The polic.f of trying to adapt a team to tho differen i and habitual tactics of the opponents Jiras been shown up times beyond numb pr, and, mercifully, in our opinion, att fmpts to play Rugby on the lines so inr; pniouslv and attractively earned out bj- our New Zealand friends are practically alt an end.

The conditions of the limine of tlin All BJa fks have been overlooked by the partis;!it* svlio tried to implant tho seven-forwmi.Jil game in this country. '1 here is. however, ( another aspect of the game which is fai ? more easily overlooked—the position in the game of tho "wing-for-ward" in P. I'itish football. Changes in the Game. Bv the tjerm "wing-forward" is meant, not the NVwv Zealand semi-scrum-half variety, buii the habitual back-row forward who • f.-as formerly described as a "winging" forward—usually as a term of reproach.

Times ha re changed rapidly in the Rugby gam. t' of late, and players must obviously kipep pace with the speeding-up of the gamp. Unfortunately the great achievement of two great players—C. H. Pillman anc I A. T. Voyce—whoso reigns covered between them the period when tho speeding-up process occurred have blinded host fc of players and clubs to the true "natuuJ3 and function" of a wingforward. They have also forgotten the names and 1 Vistories of S. H. Evershed and S M. J. Foods.

Possibly it is overstating the case to assert tha/t thp wing-forward is a player of genius, f|nr whose activities the normal modus oper nndi of the game must make certain re3«,|xations of discipline, but an approximat ijon to this point of view is a step in tin i right direction. Tho club player who.| in the past few seasons, has accustomed himself to the winging game has all too frequently, while showing up splendidly ip.i midfield play, been a costly failure at Ihe vital testing moments in his own cu." bis opponent's twenty-five. Ho has lacked genius; he has failed in inspiration; «uid he has been unable to bring tho relief, so often accorded by Pillman an tl Voyce, to the hard-pressed workers in bis pack.

Taster Forwards. The feeln g that the wilig-fonvard gamo was being overdone has long been troubling m. |ny who have the interests of Rugby at h fart. The number of youngsters who described themselves—moro than onco refereus) without

strict veracity—as back-row forwards in

their school (|2ams, made some of lis won- * der whether touch-line intp'-est was altogether a goo|l factor in the fast modern game. Last Beason's play has brought to such anxious doubters a promise of better things to come. The achievement of last year's English team, based, as it was, so largely tip<jn the staying powers of the forwards, has set a new standard of excellence. The pace cUf the modern game and the better groun iis have made it necessary that all forv.Mrds should be faster than of eld, and cle.'ir that the fastest are best placed in thi3 back row. But the proviso, "Let tl |3m lie able to push, and let them pu.sli lfcard," is at last receiving 'recognition. The moral of last year's English sid|ji was reinforced by the success of BrV:ltol, the actions of whose back-row fqr tvards, in their own twenty - fivo especially, wero an object lesson in modern Rug l>y.