THE NEW ZEALAND TEAM.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXVII, Issue 5734, 1 November 1905, Page 2

THE NEW ZEALAND TEAM.

FOOTBALL AND SPORTING CHAMPIONSHIPS.

(To the Editor “N.Z. Times.”) Sir,—ln further answer to your inquiry, “O.n they nlay football in England, or should (heir national name be ping-pong or marbles?” I’ should liko you to publish the following list of tho present holders of tho world’s championships in Hie chief sports, arranged ~ 1 phabetically; Boxing (heavyweight), Jeffries. America; billiards, Roberts. Eng!;:ad ; cricket (test matches), England.; cyclin'.;, various riders, Continent of Minopo; football. “Association.” England; football, “Jlugby," New Zealand; jumpi;:;;, both high and long, Ireland; running, sprint, Morton. England; running, di..lance. Smith. Aldridge, and Shruhb, Eugbipd; riiieshootiug. “Palma Shield” team, England; rifle-shooting. King's prize, Comber, England; sculling, Stansbury, Australia; swimming, sprint, Koran, Australia; swimming, distance. Billington, England; tennis, Doherty. England; walking, Earner, England. Summurj — England 10 points, tho rest R points. Prom this it will be Been that the pingpong or marble era has not yet arrived for England, although as recently as Saturday last wo celebrated a certain game of marbles played succcs-l’ully a century ago, which we can play again and as effectively when the time comes. Regarding the New Zealand Rugby footballers’ splendid success, more power to them, say I: but be gentlemanly with it, and do not let your “,Ma, ‘licking” destroy the honour of tho victories, and do not “skite,” it is bad form. The newtpaper quoted by you as conveying patronage, viz., the “Pall Mull Gazette,” is not an influential paper, and I doubt if the comments were made as reported by your London correspondent. The tone of the English papers I have read is very different. —I am, etc., TRUE SPORT. Hunterville, October 26th. fOur correspondent’s imputation of lack of veracity to our London correspondent is unwarranted and ■scarcely gone onto; and bis knowledge of London journalism may bo guaged by his reference to the “Pall Mull Gazette." Ed., “N.Z. Times."!

SPORT AND GOOD MANNERS.

(To the Editor “N.Z. Times.”) Sir,—Tho remarks of "Englishman” on good manners for sportsmen come with rather a bad grace from one who belongs to a nation of inveterate boasters. We may be unduly jubilant over our success in the English football field, but “Englishman” must concede this much at auyrate, that we are priding ourselves on somethin!? that we are actually capable of doing to-day, and not on something that onr ancestors may happen to have done for us hundreds of years ago. As for the character of Englishmen either as gentlemen or as sportsmen, I think tho average New Zealander would prefer to judge that for himself; and the experience we have had of visiting teams does not tend altogether, conclusively in the direction that “Englishman” so confidently indicates.—l am, NEW ZEALANDER. October 27th.

THE GAME ENGLAND CAN PLAY.

(To the Editor ‘‘N.Z. Times.”) Sir,—As an ardent footballer in the Old Country, may I breathe a mild protest against a fallacy that seems to prevail in New Zealand as regards football. This was noticeable in your sub-leader a few days ago,-when you ashed, “Can they play football in England at all?” etc. In answer to that, question X say “Yea, but not what Now. Zealanders call football.’' Speaking of football at Home, Association ia meant, unless Rugby is specified: but in New Zealand it is vice versa, so that it is ridiculous from an Englishman’s point of view to say that a. British football team was beaten by New Zealand last, year: as at football -(not Rugby football), England can beat the world, and half a dozen first-class British footballers conkl beat any eleven, oj- fifteen if you like, in New Zealand, Australia, or any other colony.

You are doubtless aware that a British Rugby team (they called it by its' proper name there) loured South Africa and was beaten hollow in, I believe, every match they played. This was. I might state (being in South Africa at the time), a far superior team to that which toured New Zealand, being composed almost solely of English. Irish, ’Welsh and Scottish Internationals. At the same time an Association team toured the South African colonies; and won every match except one, that against Natal, albeit it was a second-rate team composed solely of amateurs, and did not include one present-day International player. From this it will be seen that had the Now Zealand Rugby Union sent a team to South Africa, they would have met teams worthy of their mettle and gained credit had they beaten them;* whereas, by beating the English teams, oven by so large a margin, they deserve no credit, as Rugby at Home is on the same footing as Association in Now* Zealand, and what hope would an Association team here _ have against even a second-rate English team ? This letter is intended to servo in some measure as a foil to tho " skiting,” as one of your correspondents calls it,’that will, take place when the Rugby team at Home heats England, Ireland, Wales, and Scotland, as assuredly they will do. In fact if they do not win every match of tho tom* it will be for no other reason than that they havo “gone stale.” I am, etc., "ASTON VILLA.” October 30th; _f, Judging by the comments of the English papers, English people thought—till the New Zealand team along—that they could play Rugby, too. Our correspondent’s assertions is to the prowess of •British players of Association seems to 11a. to betray symptoms of that "skite" which wo havo been told is the peculiar perquisite of New Zealanders. —Ed. "N.Z. Times,”]