THE 1926 ALL BLACKS

New Zealand Times, Volume LIII, Issue 12526, 16 August 1926, Page 9

THE 1926 ALL BLACKS

“BETTER THAN 1924 TEAM” SECRETS OF SUCCESS OF PORTER’S MEN WHY REFEREES SHOULD BE EXCHANGED Probably because there were none of the runaway victories the All Blacks •usually enjoy in Tests against New South Wales, one or two critics have been inclined to underestimate the strength of the New Zealand side which concluded its Australian tour last week (says “Smith's Weekly"). There is little' doubt, however, that Porter’s 1926 team was superior in nearly every sphere of Rugby to that which played three matches in Sydney prior to the 1924 tour of Europe. The 1926 forwards were faster and heavier; the backs infinitely more resourceful. Comparison, man for man, must yield this conclusion, except as regards the full-back position. Even at full-back it must be remembered that Nepia was the weak link of the 1924 side m Sydney. He kept his Rugby for Britain. In the Sydney Tests he was a second-rater, a mis-fielder and a speculator. One took it for granted that he was a sound full-back, for a player doesn’t survive the strenuous trials that precede, New Zealand representative honours unless there's Rugby in him. In practically every other position, however, the 1926 players shaded their predecessors. GREAT DEFENCE Mill's displays at the base of the scrum far excelled those of 1922 and 1924; Cooke and Nicholls have lost none of their dash, ancL were infinitely more resourceful than in 1924, and, it must be remembered, they met this time an almost impregnable defence. At full strength the present New Zealand wings are Elty and Svenson. None of the teams since the war have included a pair to approach their form in either attack op defence. Elvy is the best wing-three-quarter New Zealand has sent to Sydney for many a year. Porter ie regarded in Sydney as New Zealand's greatest wingforward. One can omit reference to his play at the side of the scrum, and state that as a. rover there ie no one in his class. His agility, quickness into hie stride, accuracy and uncanny anticipation in defence, were even more marked than in 1924. Absentees from the 1924 pack were Munro, Masters, Cupples, 'Richardson, and White. At first glance this quintette would appear to be more formidable than Lomas, Harvey, Finlayson, Stewart, and Knight of 1926. But the 1926 pack won the ball, and opened up play from every line-out; and no previous New Zealand pack gained anything like the share of the ball from tlie set scrums that Jimmy Mill was given last month. Irvine is hardier and heavier than he was two years ago; Lomas decidedly more effective and as fast in support as Munro or Brian McCleary in 1924; Finlayson in the top flight of New Zealand forwards; and M. Brownlie, save one or two handling lapses and the tendency to take too much on his own shoulders, as good as ever. Assuming the correctness of this brief summary of improvement, one must then search for reasons for the closeness —on figures—of the recent Sydney struggles. Vast advance in New South Wales standard is one of the reasons, but it doesn't account for the fact that each Test was in doubt almost until the final whistle. Ross, the New-South Wales full-back, was the big factor. At a conservative estimate he saved the Blues 20 points in each match he played. The other reason, was that minor infringements cost the All Blacks several tries, often at critical stages of the game. Anxiety as to the result led to impetuosity. DIFFERENT LAWS It would be hard to define the extent to whioh the All Blacks suffered from differences in the interpretation of the laws* as between New South Wales and New Zealand. Every visiting team in any branch of sport has to face a similar situation. The two unions, however, have the remedy in their own hands. To date they have taken no steps to ensure a degree of unifgrmity. The respective Referees' Associations are not in touch, except in a casual exchange of courtesy notes. What is to prevent the interchange of referees? Both unions have the funds to finance the invitation to a chosen official, to tour, to lecture, and to hold the whistle in several games during a few weeks' visit to the sister country. Sixty pounds would amply cover such a trip. It would be the most progressive step yet undertaken in the effort to establish closer relations between the Rugby authorities of both countries. Seeing that New Zealand and New South Wales will always be dependent upon one another for the provision of representative matches, uniformity of interpretation must be the goal of those who are keenly alive to the necessity of Australasian participation in the international control or the game.