London Counties Routed

NZ Truth, Issue 997, 3 January 1925, Page 11

London Counties Routed

TRUE NEW ZEALAND FORM

Exhilarating Rugby. ,

(By E. E. Booth— Special "N.Z.T.") . r LONDON, November 17.

All, tickets for this match were sold early and often, changed hands at a big premium. Thus when the morning, dawned fair for Old London— but foggy for a Colonial — there is little wonder that approximately 45,000 people braved the troubles and intricacies of getting out to Twickenham to see the All Blacks make their debut here. T,he crowd was representative of all classes and conditions and thoroughly critical; appreciative and impartial. The Overseas portion of London was there m, legion, as the cries of many wild fanatics proclaimed from the pavilions. Words m Maori, Kia Ora's m choruses almost, Australian Cooees, South African "Schee cum a lie hoo, Whow" (phonetic only) almost made one imagine that a big new Zoo had opened. The most unrestrained enthusiasm prevailed. . Little wonder that the crowd, when they i heard the New Zealand war-cry, simply opened their hearts and mouths and roared with hilarity and anticipation of what was to follow. London's hopes were sky-high— Cockneys are proverbially optimistic. Hadn't the Cambridge pack nearly torn up the invaders? And wasn't the Rugby champions of London after their scalps? The New Zealanders viewed this engagement with very serious consideration. It was literally a "TEST" for them, the stepping stone to the bigger 6ontest with -All -England on January 3. "Beat England" were New Zealand's last words to this team, and this match meant the fir.st step to that attainment.

The team made no alteration to their frontal formation m the scrum or resorted to any experimental '-measures, and ' except for one or two little stunts did not vary one iota from their usual style. London held firmly to its usual formation, and thus the game became a battle of styles. London's trial of a "Seven" scrum without frequent rehearsals would have thrown too much responsibility on the vanguard, and perhaps caused a rout. In fairness to the London players it must be admitted that -the visitors were an established and highly-trained organisation and have, since their Irish tour, actually attained their zenith, although it was not at all apparent either at Newcastle or, Cambridge. There is now a latent strength and confidence about the team which is of quite recent creation, which I personally attribute to their success m Ireland. Before the match no one would have dared say that the visitors would have finished up victors by 31 points to 6. I quote the scores to enforce a strong point about the game itself. The difference m points just about repx-esents the relative difference between the teams, but when it is noted that practically two-thirds of .all the New Zealanders' scores were put on ,m the last forty minutes a good idea of the game is served. ,

In the opening stages the play was anything but impressive. The central backs on both sides were fumbling and their passing was loose and inaccurate. The f orivard divisions, however, were working at the highest pressure, and Wakefield, with the help of his fine pack, was endeavoring • to force their mode of- play on to the All Blacks. Up to half-time the London team were quite m the picture, actually leading m points after Millar's second try,' but the actual play had nbt been anything wonderful — just hard, ' plain, orthodox football.

The second spell was a whirlwind of All Black energy, skill, stamina and pace that swept everything before it. The Whites (London colors) often flew like snowflakes before the Black avalanche./. It was a great transformation scene. The All Blacks simply excelled any previous performance on the tour to date, everybody and everything seemed m place, and' thus the game was a fine exposition to watch. The true standard of the New Zealand play was/being vindicated m strong measures, arid two of the. back movements were.ideal m execution. One •pras the first try m the second spell. Two short passes near the scrum, followed by a small kick, gave Parker possession at speed. Cooke and Svensbn handled and from a transfer back to Cooke the latter raced round; the posts with two others in 1 support.

The other try obtained by Cooke was initiated by Mill racing from the scrum and passing to McGregor, to NichollsV who went right through the centre for some distance and transferred to Cooke. poth these movements stand out as the best on account of the straight running of the inside .backs.

Another gem was a passing rush m which the ball went to Parker, playing on the right wing, who gathered it at top speed and raced 60 yards, outdistancing all m pursuit and running round the posts. > •

Play such as this was quite up to the best shown over here m the tour of the Originals m 1905. It was thrilling and beautiful to watch. The multitude of spectators simply cheered and cheered again. : .

The London side, whilst maintaining some solidity and cohesion m desperate forward rushes/ Were more or less demoralised m the backs. Guthrie at the scrum was consistently good, but Lawton, Aslett and Richardson simply let down the whole fabric of the London attack and defence by their dilatory efforts m checking the New Zealand centres. They stood much too far off their men and. allowed them to get' lip pace and make ground to work on. (Thus Nicholls, McGregor and Cooke Inyariably flew ; 6f£ ta fine style.

One reason for the London back's standing off m this manner was caused by the short diagonal grubber kicks that Nicholls was putting through m the first spell, so they held back m some anticipation of a continuance that did not follow. Instead of this, the ball was handled almost continually, kicking being reverted to only m cases of necessity. .' This successful piercing m the centre was premeditated and m the second spell Parker took, the wing which gave Svenson, Cooke,. Nicholls and McGregor (all straight runners) more of the inner work. The operation was highly successful. Neither Wickes nor Millar was -granted much opportunity to get away as invariably the New Zealand backs cut well into any passing effort London made.

In the case of the first score 'the New Zealand backs were caught quite out of position hence Millar simply flashed round on the outside. Generally speaking the New Zealand backs stood m better order of formation than on many previous matches. They had more depth behind the scrum and so possessed the ever ready facility for changing an open attack to one on the "blind side." -

The repeated acceptance of the London players of the All Blacks feint passes ("dummies") became almost chronic and most amusing ■ and ludricrous on occasions. The Londoners' form m comparison fell away m a deplorable and curious manner towards the end. Their inertia was suggestive of the workings of the Indian sign and frequent calls -were made from the pavilions of "Buck up London," "Play up Whites," etc.

At this stage the New Zealand . exhibition was as near perfection as 1 the. game can be played against anything like 'strong opposition and it was a fine scientific exposition of genuine unadulterated football.' Personally, . I anticipated an All Black victory for the match. This tour has absolutely proved to the hilt that to succeed a team must rehearse the same as theatricals do. Can anyone conceive a "show" being staged without adequate practice? The same applies to football m perhaps a more marked degree. A team of "stars" can be beaten by any sound; side with developed tactics. Mutual understanding and combination are absolutely essential to success m this greatest of all field sports with its thousand and one variations."

The difference between Colonial and English methods m the game are perhaps illustrated by the following. It was given to me on excellent authority that the London team were offered the chance of playing a mid-week match as a practice for this match with New Zealand, but it was turned down because of the difficulty of getting the men off work, the extra trouble involved and, it might be added, the expectant hope that it was not necessary.

The match resolved itself into a rabble against a well-trained army. With such evidence as this can the Briton overseas wonder at the present decadence of sport m England? Over here m sport there is an abhorrent perversion against, anything that savors of specialisation which, with many, is considered a prostitution of fair sport. The ambition of winning, attaining perfection, equalling or bettering "the other fellow" is lost sight of by this, nonsensical and false idea.

The New Zealand scrum m the first half neither wheeled nor heeled as smartly as they might, and had London adopted better spoiling tactics m the second spell the scores wotold not have shown such a. marginal difference.

Nepia was rarely pressed hard, consequently his kicks were usually good. Hart played well, making the most of chances, tackling better. Svenson, on the blind wing (so to speak) played well, centreing well and keeping the ball m motion to the centre. Cooke was the most destructive agent against the weak central backs opposite. Mc.Gregqr, and especially Nicholls, beautifully worked him into, good positions. Mill was not so prominent m the earlier portion of the game, but with the opening work later he was outstanding.

Parker played a consistently good game. M. Brownlie had a rear day out, which he made the most of. Fancy Wakefield, the English skipper, knowing Brownlie's specialities on the lineout, allowed him once to be left unmarked. It cost a try and some reputation to him. Similarly Wakefield started a passing rush, passing when on the ground, which the referee missed, like many other things. This play of Wakefield by one paper is described as a "dash of genius." Richardson played a great game. Stewart played well, showing a fine recovery after his illness. White showed m his frequent onslaughts, and with Donald figured m following up. Irvine was into everything, whilst Masters had a full hand m the scrum holding.

Millar and Guthrie performed most effectively for London' backs. None of the others played a bad game, far from it. They played whilst their condition held. Lawton I watched with special attention, having met him m Sydney, and his over-caution induced some degree of loss of confidence, which is' rare with him. He did not understand the, difference m New Zealand tactics soon enough.

R. A. Lloyd, the referee* does not handle (these fast games too well. In fact, this contest was rather hard to boss owing to its rapidity and variety.;