OUR NATIONAL FIELD GAME

NZ Truth, Issue 1001, 31 January 1925, Page 11

OUR NATIONAL FIELD GAME

Services Well Skittled

CONVINCING, SKILFUL PLAY.

Unmerited Criticism.

(By E. E. Booth—Special "N.Z.T.") LONDON, .December 13. Amongst nearly all those who professed to know something about the

playing status of the Combined Services it was generally anticipated that they would offer one of the stiff est propositions the All Blacks had so far. encountered. Logically this seemed quite m order and the assumption that they would field a superlatively great side was based on the fact that the Services had organised very early. The Military. Air and Naval had exhaustively picked out their best and for a month had played them together. Their trials had n.ot been uniformly

successful. Still they fielded, on paper, a strong side, five or .six -being Internationals. Their \ composition was made up from, the Military, seven members; Navy, six; Air Forces, two. It is true, that many, forerunning teams against the All Blacks were "scratch" fifteens,, mere groups of players so to speak, but this side was an established organisation and great was the fall thereof. . , It is fair to state that, although they possessed all the trained ■! instincts of the fighting men, which they illustrated m fitting manner, taking their physical condition as against their opponents they were lighter rail round, especially m the vanguard,, arid a good deal shorter m stature. This accounted m large measure for the New Zealand dominance on the line-outs, arid which they used to its fullest advantage for feeding their » backs, Richardson and M. Brownlie being especially prominent. . The Services played the usual eight t pack, and during the first spell at least they secured most possession from the scrums. Then G. Lprlngston- Clarke, just on half-time, had to retire suffering from both head and shoulder. He: Jiad played a rattling: fine hard-work-ing game and his loss of weight made a serious difference to his side, inasmuch as the New . Zealand mighty seven could practically push their opponents off the .ball almost at .will, -and consequently the ball flew to ■>" the ceritres and outsides from Mill's "■ nimble fingers. - ' ; j ..-':" With ball possession ad lib and the opposing backs standing much too far off their men arid not spotting or marking properly, 'the AH Blacks' back division ; were allowed plenty of grass and space on which to gain impetus and to manouvre. . ..-;■•..-■ '

Allied to this fauit was that of poor tackling by the inside backs. Their efforts were much too slow and deficient m vim and purpose. Often a Black was allowed away again. These two weaknesses the visitors played on up to the hilt, and the result was a veritable feast of opportunities, of which they made the most. of. :

Most of the New Zealand attack was

made through the centre, real good piercing moyements, which invariably made the extra man, especially when the Services' backs were caught out of position several times. > Even when the Services got possession and commenced parsing" their transfers were much too slow and across field to be effective against the All Blacks' most determined tackling, which was one of

I the strongest features of their play. In f this match they had been made to realise that the Services were a powerful attacking: body: Against a weaker X team the Services would probably have

[ performed wonder^, as their wings, Millar and Stephenson, the Irish greyi> hound runner, were splendid finishers.

The All Blacks have come to have

quite a liking for this Twickenham now.- Within five minutes from the start New Zealand; had, scored and the Services forced twice. The i Services seemed, nonplussed by the rapidity of the Blacks' attack and forced six-times m rapid succession.

Taken altogether, the ; game was a * really -excellent one and the exposition by the visitors is. about their best of the tour, it at times reaching a high stage of brilliancy and accuracy. The play all through by the Blacks was more consistent and varied m charac- " ter tsan m the first London match, when they seemed to reserve .all- their fireworks for the second spel). Even m this game they seemed, as usual, to apply extra pressure after the interval. Services' stamina seemed to wane against their heavier and faster opponents, who played with outstanding confidence and used almost every chance .afforfliid them. Their keenness was 'remarkable and does clean away with the possible suggestion of staleness. Except for some slight mishandlings, v the cohesion was splendid, the backing up, running m support and into position was up to the very best New Zea-' Mand standard. The play ! was beautiful t« watch. . .

Territorially the -play was mostly m "the Services' quarters, otherwise from the multiplication, of penalties awarded against the All Blacks some goals t would have been kicked.. Thus from three attempts only one was successful. ■• \ '■: • ■■■- '■.■■'.- .; '■". :.■• : •■ v. The visitors won m most, convincing fashion, completely outplaying and outpointing the .Services at almost every feature and phase of the game. It was 4 almost a demonstration of how Rugby should be played, and certainly a les- , son m team .work. ' '. ' {

* Several times play became sensational m character. • Once Svenspri, i confronted near, the line, attempted to *jump over two opponents, cleverly inpassing to the alert Lucas waiting unmarked inside. . Then Nepia simply bolted almost right through with a fine burst. Richardson's try, too, was well engineered and .brilliantly finished. l The most important factor m this game was the referee,: Mr. Potter Irwin, who gave most technical interpretations of the rules, apparently being guided, one would suppose, more by the letter than the spirit. Penalising an International side like New Zealand sixteen •or seventeen . times during the course of one game is not a commendable thing to do, especially when the rulings were almost impossible to analyse or follow. ' The blank look of surprise on several of the All Blacks' faces at times when the whistling solo was continued was most amusing. I think Mr. Potter Irwin was unduly severe on the New. Zealanders, admitting at the. same time that there are things they do unconsciously that are not m Eull teaching with English ideas. Thus on a matter of barging m on the lineouts and a few other small things they differ. These could all be explained md obviated by a few minutes' instruction. . Still, the All Blacks' play m this game hardly merited such severe correction. Many frees awarded at most only merited scrummages. Porter was penalised twice, once seemingly jeing offside without intent. Twice New Zealanders claimed- marks— not jiven. Only four times were the Services penalised and yet I. understand n one of their forerunning games at sither Bristol or Gloucester, they were >enalised twenty-two times. The frequent whistling during the natch lent one the idea that the reeree was officiating, somewhat m a teaching capacity .and the visitors lovices over here to learn the rules, n the interests of the game it was regrettable and, certainly would not' suit my Colonial audience which want to ret on with the game. The game was much too fast for the referee and several times be could not: get m line with the passing. When the New

Zealanders were awarded a "free" it was greeted with ironical cheering from the pavilions.

Once Cooke cut through and literally stole the ball from Coutts's arms, and this was brought back and scrummed. Little occurrences like these cause wonderment.

Nepia was neither bustled nor had much to do, but he did that little well. Svenson was brilliant, pairing well with Lucas, who was m his best f orm of the tour. Steel gathered and defended weli. Cooke played m his lisual characteristic fashion, gliding swiftly past his opposing vis-a-vis, besides kicking well. A game such as this suits him exactly. McGregor and Mill worked both sides of the scrums, well. Most of the New Zealand passes [were swift and low. ..

The forwards, led • by Richardson's commandingly tall figure and excellent example, simply had things very much their own way. M. Brownlie and Masters were conspicuous always. White ''showed his good following up and 'both Donald and Irvine were seen to advantage m the loose. West, too, played better than usual. ■ Stevenson was the most effective of the opposing' backs. Thompson was riot too good at full-back and had a rare busy time forcing down and trying to stop two or three All Blacks coming up at speed. All the New Zealand attack was executed almost at top pace, and m this respect it was distinctly better than before.

The day was bitterly cold, a biting •north-east wind debarring thousands braving the elements and coming out to see the match. The presence of the King was a great' event, and, as usual, he came down and' shook hands with both teams. »

Following this match, and perhaps consequent on the referee's chastisement, several criticisms evidently influenced by prejudice appeared m some papers on Sunday and Monday. They seem to increase m violence With the All Blacks' repeated success, which bears out this assertion.

I know the Blacks are not naturally viceful, and these severe criticisms are overdone very much and.are likely to create misrepresentation.

Some innuendoes about the team's popularity have been thrown out that are wrong too. One was silly enough to state that doubtless one of the. reasons why only 20,000 persons went out for this match was attributable to the visitors' bad tactics m the first. London match. All this adverse stuff is apt to convey the impression that the English people cannot take a licking. This is a mistake as I think they take it with surpassing grace. The crowds usually sit right till the end of the game and after the match the teams fraternise together with' the greatest bonhomie, often; more than perhaps suits : the manager. It must be always borne m mind that the overseas Colonial always plays m sport generally with more heartfelt keenness than the average Britisher.

The game is the thing to him— it is All. This very keenness exemplified by these Rugby tourists' is misinterpreted as being a species' of win-at-all-costs, fair or otherwise.,- This intentness seems to be misconstrued and hence the trouble. It is part 'of the New Zealanders' stock m trade to force their mode of play on the other ' side. This forcing of play seems a new feature over here.