RUGBY FOOTBALL

Otago Daily Times, Issue 22064, 21 September 1933, Page 4

RUGBY FOOTBALL

By Full-back. V FIXTURES July 29.—Otago Sub-union v. Southland Sub-unions, at Dunedin, lost 12 points to 9 points. August s.—v. Southland, at Invercargill, lost 23 points to 8 points. August 5. —-v. Marlborough, at Dunedin, won 21 points to 6 points. August 12. —v. Southland, _ at Dunedin, lost' 13 points to 12 points. August 26. —v. Canterbury, at Christchurch, lost 8 points to 5 points. August 30.—v. Wairarapa, at Wairarapa, lost 19 points to 17 points. September 2. —v. Hawke’s Bay, at Napier, lost 19 points to 8 points. September 2,—v. South Canterbury, at Dunedin, won by 17 points to 12 points. September 6.—v. Wanganui, at Wanganui, won 13 points to 8 points. September 9. —v. Wellington, at Wellington, loet 20 points to 17 points. September 13.—v. Taranaki, at Dunedin, lost 15 points to 14 points. September 16. —v. North, Otago, at Dunedin, won 44 points to 3 points. September 23. —South v. North Island. ANSWERS TO CORRESPONDENTS Robert C., Dunedin. —The South v. North Island match in 1925 was played at Invercargill. The teams were: South Island—J. Harris, A. C. C. Robilliard, W. Reid, J. Steel. R. Bell, U. P. M'Gregor, W, C. Dailey, R. Stewart, O. Knox, A. G. M'Cormack, G. Y. Gerard, R. Masters, J. Richardson (captain), P. Burt, J. T. Burrows; North Island —G. Nepia, A. R. Collier, J. Blake, A. Falwasser, A. E. Cooke, W. Langlands, J. Mill, C. G. Porter (captain), J. Walter, H. Sly, M. Brownlie, W. R. Irvine, A. Kirkpatrick, P. M’Laren, C. Brownlie. North Island won by 16 points to 5 points. .... R. C., Green Island—“ Full-Back ” witnessed the shield match between Otago and Canterbury ._ (2) Jackman played for Otago against Southland (twice). South Canterbury Canterbury, Wellington, and Hawke a Bay, all in the year 1926. He played wingforward at, times for the Pirates team, but I do not think he played in this position for Otago. ■ NOTES The season of representative matches in Otago was concluded on The Otago team was not very successful in its matches, .as it was only able to beat Wanganui and North. Otago, and the B team gained victories over Marlborough and South Canterbury. The Otago touring side, however, put up great games against Canterbury and Wellington—the two leading representative teams in New Zealand —and with a bit of luck would have won both these matches. It has been again shown’ that Otago can field a set of forwards equal to anything in the Dominion, but when it comes to the backs it has to be admitted that we have nothing of outstanding ability, in the inside men at any rate. Moreover, we do not appear to have any inside > backs of promise coming on. - Otago is not singular in this respect, as the standard in the South Island does not . impress one to any great extent. Southland is just as weak as Otago.in this department of play, and Canterbury, had it not been for Oliver (centre three-quarter) would most likely not be holding the Ranfurly Shield to-day. On the other hand Wellington have inside backs to spare, and they are really in a class’ by themselves. When, however, one looks over the teams to play for the South-North match one cannot help coming to the conclusion that , the team to . go Home in 1936 will have a large proportion of players who will be getting on to what is termed the football veteran stage. In other words, there is a lack, of promising backs coming on, and though we may have good young forwards available the selectors have taken the line of least and have picked forwards who have been in the forefront for the past year or two.

G. Nepia played full-back for the North Island team in 1924 and 1925. He will occupy the position again this year.' Although the first match between England and Scotland under Rugby rules was played in 1864, the institution of the match as a regular fixture did not materialise until 1871, and was due to a rather interesting cause. The Rugby game was introduced into Scotland about 1855 and by 1870 it had a strong following. During the latter year a match was played under the Association code, and the Scots were beaten. At this time the clubs in Scotland playing Association were very few, - and the Scots were filled with indignation to read in the papers, “ Defeat of Scotland at Football,” when the defeat was under rules so little played by them. This indignation found expression in a challenge that 20 native Scots would play a 1 like number of English under Rugby School rules. Since the Rugby Union had not been formed some doubt existed as to who should accept it, and eventually Blackheath, as the oldest club, accepted it. The match took place in 1871. There was to be no hacking over or tripping up, and the ball could only be picked up for a run when bounding and not if rolling. Scotland won by a converted try to a try. It is interesting to record that each player paid his own rail fare,’ hotel, and all other expenses connected with the outing. The paying of amateur’s expenses came at a later date. CANTERBURY v. TARANAKI Canterbury’s escape from defeat was remarkable and extremely fortunate in the Ranfurly Shield match between Canterbury and Taranaki (states the Christchurch Press). The saving potted goal itself was a high light in quick thinking and accuracy under severe strain, but Taranaki had so dominated the play in the forwards and defended so grimly in the backs that victory would have been a fitting reward. Rarely has such high quality team work in tight rucking and loose dribbling rushes been seen than was produced by the Taranaki forwards after half time. Canterbury held a .definite superiority on attack in the backs, but it had little opportunity to reveal it until the last 10 minutes of the match, so successful had been the harrying of the visiting forwards. If Ross, the Taranaki wing-threequarter, who took the kicks at goal, had shown any of the form of which he is generally capable, the Ranfurly Shield would be on its way to Taranaki. . He' missed two shots at goal from ■within easy striking distance —one an attempt to convert a try. All the luck to be had was with the shield defenders, and in addition Taranaki appeared to make, one tactical error. Holding a onepoint lead with half the second spell passed, the yisitors chose to kick for the touchline on two occasions when awarded penalties well inside Canterbury’s territory. The positions should have given a good goal-kicker a chance to score. This is only the fourth occasion since the shield was first presented,, in 1902, that a holder has staved off a challenge with a draw. In 1905 Wellington drew with Wairarapa 3 all, in 1910 Auckland drew with Wellington 3 all, and in 1912 Auckland drew with Otago 5 all. OLD TIMERS MEETING AT ATHLETIC PARK. On one Saturday in each season ■ the old timers (former representative players and officials) have a day out at Athletic Park. At the invitation of the Wellington'Rugby Union they attend a representative match, assembling en bloc in the stand, and* after the game their reunion is continued at a social gathering. This year’s special event for the veterans took place on Saturday week on the occasion of the Otago-Wellington match, and the game turned out to be one of the right type to call to mind old times. Prior to the match the players lined up in front of the stand and gave .three cheers for the old timers, who responded lustily: At the function after the match Mr A, F. Wiren, on behalf of the Wellington Rugby Union, welcomed the old players and ex-officials. He said that many fine games had been played between Otago and Wellington, and the one that day compared with the best of them. The Otago match was always regarded as one of the best on Wellington’s home programme. Mr Wiren also mentioned that he had seen the game with Otago on Newtown Park 50 years ago, when Harry Roberts had scored tbo only try.

Among other speakers 'was Mr W. Beck, who represented Wellington against Otago at Dunedin in 1885, and he recalled that Ned Davy was one who had played against Otago at Wellington in 1883. “We old players,” said Mr Beck, “ fully appreciate the Rugby Union’s kindly thought in getting us together once again to renew our youth.” Pleasure at seeing all the “old birds,” and the young ones, too, was also expressed by_ Mr Sam. Cockroft, described by Mr Wiren as being in his day as honest a forward as there was playing the game. Mr W. T. (“Tab”) Wynyard. called to mind many of the old players; and spoke of Davy Gage, Sid. Nicholls, and Tom Ellison as three of the finest that had ever stepped on to a football field. Davy Gage he regarded as the finest back he had ever seen—he could play from half-back to full-back, and they could not knock him out. Mr Wynyard added that Otago had always been found to be a hard team to beat, and well he remembered such players as Stephenson, Thomas, Duncan, Armit, and others. He payed a tribute to the game played .by Otago that day, and wondered how it was that they' had not beaten Canterbury. Among others to speak were Messrs A. M’Donald, S. Abrim, M. Hyland, J. O’Shea, J. Mitchell, and D. M’Kenzie. Mr O’Shea mentioned that he was glad to see the “ pot ” coming once more into its own. A happy gathering concluded with the singing of “Auld Lang Syne.” TWELVE WINS WALLABIES~IN AFRICA. The Wallabies have come through their South African tour exceedingly well for a side which was not expected to achieve a great deal of success, and its prospects further reduced by injuries to players. They played 23 matches, winning 12, drawing 1, and losing 10. New Zealand’s record in 1928 was; Matches played 22, won 16, drawn 1, lost 5. Five tests were played by the Australian team, as against New Zealand’s four, with the following results: — Australia, 1933. N.Z., 1928. First .. lost 3—17 lost. o—l 70 —17 Second - . won 21—6 won 7—6 Third .. lost 3—12 lost 6—ll Fourth .. lost o—ll0 —11 won 13—5 Fifth .. won 15—4

In all matches (23) in South Africa this year the Australians scored 299 points and had 195 scored against them. New Zealand’s 22 matches in 1928 yielded 339 points as against 144 by opposing teams. The Australian team’s record of results is as follows: v.. Natal, won, 14—3. v. Western Transvaal, won, 20 —3 V v. Reef and Country, lost, 6—13. y. Combined Pretoria, lost, B—l 3. v. Griqualand West, lost, 9—14. v. Rhodesia, won, 24—5. y. Rhodesia, won, S'l—nil. v. Northern Districts, lost, B—lo. , v. Western' Province, lost, 9—IS. v. South Africa (first test), lost, 3—17. v. North-Eastern Districts, won, 31—11. y. Orange Free State, won, 9—B. y. South Africa, (second test), won, 21 — 6. v. Border, won, 24-r5. y. Border, won, 13 —6.

■v. Transvaal, lost, 9 —ll. v. South Africa (third test), lost, 3—12. v. South-Western Districts, won, 21 —14. v. Eastern Province, won, 18 —3. v. South Africa (fourth test), lost, nil—ll. y. South Africa (fifth test), won, 15 —4. v. Combined Universities, drawn, 3. y. Western Province, lost, nil—4.