NOTES BY FULL BACK.

Otago Witness, Volume 14, Issue 2648, 14 December 1904, Page 57

NOTES BY FULL BACK.

The receipts of the British team's tour through Nel>v Zealand were as follow: Auckland, £715; Canterbury, £363; Otago, £536; Taranaki, £205; New Zealand match, £1222. The total receipts were £5636, and the expenditure £2595, leaving a sum of £3021' to be divided between the New Zealand and New South Wales Rugby Unions, of which the former's share, after deducting entertainment expenses incurred on behalf of the visitors, is about £1207. A sum of £669 represents the travelling expenses of the British team through the colony. Dr Fookes, the ex-International footballer, and Gilray, of Otago, have advised the New Zealand Union of their inability to accompany -the New Zealand team to England next year. . t Of the 53 men selected as the basis of me Nev Zealand team for Great Britain, 24 have informed the selectors of their ability to make the trip. Football in Zion City is something to Bonder on. It has been decreed that there bhall be no tackling or holding in the Zion City game, so that the resourceful young men may develop the spectacular side of the play' with running, passing, and kicking. Rough play is to be so sternly dealt with that the offender will wish he had never seen a football in his life. In the game of American football the object is to get in as many heavy weights as possible: nothing less than 2iiolb need apply. In sifting a mass of material from college correspondence such ponderous items as these (says an American writer) have turned up: "Cunniff, the 2221b baby, who is trying for the Harvard line ; Dutcher, the 210-pounder, is a candidate for Princeton; Shevlin, the 1901b human dynamo, will play full back for Yale this year; Carter, the giant tackier, has run hid weight tup to 2701b since he played two years ago, but he will train oft 201b." Fancy playing up against these weights. No wonder the American footballer wears armour and nose guards! The visit of the New Zealand Rugby team to Great Britain in the back-end of next year promises to be a great succe-s in every respect, says the London Daily Express of recent date. The team will disembark at Plymouth early in September, and will open their tour with a gam© against a Devonshire club on the iiist available Saturday in the middle of that month before journeying up to the metropolis. They end the tour at the beginning of January, 1906, with a match in Wales. Much regrec is felt that their tour will only extend over a little more than three months, and not five, as generally anticipated. They alio stipulate tor not more than two matches a week. Our visitors have spared and will spare do pains in gathering together a highly representative contingent, and it is anticipated that it will mean an outlay o: nearly £6000 to them. This amount, however, should be easily recouped. Apart from, the four "international" games between New Zealand and England, Scotland, Wales, and Ireland, respectively, all the first-class counties are billed to meet them. The financial arrangements of the tour hava been already settled. In the games between the New Zealanders and England and the visitors' match with Wales, both the home executives will give their opponents 75 per cent, of the profits, fixing a minimum amount of £500 in each instance. In the case of the New Zealand and Scotland and New Zealand and Ireland matches, the visitors will be particularly favoured by being awarded tho entire profits, and Ireland has gone one better by guaranteeing a "minimum profit" into the bargain. This is encouragement which cannot reflect too highly on the Scottish and Irish organising committees. All other games are to be arranged so that the New Zealanders receive 75 per cent, of the profits, with a stipulated minimum of £50 for Saturday games and £55 for these on any other days in theweek. That they will prove powerful antagonists is endorsed by opinions in private letters Home from the members of the British Rugby Fifteen who recently toured in that country.

As against the foregoing, the guarantee of £50 per match which the New Zealand Rugby Union is said to require on behalf of- the team it is sending Home is considered a rather stiff one in the North of England. The Manchester Uuardian remarks that there arc, unfortunately, some representative clubs whose finances and gate prospects do not justify the giving of a guai-antee of that amount, and the Lancashire Club is mentioned as an instance. "We fear," adds tho Guardian, "that when the New Zealanders do come they will be disappointed with the size of our gates in the north and with the amount of enthusiasm that is likely to be manifested m their visit. These will be in striking contrast to the happenings at Wellington when the British footballers were there not long ago."

What are we to believe? A Sydney paper recently stated that the members of the New Zealand team for England were to be very classy, and wear a monocle; now hear what it has to say: — Maorilaoid RugbyUnion is making no class distinctions in its selection of the footballers who are to invade England. Of the 53 men nominated six are navvies, four are carpenters ; and boilormakers and blacksmiths make up another six. There are ten farmers and farm hands, four frozen mutton specialists, three storemen, five miners, four bricklayers, and one doctor (Fookes, who formerly represented Engla.nd). One schoolmaster, and a clerk complete the total. Only four of the team have a real good Hinglish accent. No social successes are looked for, unless, perhaps Edward VII bestows o r e of his daughters on the champion forward : Maoriland only wants its Rugby flas* planted on the goal posts of every county in the dear old Unclo-land. There will be about 28 matches played. The tour will las,t from September 16 lo December, and will probably cost £6000, but the team is guaranteed ?ood percentages of the gate money, especially in the matches asrainst England, Wales, Scotland, and Ireland.

There are many people (*ays a London paper) who think that, as a nation, ive pay too much attention to sport. Edward 111 was evidently of thr 1 same opinion, for. writing to the Sheriffs of London in 1349, he says : "Our skill at shootine with arrows was almost* totally laid aside for the purpose of various useless and unlawful games," and the Sheriffs are thereupon commanded to suppress "stie-h idle practices. Richard 11, too. was equally down on tennis, football, and other such importune games," while James in of fiGofcfeud decreed that "foofctwlle and golfe

be utterly cryed down and not to be used." Football, indeed, was regarded with little favour by our ancestors, who would have been extremely shocked at the sight of a 'Prime Minister presenting a cup to the exponents of this "develishe pastime," as it, was called by Stubbcs. The English Rugby Union's decisions for the season 1903-04, to hand, deal with some interesting points.

Question : On r player being brought to the ground, can he paes the ball to a confrere, or can the latter take it from him, always providing the ball has not been held by an opponent? Answer: Yes, provided also that the ball is not on the ground. 16 is further lecided that a player can kick the ball with his knee or with his leg; that when the ball is thus kicked, it is not a rebound; that if an opponent makes a fair catch off such a kick, he is entitled to a free kick.

Question : An attacking side, in a scrum, with the ball between the first and second rows, and pushing the defending side over the goal line, touches the ball down — (a) by the half back, (b) by a forward in the scrum; is it a try? Answer: The try should be allowed.

The fourth and last decision has apparently been rendered necessary by soiuo doubt arising as to the meaning of "free kick" as mentioned in law 8. This law allows a free kick for off-side play. A free kick may be either a three point or a four point one ; which is it under this law?

The union first decides that a "free kick" is either "a penalty kick" (which count three points) or "a kick after a fair catch" (which counts fou. points).

In deciding which of these is meant in law 8, the union considers sub-section E of law 11, which provides that "free kicks by way of penalty" shall be award if any player "illegally tackles, charges, or obstructs as in law 8." This makes it plain that law 11 regards- the free kick in law 8 as a penalty kick. The union therefore further decides: "A goal kicked from a free kick awarded through an opponent being off side, under law o, shall count three points, as it is the result of a penalty kick awarded unclar law 11, section E."