To Meet The British

Sun (Auckland), Volume IV, Issue 1027, 18 July 1930, Page 7

To Meet The British

AUCKLAND AND N.Z. TEAMS

What SUN Readers Think

IT goes without saying that tremendous public interest is being taken iu the British team's matches in Auckland, and in the composition of the teams that will meet the visitors. Here are the views of two correspondents;—

“Clubman” writes: With the approach of the Auckland - British match and the final selection of the Auckland fifteen, most of us are weighing: our team's chances of defeating the visitors—a task which I doubt the New Zealand team will accomplish on Saturday week.

Mr. Nicholson's team will give general satisfaction, although the pack would be strengthened in all-round ability by replacing Palmer with Finlayson and introducing the most versatile forward in Auckland. Anderson. The latter, to my mind, is decidedly unlucky. His line-out work is good, and also his rucking, while his speed, handling and quick thinking in the open would give the forwards that sting in the loose which they now appear to lack.

Of course, the key to the back division is in the five-eighth line— Jamieson and Haslam. Why not Haslam and Jamieson? As the backs are now lined out, Jamieson and Corner, the two lightest men in the team (perhaps 10.0 and 9.7 respectively) will to bear the whole brunt of the gruelling which someone must take from the heavy British forwards. We can’t get away from them, or at least Corner and Jamieson can’t. Solomon Is negligible in heavy stopping work —being in any case too far forward to nip a forward rush before it starts.

Although probably too late to effect the change, I really think that the five-eighth position would be improved both defensively and as an attacking force by the above suggestion.

I have written this note not with any spirit of criticism, but with a genuine desire to see the Blue and Whites perform well against our formidable visitors and, if possible, win on their merits.

In any event, here’s hoping for a good day. a good ground and a great match. May the better team win. “Rugby” writes. —I read with interest your Rugby notes of last Wednesday and also this evening, giving your opinion on the New Zealand and Auckland_ teams. Being a Club player of 14 years standing, 1904 to 1921 (no senior football during the war) and the last five seasons representative, I naturally take a keen iuterest in the selection of representative teams. On retiring from the game I was on the management committee for three years and was also representative selector in the King Country. At the beginning of the season I was asked by friends to pick what I consider should be the team for the first test. I chose on last year’s form and my back line differed from yours only in that I had Dailey as half and Lucas on the wing in place of Hart. I certainly consider Lindsay should be centre, and I must endorse your reasons for placing him in that position.

Now for the Auckland team to meet the British for the trial match I would try out tiie following:—Front row. Finlayson and Hadley; lock, Kahu: supports, McWilliams and L. Knight: back row. Batty and Anderson: rover, Solcfman; half. Corner; five-eighths, Weir (first) and L. Hook; threequarters, Minns, Lucas and Jones, and as Butler is the only fullback chosen to train he must go in. Personally. I prefer Bush. He is a better line kick than Butler, who, as*Vou say, h-is a habit of waiting for the bounce. He also has tlie bad habit of kicking straight up in the air when pressed. Weir at first five-eighth is strong o:i defence and is a good connecting link. Hook, at second, is quick to see an opening and possesses penetrative ability such as required for that position. He would work well with Lucas, whichever way the attack went. I consider Jones's place is on the wing. He is something after the style of Kalwasser, with his weight and pace, and well fe_d by Lucas, he would l>e a success in that position.