GOOD RUGBY.

Sun (Christchurch), Volume I, Issue 138, 17 July 1914, Page 2

GOOD RUGBY.

SECONDARY SCHOOLS' MATCH. A telling reply to the pessimists who contend that Rugby football in New Zealand is deteriorating is almost invariably furnished by secondary schools matches. Years ago the secondary schools of this Dominion set a very high standard of play, and although, like other teams, sdriie of theni have had their lean seasons, any departure from that standard has only been brief. Wellington College and St. Patrick's, Te Aute and Wanganui, Auckland Grammar School and King's College, Christ'-'I church Boys' High Sehooland Christ's College, and the others —what a great vista of splendid Rugby through the years the very names open up! And' what great hopes of the future they bring! Take them by and large, these schools are still playing Rugby as fine as that played years, ago., While these great nurseries of the game remain true to their traditions, Rugby football in New Zealand will not deteriorate. TRADITIONS UPHELD.

Some people have said that the game between the Boys' High 'School and Christ's College teams on Wednesday was not quite as good as their games,in past ■■ years;.,. - Those kind informants were only, partly right. Their conclusions were only superficial, in that they judged the game on the fact that it was riot quite as spectacular as previous games between the School and the College., They did not, apparently, perceive' that' the broad characteristics which mark secondary schools! 1 football in New Zealand were all present in that match. The team play was thoroughly iri accordance with the traditions of the schools. The play of a few individuals was not quite up to the standard; that was why the team play did not produce quite the effect that was intended by the teams and by the onlookers: When two»fifteeris show that they have gauged correctly the standard of Rugby expected of them, arid were playing up to it, but are' just prevented by what may be termed an accidental personal equation, from showing spectacularly that- they have! reached it, no one has any safe ground upon which to argue 'that the standard has declined. The basic, principles of modern New Zealand Rugby showed out in that match.

; I desired for one thing, to see whether there was any truth in the whispers that have been borne to me that secondary school football in the~ South Island is and, for another, to see how the game compared with secondary schools' matches of' the present time in the North Island. What I haye written already sufficiently indicates my conclusion on the first point. ..j/As for the second point, the game, in its broad Jutlines, was quite as good as the North sland colleges/play. - . > j : *; ENGLAND V. NEW 'ZEALAND] I An iiripjression received in * the game wassthafe of a remarkable likeness fo a match between a New Zealand team and an English fifteen, in styles of play. If Christ's College had had eight forwards in the pack, and seven backs, with a line of four three-quarters, their play would have been thoroughly English in character, save for bnS or two matters of detail. Their! forwards struck me as being of the dribbling type, put off their own game by the "dash" of the School forwards. The backs, too, ,/played orthodox English football, so f !far as their. Arrangement permitted. : Ori .the other!: hand, the School forwards tearing garne associated witfeNew laud forwards, arid- their backs were quicker at*making-and Seizing openings than were.:tb.eCollegiaris. Their greater dash arid riippiness were the principal factors in the School's victory. The whole team played with fine determination. The forwards grafted splendidly, bustled their opponents, and "fed" their own. backs with? almost unfailing regularity. As a connecting link between the forwards and: the backs, half-back E. J. '.■ Taylor could scarcely have been improved upon asj : school players go. He snapped up the ball - and passed it out neatly, smartly, and with excellent judgment, thus giving the backs opportunity after opportunity. Indeed, his passing was a treat.: Occasionally he should have tried to get round the scrum himself, to vary his play. But unselfishness is an excellent trait, and half-backs should not develop too quickly. Behind him was another fine player, C. E. Guiney, who, like Taylor, gives promise of developing into a first-class back. if he is not spoiled by early success. FAULTS IN PASSING. ! But then came the weaknesses of the School attack. A. D. Teneh' -did a lot of good work, but his passes were not always sound. At the same time, Tench was blamed too much by' the Onlookers because his passes were not always well taken by G. M. Sheppard, the centre-three-quarter. As an attacking player, Sheppard was the great weakness in the School backs. His faults, however, seemed to be due to over-eagerness, and as they are removable he: need not be discouraged. Too often he tried to pass the ball on from practically a standing position, without beating the man who was "marking" him. He should study the art of beating his man before passing, and of passing when in full stride. Another fault he showed was of getting

too far ahead when the five-eighths had run some distance before passing. ' It is much easier to take a pass when gathering up speed than when slowing down a little to take the pass or to avoid running past the man with the ball. Further, if the man waiting for the pass is running level with the man with the ball, he practically commits himself to a certain course of action which his vis-a-vis can anticipate. If, however, he keeps slightly behind his comrade, and the latter partly turns as he passes, it is easier to take the pass and to vary the course of. action —the runner is in a better posir : tiou to cut in; or to swerve,,or side-step, past his particular opponent. There is also much less risk of the whole movement being spoilt by the pass being taken offside. A FINE THREE-QUARTER. J. H. Parker, the School's right wing-three-quarter, played, splendidly. He is a fast, strong runner, with a fine swerve and . neat, quick footwork, he plays ''heady'' Bugby, and he takes the ball remarkably well. He takes his pass when he is gathering up speed, and in a flash he is off in a determined run for the line. To start the dash with which he scored his second try he had to take the ball above his head, and he got it as surely as if it had come at him waist-, high. Parker should have a bright future | as a Rugby player, for to the qualities mentioned he adds fine kicking powers and strong defence. On the other wing of the three-quarter line R. G. Macdonald, a 9st lad, played sound football.: With two such wings, and the backs getting the ball so of ten, the School score would have been much larger if the centre' backs had been surer. At full-back,-D. ; C. Nixon played a thoroughly sound, game with not a mistake. He was cooL fielded surely—often ■ brilliantly—and; kicked' with power and ; fine judgment. In the* art of long, low kicking—'' torpedo" kicking it is sometiiries called—this boy jeould teach many senior full-backs a use--' ful lesson. : The School forwards were a fine' even lot, without any " passengers," arid it appears rather invidious to single out any for special, mention. But there.were i two who showed particular "headiness" in their play, and yet grafted thoroughly honestly—for, unfortunately,, these two qualities are separated in too many players. T. Milliken, who scored two of the School's tries, was one of these "heady"t grafters. The other was Gray'v-ai:;l«ast, that is the name given to me. ,0n the College side, D. B. Loudon was the of .the forward; division. -, Among, the packmen there seemed.to,be: two or three opportunists. ,G., H. Lamer, at, centre three-quarter, and D, IVL Stittj at half, were the best of the backs, whofwere, Jiowever, fairly even, so far as their limited opportunities-<in attack are cerned. In accordance with tradition, it was a finely. " clean" : game, and. alto? gether the best that has been seen in Christchurch so far this season. I A. L. C.

RUGBY FIXTURES. ' 3raW TEAM. : ' July' 18—v. Australia, at Sydney. July: 22—v. Northern Districts, at Armidalc. July,.2s—r-v. Queensland, at Brisbane. ~ July Queensland, •■ at Brisbane. Augiist I—y. Australia, at Brisbane. August 's— Olynipic Fund match, at Sydney. August B—v. New South Wales, at Sydney. August 15—v. Australia, at Sydney. SYDNEY UNIVERSITY TEAM. August 22—v. Canterbury College, at Christ*church. August 26—v.; Otago University, at Dunedin. August New. Zealand,, .University, .at Dunedin., September 2—ry. Otago University, at Dunedin. . September s—v. Victoria College, at Wei'j •" lington.' ■'■..•■•• ■■■■ ';■:..:■ September 9—v. New Zealand University* at Wellington. I INTERPROVINCIAL MATCHES. August B—Canterburyß—Canterbury v. South Canterbury, at Christchurch. Wairarapa v; Manawatu, at Palmerston Noirth. August 13—Wairarapa v. Taranaki, in Tara- , naki. August 15—Canterbury v. Auckland, at Auckland. Wairarapa v. Wanganui, at Wanganui. August 19—Southland v. South Canterbury, at Timaru. August 20—Canterbury v. Taranaki, in Taranaki. August 22—Canterbury v, Wanganui, at Wanganui. Southland v. Wellington, at , Wellington. Taranaki v. Auckland, at: " Auckland. August 27; —Canterbury v. Wairarapa, in Wairarapa. Southland v. Taranaki, in Taranaki. August 29—Canterbury v. Wellington, at Wellington. Southland v. Auckland, at J i Auckland. September 2—Southland ▼. Wanganui, at i Wanganui. ' September s—Canterbury v. Southland, at, Christchurch. Wellington v. Auckland, j at Auckland. September 10—Wellington v. Taranaki, in Taranaki. Otago v. South; Canterbury, at Timaru. September 12—Otago v. Canterbury, at Christchurch. Wellington v. Wanganui, at Wanganui. September 17—Otago v. Wairarapa, in Wairarapa7. September 19—Otago v. Wellington, at Wellington.