TARANAKI TRIAL RUGBY

Taranaki Daily News, 10 May 1930, Page 5

TARANAKI TRIAL RUGBY

PLAYERS’ FORM REVIEWED WING-THREEQUARTER WEAKNESS. MANY CHANGES NOT LIKELY. For most of the game at Inglewood on Thursday and in the first spell particularly, the South forwards were superior in the scrums and in all light work, largely due, no doubt, to a superiority in avoirdupois. Taken all round they were noticeably faller and more stalwart than their opponents. Robinson, Williams and Baldwin did a power of battling, for possession. North forwards, on the other hand, excelled in the loose. The old brigade—Walter, Ward and Kivell —particularly Walter and Kivell, were frequently in the picture, though Walter did not exhibit the same dauh that he did a season or two ago. McNeill played a good game but requires further experience. Young and Smith were always on the ball, and taking everything into consideration Young was probably the best forward ou the ground on Thursday. At wing-forward Wills (South) played a splendid game, and in the early stages with his superior physique frequently beat Guy for- possession in the line-outs. Guy was the cleverer of the two, however, and was of more use to liis side in the long run. The most serious feature of the back play was the absence of wing-three-quarters of representative class. There was not one on the ground that day. Evans, Hamilton, Hunter and J. Crawford all showed a fine turn of speed at times, particularly Evans and Hamilton, but all lacked knowledge of the finer points of the game and were all found wanting at' one stage or another when a orim tackle was required. Medley °OId Boys) a more reliable defence hewould have been better than any .of those tried out. Probably K. Fookes pushed out on to the wing and Watson (Clifton) would be the strongest pair in Taranaki at the present- time, taking both attack and defence into account. R. Hohaia and Tui Robinson went brilliantly on attack and if their defence had been of the same standard they they would be hard to pass by as the Taranaki half and first five-eighths. Twice, however, they let Owen through badly, displaying a' weakness which would be disastrous against a team like the Englishmen. C. "Brown, half-back on the < North side, was distinctly disappointing, and could not secure the ball from the scrums neatly and quickly. He is not the Brown of a season or two a to; yet it is doubtful whether there is any other half-back in Taranaki who is entitled to replace him. . K. Fookes had a day off. Sometimes be is a tower of strength; on Thursday, while not a weakness, lie was not impressive and had to concede superiority to Johnston. Any other day he is equally liable to be brilliant. Even H. W. Brown did not play up to his best form, but he gave uo reason to suggest a change in the centre threequarter position. Grant, sound but not' brilliant, was not given a great deal of opportunity. Hunt was outstanding at full-back, i playing a fine game, though it is still doubtful whether Collins has not a better claim to custodianship. There, very little to choose between them. On ‘Thursday’s form the following Taranaki team suggests itself: —

Full-*back: Hunt (Collins). Three-quarters: Watson, H. W. Brown. K. Fookes. Five-eighths; Johnston, Owen. Half-back: C. Brown. Wing-forward: Guy. Forwards: Young, W, Robinson (hookers), Walter, Ward, Kivell, Baldwin, Wills.