THE ANVIL CHORUS.

Timaru Herald, Volume XCVIII, Issue 18084, 24 November 1924, Page 4

THE ANVIL CHORUS.

BLACKING THE ALL BLACKS

A JOKE OR A SMOKE-SCREEN

(Auckland “Star’') Now Zealanders are proud of the successes .or tiro Ail Blacks m Britain, j licro is no chJUJt tnai qune a laigc section of the community is inordinately proud of the team's record, apt to unuuly (ilonry.it, and to resent quite reasonaOle erit.eism ot the plajers amt their play. It is q<ute cor tain. However, that all New Zealanders will resent the criticism of a section of the London iialtponny press on the All .Blacks’ play in the match against tho London Counties team, i rouahly eie tins, tlioso same papers will, have been oveiwhelmed with protests lrom New Zealanders and others m London, and will have the satisfaction ot knowing that they had achieved their object of creating a circulation-stimulating sensation, Tne more knowing 01 Rugby enthusiasts here, many ot whom were able.'to make some personal observation of certain phases of London journalism during tne war-tune, decline to «et stirred up about it. for one thing, A is rather playing the colonials at one of their own characteristics of taking a rise” out of the other chap, getting him to “bite” at some outrageous statement and playing him on the hook till he realises that he is the victim ot satiric humour. Also, it is recognised here that the result of the game rather confounds the predictions of a section of the Loudon critics,, who had written the All Blacks up as a rather mediocre lot, and encouraged' l Londoners in tne hope that they would sec the New Zealenders crack up in this game. Aie the disgruntled critics making a strategical retreat under cover of a dense daik smoke-screen they have set up (

“TARRING” THE ALL BLACKS Eor me benelit ot tnose vvuo are inclined to take tlie remarks seriously, it might be recalled that the appeal to prejudice of a section of the Loudon press,', by way. of- cleverly - Written sensations, has not been uncommon of-late years in other spheres . fnan that of sport. The British. idistrust of . the motives of "foreigners” makes this a sme string to play,-and, ;,he_suecess of tne • r\ew Zealanders at Rugby- in* Britain is bound to have evolved a widespread dejsne to see> them chasten-' eci, as all growing boys of. the empire must at- tunes be . Cnubtohed. . \>ith tiieir clever opportunism and impressionism, some oi tho London cutics started lroiii the Devon maten, th "paiiit the All Blacks, black, 1 ’ tvliiie Oviiei critics used the bright Colours ot auulation. ‘llie New Zealanders were told that their.war cry vas ohensive, fliat tbe wmgrlorwaixl game ...their Captain played was “not tyanted in this country,'' tneir passing was crude and tiieir torwards were smggish. All this appe.ai;ed only ;n a section of the London papers, while the provincial papeis quoted the opinions ol leading-players, tnat the All Blacks were eiever and formidable, and'even as early as the Gloucester match, Dr E. T. Morgan, the famous Welsh international player, doubted the ability of any team but ah. international side to beat them. - Looking hack to the 1905 tour we find that exactly the same attitude was adopted by certain London papeis. Before "they got to London pohtan papers accused them of handling in the. scrum, putting the ball in umairly, obstruction and lough play, while .tlie- fact thiik Gallahev wore, shmpads >vas quoted is -Wills also stated to .be a big wing-forward to tackle a small halfback. Tlie cumulative result of this was that when tile teaiu iiist match in London (against Surrey) tlie referee the-Alb Blacks 33 times In fifteen minutes, and- declined to give his reasons other tijaii “dirty trickery.” Some of the papers made vague criticisms of obstruction and sharp practices about the Richmond match, adding the line British sentiment of regret that so excellent aHeam should descend to such 'aetics. J.heiouppn a, number of the prominent players and referees of the time, while stating their disagreement- with the W'iiig-tonvard idea, protested that the experience and observation of the All Blacks iii general was that they always played clean, sporting football,, devoid of any trickery beyond the accepted deceptions of the game.

ALL BLACKGUARDS V. ALL SAINTS.

Th'o dealers in dark colours certainly went the whole hog this time —not it suggestion oi provocation or on me other sicie. Accorctmg to them it was Ail Blackguards v. Ah Saints — tlie limit in seJi-satislied. Bfiarisaicism. in fact there is so muon suggestion of ine black art about it as to render it unnatuially suspicious. ilie halfpenny papers ciecmrei there was repeated tripping by the i\ew Zealanders, nstieuus and glaring obstruction, and that hvo of tne All Black loiwards should have been ordered oil, yet a critic of a responsible sporting papyr does not even mention one such incident. Jtither they have rotten reierc-es in Loutioii or ’otten critics. “Repeated tripping” is a phrase that at once stamps the criticism with suspicion, for in New Zealand tripping is a rare olience that is drasticuuy dealt witli by tne referees, and nobody who knows the personnel of mis team can associate the All Blacks with the heinous football ettenoe of repeatedly tripping-. One eritio saw tne All Blacks galloping through and through the tiOmioiiers, callously trampling them underfoot; another notes tripping, illegal tackling, fisticulfs, and sharp practices; a third observed flagrant ohside play, tripping and obstruction; ana jet another saw handling in the scrum and bare-faced obstruction. What a team of utter blackguards these New Zealanders must be, and what a rabbit the referee! So far as this section, of the critics is concerned, the guests of the English Rugby Union have certainly been well tarred-. Their reception in London certainly could not have> been warmer. But our experience so far of his judgment has led us to the belief that the London critic, even if rn accopted authority on music, art and the drama, has his limitations, and ho must not be hurt if New Zealanders inoline rather to smile than be distressed over his fulniinationsv In fact, people in New Zealand would not be at all surprised should the piiilllpic of ihe London critics supply just the fillip needed to make the All Blacks wm every match in Britain-.