FORWARDS PRAISED

Timaru Herald, Volume CXLII, Issue 20505, 25 August 1936, Page 8

FORWARDS PRAISED

NORTHERN CRITIC’S VIEWS A Christchurch critic, commenting on the display of the South Canterbury team on Saturday, states. —“South Canterbury’s forwards have only to reproduce their second-spell form next Wednesday to have a first-class chance of winning the shield from Otago. Canterbury has met some great forwards this year, but none has been better than the green and blacks on Saturday The backs have not a great deal of thrust in passing movements but they are splendid opportunists, and led by the South Island representative, G. Gaffaney, they made skilful use of kick-and-follow tactics. Their defence was splendid, too, and many a Canterbury rush ended against the solid wall of South Canterbury’s tackling. “Adkins was an inspiring leader of the South Canterbury pack, and he was nearly always at the head of those slashing second-spell rushes. F. S. Thompson, who came on in place of Duncan early in the game, was excelled by few men on the field. He gave a brilliant display in the loose, and his height made him a valuable man in the line-outs. Strang, whose merits have been recognised by the South Island selectors, was another who impressed by his all-round ability. Graham, in comparison with the brilliant Rankin, was always looking for work, and South Canterbury had an efficient and grafting front-row trio in McShane, Gunn and Higginbottom. “G. Gaffaney was the general of the South Canterbury backs. It was he who, finding that chain passing gained little ground, began to use the short punt with devastating effect. His kicks were always well directed—just over the heads of the Canterbury defenders—and Cartwright, A. Gaffaney, and the wings, Ryan and K. McPhail, swooped down on the ball at great speed, generally linking up again with their fastrallying forwards. King, behind the South Canterbury scrum, had a feast of the ball and made good use of it. His passing was well-directed, and he made some good breaks on both the open and blind sides of the scrum. Heasley, at full-back, was very safe although his kicking lacked direction.” Looking for Trouble: If King is allowed to persist in some of his tricks when placing the ball in the scrum, South Canterbury will incur a few penalties in Dunedin to-morrow. On one occasion on Saturday he threw the ball at the outside feet of the men in the front row. The leather bounced back to him, and he sent his backs away. There was no need for such an action, for when put in fairly, South Canterbury secured a fair share of the ball. In the opinion of the writer, the ball should be placed in on whatever side the referee is, and there would then be no cause for complaint. Centre Problem: The weakness in the South Canterbury backs, the centre position, still persists. Until Saturday, A. Gaffaney had been showing great form, but he did not reproduce club displays against Canterbury. The slowness of the five-eighths off the mark did not help him, but when he did receive the ball, he was inclined to hang on too long. Experimenting at this stage is not justified, but weather conditions in Dunedin may decide the problem. If the going is heavy, McPhail may be given preference, and in the course of the game he can easily be shifted to the wing, Morrison being brought in to centre. Such a change wf'jld not be possible with Gaffaney, who lacks pace for the wing position.