“WANTED—A SOLE SELECTOR”

Timaru Herald, Volume CXLIII, Issue 20802, 10 August 1937, Page 5

“WANTED—A SOLE SELECTOR”

THREE HEADS NOT AS GOOD LITTLE PROGRESS MADE “Wanted—A sole selector.” That is a notice which the South Canterbury Rugby Union might profitably exhibit next season. The frequent changes which are being made at this late stage of the season would indicate that the three selectors. Messrs S. H. Sullivan, M. J. Angland and L. W. Parrant, are experiencing difficulty in agreeing on the relative merits of the players; and it is “WingForward's” opinion that the task could be accomplished more effectively by one man. Before proceeding any further. "Wing-Forward” would make this point clear. The suggestion for a change is meant in no way to reflect on the individual efficiency or integrity of any one of the three at present entrusted with the selection of the South Canterbury team. In fact, it is probable that any one of them could successfully undertake the work alone, but the small amount of progress made so far must be taken as an indication that the diversity of their individual views is conflicting with the sorting out of the final 15 players. It is felt that after watching the players in club football all the season and again in three trial matches, the selectors should have been able to find a satisfactory team before the representative programme was commenced and to have persisted with it. Naturally there would have been weaknesses, but there has been ample time to detect those which will not respond to training. But here we are, with the Springbok match not three weeks off and the team still at sixes and sevens. “Messing About” A glaring example of what might vulgarly be termed “messing about” is the manner in which G. Adkins, the former All Black forward, has been chivvied from the front to the back of the scrum. Adkins was played in the front at Waimate, in the back at Fairlie, in the front in the TownCountry game, in the front against North Otago and in the back against Ashburton. To-morrow against Southland, he is to be promoted again to the front of the scrum. Has it taken five matches to convince the selectors that the front row is Adkins’ correct position? At Fairlie it was proved that Adkins' weight was needed in the front of the scrum. Why was he played at the back on Saturday? Surely the selectors did not seriously consider playing him there against the Springboks? If it was to afford some protection to the Inside backs, someone’s plans went astray for Adkins was of little use to Saxton and Morrison on Saturday. If the selectors were satisfied with Adkins as a front row man. he should have been kept there and someone else put in the back. The selectors cannot hope to find a good i man for the back as long as that position is being filled by a man who must ultimately relinquish it. After playing all the season on the side of the scrum, J. Strang is to fill the back row to-morrow. Without discussing the wisdom or otherwise of the change, “Wing-Forward” would like to know why it was not made long ago. Why leave the experiment until this late stage? Last Minute Change Another example of “messing about” is the selectors’ attitude regarding M. Cameron. Cameron was played In the front row in several of the early matches and was not very convincing. Still, he was persisted with until now, Gilmore, another Temuka forward, is to take his place. When it was found that Cameron did not come up to standard, why was Gilmore not sent for? Surely, if he is good enough to earn representative honours now, the selectors must have noticed him when the teams for the trial games were being picked. These remarks should not be construed as disparaging to Gilmore, who has shown himself to be a good, hard-working forward, but are made to illustrate the obvious divergence of opinion among the selectors. What is, perhaps, more serious still is the fact that the selectors are now in the awkward situation of having to find a full-back, Rollinson’s display on Saturday not having inspired sufficient confidence in him. The initial mistake was the nomination of M. O’Connor for South Island honours, a step which must have been taken on last season’s form. Although, at that time, Rollinson was playing better football, the selectors, in view of their nomination, had to pick O’Connor for the match at Waimate. It is a thing >f the past that O’Connor did not turn up and, apparently, incurred the displeasure of the selection committee, but for the next game Rollinson, the logical man, was not given a trial. Instead. Jamieson was played at full-back—and dropped just as quickly. It was as a last resort that Rollinson was asked to fill the position and now he has failed to measure up to standard. A Doubtful Choice “Wing-Forward’s” point is that if Rollinson had been played at the beginning of the trials his weaknesses would have been detected and more time would have been available in, which to find a substitute. Now, at the eleventh hour, he has to be jettisoned and the best the selectors can find is A. Gaffaney. While Gaffaney I is a good attacking back, his tackling is not reliable and he does not impress I as a satisfactory last line of defence Owing to injuries among the backs. R. Lundy is to be played at centre t.»morrow, but “Wing-Forward” suggests that it might be found safer to trans- ; pose him with Gaffaney. Gaffaney would be more effective in the three- ; quarter line and Lundy is ?. safe .land- i ler and can be relied on to take his I man. It may yet be found that Lundy is the best man to fill the full-baca j position, especially against the Spring- ! boks, when no replacements will oe 1 allowed. If Saxton’s knee was to give ■ out, Morrison could go to the base ’ of the scrum and Lundy could be brought up to centre. In view of Saxton’s retirement last Saturday, it might be well for provision to be made for such an eventuality.