FOOTBALL NOTES.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 17831, 27 April 1926, Page 6

FOOTBALL NOTES.

SENIOR B GRADE. SATURDAY’S GAMES REVIEWED. On Saturday the second round of the senior B grade was played in gruelling, hot weather. The standard of play was good on the whole, though most of the teams do not work together well yet, but combination will come later. The heat had an effect on those players who were short of condition, and “bellows to mend” was very noticeable in.the second spells. ’Varsity had a well-trained team, with the result that they won their match with comparative ease in the later stages of the game.

Old Boys had no difficulty in beating St Andrew’s, who have a rather weak side. In their two games to date Old Boys have not had much opposition.

The Lin wood-North Canterbury game was even, but both teams lack combination. North Canterbury should improve, however, as they have some good material to work on. At North Park, the game between Merivale and Christchurch was uninteresting, and a draw was the result. On the day’s play Christchurch were the better team, and should beat Merivale if they meet again. ’Varsity and Technical were evenly matched. At half-time Technical were playing well and looked as if they would win, but their condition gave out and towards the end of the game they had gone to pieces. The flolowing table shows the positions of the teams at the end of the second round:—

OLD BOYS (35) v. ST ANDREW’S OLD BOYS (0). At St Andrew’s, in a fast, clean game. Old Boys secured an easy victory over St Andrew's. In the second half, the Old Boys’ backs threw the ball about in good style, and ran St Andrew’s off their feet. The Old Boys’ pack worked well together, and nearly always hooked the ball. The St Andrew’s team is comprised mostly of young players, and should do all right if they stick together and train. On Saturday their tackling was weak, and they showed little combination. A noticeable feature of the game was the poor place-kicking of Old Boys. Out of the ten tries that were scored only one was converted, although several were scored under the posts. Of the Old Boys team Armstrong, second fiveeighths, was the pick of a good set of backs. He was well supported by A. Cox, the other five-eighth, and the pair should combine well. W. Moffat, on the wing, played a fast, heady game, and scored two good tries. Simes, at full-back, was good, but he should remember that it is bad football for a full-back to be caught in possession of the ball. The forwards were an improvement on the previous Saturday, their scrum work being better. Speight provided a valuable addition to the pack, while Forsythe is still a hard worker.

England, at five-eighths for St Andrew’s, was easily the best player in his team. He is a good all-round player. Wilson, at full-back, also gave a good display.

VARSITY (20) v. TECHNICAL (7). Technical gave rather a disappointing display on Saturday. They were leading by a point half-way through the second spell and then were beaten by a thirteen-point margin. The main reason for Technical’s collapse was lack of condition, their opponents leaving them standing at the finish of the game. Play was interesting throughout, both sides making the pace willing. A big fault of the Technical team was that the players all waited to intercept instead of going for the man with the ball. The Varsity backs soon took advantage of this, and time and again they went through practically unchallenged till they came to the last man. Varsity are a well-balanced team and they should go far in the competition. On Saturday they played a clean, open game, and scored their tries through good handling. The forwards are an evenly-matched lot, all eager to do their share of the work.

Prussing at full-back for Varsity played a very solid game, and was never bustled. His line-kicking was a feature of the game. Rutherford, at centre, is another good back, who is hard to stop once he gets going. Te Awarau played on top form, and showed some of his old speed. Simmers, the wing-forward. was easily the best forward for Varsity. Being fast, he is a dangerous man. and several times he broke through Technical’s defence. Weston and Nimmo in the pack were also sound. Of the Technical team. Bamford, who was promoted from juniors, showed that he well deserved a place in the senior B team. Although at times he was not too sure at taking the ball, his kicking and tackling were first-class. Marshall, at centra, another young player, should do well later in the season. He is a natural footballer, with a tricky run and sure defence. Bellamy, at half, gave a pleasing display, and on his present form he should have a good chance of gaining representative honours. In the forwards Chapman, Nesbitt and Todd shone out above the rest, the last-named doing some good work in the line-outs. Bell seems to be right off form this season. CHRISTCHURCH* (6) v. MERIVALE (6). Merivale were first to score, Richie marking in front of goal and converting. Christchurch attacked and some good work by the backs resulted in B. Taylor scoring. In the second spell Taylor scored again for Christchurch, and M'lsaacs for Merivale. Towards the end of the game play became a trifle too vigorous, and, there were indications of a desire by some to give more attention to the man than to the ball. On the run of the play Christchurch should have won. For Christchurch. Taylor was the best of the forwards. Young, at halfback, who came up from fourth grade, gave a good display. He had a big task in standing up to the Merivale forwards, but got through it very well. Boon and Bell also were prominent. Merivale showed little team work, but in the loose thev were good. The backs were unreliable, their tackling being ot a poor order. M’Gregor, on the. wing, played a good game, but did not receive much Support RANFURLY SHIELD RULES. Delegates to the. annual meeting of the New Zealand Rugby Union will be called upon to consider a motion to the

effect that all Ranfurlv Shield matches should be played on the home ground of the holders of the shield, notice of intention"to move in this direction having been given by the Wellington Rugby Union. -Referring to this matter, the Hawke’s Bay writer “Scrum” has the following to say:—“Mention of the Shield reminds me that the amendmerits to the Ranfurly Shield rules, providing for shield games to be played away from the holders’ ground, is considered by Wellington to have served its purpose. Wellington is to move at the annual meeting of the New Zealand Union, that the provinces return to the old order of things, making it compulsory for challengers to go to the holders’ ground to play for it. This matter was advanced by Hawke’s Bay last year, they moving' in the same direction, which motion caused an outburst from a Wellington weekly journal, and two members of the Hawke's Bay Union got a column and a half all to themselves without asking. However, a reversion to the old order seems desirable. Under present conditions it is possible for a team to go right through a hard season and then at the fag end lose the shield by having to take it away from home. Wellington once lost the shield while on tour, and probably the memory of defeat by Southland is still green in the minds of those sponsoring the present motion. The chief argument in favour of reverting to the old rule is that a defending team should at least be entitled to place the best team it can in the field, which is not always possible if a team has to tour.”

Points Oh. W. Ti. r>. F. A. Ftp. 'Varsity 2 46 IS 2 Old Boys 2 62 14 2 Ohristohureh .. 1 — 1 26 3 13j Technical 1 1 — 2 2 22 X Linwood 1 1 — 12 IS 1 Merlvale — 1 1 18 82 \ Is. Oa.nterbury .. ■ —■ 2 — 17 26 0 Rapaki . . — 1 — 2 20 0 St Andrew's O.B. — 1 — 0 ;>5 0