Soccer.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 18186, 20 June 1927, Page 11

Soccer.

lllillllllillllllllllllllllllllllflllllllllllllllllllllllilllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllliiil CANADA WINS. A BRIGHT EXHIBITION. BEFORE a large and enthusiastic attendance at English Park on Saturday afternoon, Canterbury were defeated by the redoubtable Canadian eleven by 0 to nil. The reputation of the visitors bad preceded them, but it was generally thought that Canterbury would have made a better showing than they did. A spirit of close co-operation existed in the Canadian ranks, and it was probably in this aspect of the game that their superiority lay. The Canterbury team were by no means hopelessly outclassed, however, and bright flashes of play on the part of the Red and Blacks (and of the visitors as well) earned hearty applause from the crowd. Where the local team were found lacking was in the finishing off of their movements. “The Canadians are coming.” Placards about the city heralded the coming of the Maple Leaf eleven, and the match with Canterbury was keenly looked forward to, with the hope that Canterbury would play a game "out of the box” and spring a surprise pn the visitors. There was much adverse comment upon the personnel of the Red and Black team, and fears were expressed that the team picked was not as strong as it might be. Hopes were again revived, however, when the Westland eleven defeated the Canadians" at Grevmouth on June 15, and speculation was rife as to whether Canterbury could follow the West Cast’s example and do likewise. Heavy rain on Friday night spoiled the prospects of seeing the visitors at their best on a dry, hard ground, and further rain and sleet showers on Saturday morning clouded prospects still more. The teams were:— Canada—S. Tait (goal); backs, F. Crawley, E. Edmunds; halves, J. Monaghan, W. Brolly (centre), 11. Paynter; forwards, W. Gibson, R. Williams, D. Archibald, J. Davidson, XV. Milligan. Canterbury—Goal, J. M’DougalJ; backs, F. Graham and F. Muscroft; half-backs, S. Muirson, G. Roberts and J. Dryden; forwards, T. Ilarbutt, F. Isles, J. Phelps, T. Nelson and G. Duncan.

On the Job Early. Canterbury lost the toss and kicked off into the wind. The visitors were on the job from the whistle, and after about a minute’s play, had scored! It all happened so quickly that the Canterbury men did not know whether they were on their heads or their heels. The goal was scored by Davidson, who received from Gibson (on the right). Gibson beat the Canterbury men before centreing to Davidson* This reverse put the Red and Blacks on their mettle, and Isles had a long shot at goal. Phelps next made a. -weak attempt at goal. A heavy sleet shower then fell, and made the surface of the ground very greasy and slippery. It remained so during the progress of the game, and hampered, to a certain extent, the freedom of action of the pla>--ers. The superior combination of the Maple Leaf men soon told, and it was not long before they were two goals ahead, this time through the agency of Archibald, the centre forward and cap-

Canterbur> r livened up considerably after this, making occasional excursions into the Canadians’ territory, but could not finish off their movements. Roberts, in particular, was feeding his forwards frequently and accurately. The third goal was a long time in coming, being secured by Williams. When half-time was called Canterbur}’ had the Blues on the defensive, but were three goals down.

The Second Spell. Canada was soon on the job in the second spell, M'Dougall being conspicuous for several brilliant saves. Canterbury then took a hand at attack and had one or two golden opportunities to score, but the shooting lacked direction and sting. Canada’s fourth goal was netted by Archibald, who is a most prolific scorer. The Blues got going again almost immediatel\', Paynter annexing the fifth goal. M’Dougall figured prominently in some spectacular saves at this stage of the game. Weak Shooting;. The pressure relaxed for a while and Canterbury had a turn at attack, but again the shooting was weak. From a goal-kick, the visitors initiated a brilliant passing movement, culminating in Archibald finding the net, but it was ruled offside. Almost immediately afterwards Archibald succeeded in again getting the ball past M’Dougall. but this one was also given offside. Another brief respite was availed of by Canterbury to take play to the Canadians' end, but again without success. The visitors speedily returned play to the Canterbury goal-mouth and rained shot after shot upon M’Dougall, who brought off some clever saves. He was ably supported by other members of the team in stopping or blocking the shots. Shortly before time, Gibson added the sixth (and last) goal from a hard angle. The visitors made the most of their opportunities in front of goal, whereas Canterbury did not. The Canadians certainly had more opportunities of scoring than did Canterbury. The local team, during the course of the match, however, had several first-class chances of scoring, but at no time did they trouble the Canadian goalie, Tait with their shots.

An Attractive Game. The Canadians pla>'ed a very attractive game, and in thejr ranks are several players who could probably take their place in any company. The visitors showed their superiority early in the game and won with comparative ease. They proved themselves to be fast and tricky players, their command over the ball, their foot-work and headwork being things to be applauded. Very seldom were the visiting players' to be found out of position, and the understanding of the inside forwards was amazing. Much good should be the result of such a good exposition of the Soccer code. Tait, the Canadian goalie, had very little work to do, none of the local shots at goal extending him in clearing. lie is recognised as the finest custodian in British Columbia, and one of the best in Canada. The two backs,. Cratvley ami Edmunds. did not have a great deal to do, but they proved themselves to be i sure kickers and deadl>' tacklers. Craw j ley has played in England for wellknown Association clubs, while Edmunds was developed and coached bv Jimmy Watson, the Sunderland and Scottish international full-back. The Canadian half line—Monaghan (right), Broll> r (centre) and Paynter (left)—showed fine judgment in pass-

ing to their forwards, Monaghan, in particular, being very conspicuous. Their skilful manipulation of the ball was worth going a long way to see. Brolly is acknowledged to be one of the best centre-halves in Canada to-day. Overwhelmingly Superior.

The visitors’ forwards were overwhelmingly superior, and had the local men guessing all the time. They were always on the look out for openings, and, what is more, generally made the most of them when they came along Milligan and„ Davidson, the left wing, were a good combination, their short, snappy passing often disconcerting the Canterbury men. Milligan is a player who is at home in any position in the field. Archibald (centre forward) is a very dangerous man when within striking distance of goal, as was proved on Saturday. He has been a most prolific scorer of goals during the past two seasons. Williams (inside) and Gibson (right wing) were also a formidable pair, Gibson’s centres in particular always being directed to the right place to finish off the movement. Gibson is one of the youngest members of the team and has declined many offers to go to the United States, one offer being from the champion club. Williams is another versatile player, who is at home in any position.

The Canterbury Men. M'Dougall gave a great exhibition of goalkeeping, on one or two occasions rising to brilliant heights in effecting a clearance. On his play on Saturday he fully merits being included in the New Zealand team in the first test match next Saturday at Dunedin, although he did let six shots go past him. Neither Graham nor Muscroft played up to form, their defence being weak. To this must be accounted, in a large measure, the great number of shots that M’Dougall had to stop. Roberts, as centre-half for Canterbury, was perhaps the best of the Red and Blacks. He was always in position when he was wanted to extricate his side from a tight corner. When on the offensive, his passes to the forwards were accurate and were the means of setting up many of the Canterbury attacking movements. Muirson (right half) also played a good game, but Dryden (left) was not conspicuous. Isles and Nelson were the pick of the Canterbury forwards. Phelps (centre), Duncan (left wing) and Harbutt (right wing) w T ere right off their game and were a negligible quantity in the Canterbury attack .