WARATAHS TOOK OXFORD CHEAPLY.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 18339, 16 December 1927, Page 9

WARATAHS TOOK OXFORD CHEAPLY.

REPORTED ROUGH PLAY BY TOURING TEAM IS EXAGGERATED (By CAPTAIN E. W. BALLANTINE). After the very hard pointless game at Twickenham against London, and with the prospect of another hard game at Leicestershire on that compact ground at Leicester, the Waratahs’ intermediate match was against Oxford University, on the Iffley Road ground which is situated past that beautiful towered college, Magdalen. It was the Waratahs’ twelfth game, but the third game of Oxford, and as Oxford had given no convincing evidence of being anything but a very ordinary—very ordinary—fifteen, only four of the visiting players who played Against London were introduced into the Waratahs side—C. L. Fox, B. Judd, W, B. J. Sheehan, and A. W. Ross. Even Tom Lawton rested, and it was his first absence from the side. Some fifteen minutes before “no side,” the tourists 'lost D. Malcolm, who was scrum half on this occasion through a dislocated shoulder, and there is not the slightest shadow of a doubt that with only fourteen men against fifteen, there was little hope that the Waratahs could recover during the concluding stages of the game. It was a bit of very bad luck for the tourists, particularly as the match was played through pouring rain. It happened that half an hour from the start, Ross, in attempting to clear his line, failed to . find touch. M. A. M’Canlis, the Oxford cricket “ Blue ” who has been playing centre three-quarter for Blackheath, was the Oxford full-back, and he made a marvellous field with one hand, and running across the field into the rival twenty-five, he gave a timely pass to the forward, L. F. J. Davies, and when close to the line, he handed the ball to R. M. Marshall, the wing three-quarter, and he made the try which was to decide the result of the match, and incidentally be the means of smudging the Waratahs’ record. There were about 7000 spectators, and they went frantic with delight.

Never before had a University team defeated a visiting Overseas side, with the single exception that Cambridge beat the 1888-89 Maori team by 2 gqals and a try to a goal, and Oxford beat the same team by 2 goals to nil. As a matter of fact, the Waratahs made the mistake of taking the Oxonians cheaply, and it was very obvious that the rest of the touring side, after the chief players have been taken away, would have a rough •'journey against the leading clubs in Britain. The “All Blacks” did not fall into the mistake of being represented by a second XV. I wonder if the Waratahs have been depending too much on Lawton. It cannot be expected that he could go through the whole season without a rest, for he would run the risk of becoming stale, and when he was in England that fault was seen in him. There was delightful dash amongst the Oxford forwards, and their backs were able to manipulate the slippery ball with more success than the tourists. Cambridge have shown convincing form so far this season, except that the forwards are a bit* patchy. It will be a reversal of form if the Waratahs should beat Cambridge and then for Cambridge to defeat Oxford, as I really anticipate will be the case. The Waratahs went across from Oxford to Leicester. Leicestershire was represented exclusively by members of the Leicester R.F.C., and I saw a very fast game. It was the thirteenth match of the tour, and there was a feeling that the Australian players would have to go all out to snatch a win. As a matter of fact, misfortune fell to Leicestershire, as ten minutes after the change of ends, that versatile scrumhalf, John Russell, in successfully tackling Jack Ford, the heaviest forward of the side, dislocated his shoulder At that time, Leicestershire were penning the Waratahs in their own twentyfive, and clearly the home side was the better side. For the rest of the game Leicestershire set themselves out solely to keep the Waratahs from scoring as much as possible. Where the Waratahs excelled was in recovering from mistakes. The “ big man ” of the Waratahs was Aleck Ross, who was well nigh faultless in fielding, finding touch, opening up the game and tackling. Four minutes from the start, Prentice kicked up the field in defence and Ross fielding the ball had time to steady himself and kicked a lovely dropped goal. Weak centre fielding defence enabled Day to be sent in, but just on half time, for the only time in the game, Waratahs dribbling succeeded and Storey scored in an easy position for Lawton ♦-> get the goal. Then came Farndon’s try, magnificently converted by Day from the touch line, and the county were within one point of the Waratahs’ (eight points to their nine). Some perfect hand work, with backs and forwards assimilating, put the tourists on the attack, Eric Ford, Towers, from a down the field run with King and Egan scored tries, Lawton adding the points after the try by Towers, from right in front of the goal. It was a good game, and there was nothing throughout with which fault could be found. I think that the expressed opinion that the Waratahs are unduly rough is much exaggerated. The breakawawy forwards have ceased to obstruct, and their whole game is played with a delightful spirit.

PATTERSON S 5-SET BATTLE FOR TITLE.

Gerald Patterson won his eighth Victorian tennis championship by defeating Jack Crawford (N.S.W.), 7-5, 6-1, 5-7, 1-6, 7-5. Play was interrupted by rain four times during the three hours the game occupied, and conditions were unpleasant and difficult. Patterson's mastery of the heavy court and wet balls gave him the victory. He had match point in the tenth game of the third set but he served a double fault. Crawford was making fewer mistakes at this stage and took the set 7-5. In the fourth set Crawford captured Patterson’s serve to lead .3-1, and, playing a forcing game, he won the set without the loss of another game. Commenting on the play an Australian writer says: “Considering the conditions, the tennis was very good, but Patterson's experience and ability to make, use of the wind and the deadness of the court, turned the scale in his favour. Crawford brought off a number of brilliant shots, but he did not seem able to adapt himself to the conditions as well as Patterson. Watching the match, it seemed that Crawford had more of the luck, and had it been the other way he might quite easily' have lost in straight sets.”