SOUTH AFRICAN GIVES OPINION ON N.Z. RUGBY.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 18544, 18 August 1928, Page 4

SOUTH AFRICAN GIVES OPINION ON N.Z. RUGBY.

DIFFERENCE IN STYLES SUBJECT OF COMMENT.

Written for the “Star” by “PONTY.” Xew Zealand and South Africa have met five times in international Rugby games. As four tries were scored at Dunedin in 1921 the records show that only three tries have been scored in the remaining four tests! After the New Zealand Armv tour of South Africa in 1919, one of the bestinformed critics Rugby has ever known, Mr Leslie Cox, summed up the lessons in victory and defeat, and then toasted “The Day” when the two countries would meet in the international arena. As the 1921 test rubber was a no-deci-sion affair, and each side has won a game apiece in 1928, South Africa’s viewpoint—although stated nine years ago—is rather interesting now that the final of the world’s rugger championship is being staged to-day at Port Elizabeth and a fortnight hence at Cape Town. Here is Mr Cox’s resume in “S.A. Pictorial,” September, 1919. New Ideas Better.

“What is likely to be the educative influence of the tour of the New Zealand Service Rugby Football Team? A big question, one which vitally affects South African Rugby, and one which is not to be lightly answered. Because the day is. not far distant when New Zealand and South Africa will test their respective strengths on the fields of representative sport. Ever since the most famous football team of all time, tb6 All Blacks of 'OS, woke up the sleepy old Rugby world of the United Kingdom, it has been the desire of all who follow the Rugby code to see New Zealand and South Africa in opposition to each other. Such a duel will settle so many debatable points, notably the sharp alignment of the backs whereby South Africa makes its attack, and the much-discussed and frequently adopted New Zealand scrum formation. We in this country have never failed to recognise that the New Zealand game differs materially from that of South Africa. It is no slavish imitation of any one particular style or system, but a game which has been evolved by the All Blacks themselves in the course of the development of Rugby football in those beautiful islands. They have played Rugby football since the 'sixties, they have made it their national game, and they were not satisfied to go on from year to year playing the same old game in the same old way. So, brains added to brawn, evolved new ideas and new theories, until the child attained to man’s estate, and the parent had to admit that the new ..ideas were better than the old.

Another Style. “But, as against this, South Africa has also developed a style of its own. It used to be stated that South Africa played the Welsh type of football, but that fallacy was exploded long ago. This country has never slavishly adhered to any type of Rugby football, but it is undeniable that our play is modelled on the English and Scottish game of the early ’nineties, as propounded to us in most emphatic fashion by Bill M’Logan, and that hardscrumming, straight-running, vigorous team of his. Those were the days before the Northern Union came into existence, when Rugby football was the game of the North Country, and it was football well worth watching. They sent out to South Africa a great team, probably the greatest which has ever left the Old Country, and as a direct result, South Africa stands to-day, holders of the Rugby Championship without dispute, conquerors of the four Kingdoms in 1912-13, playing the same bright, vigorous football which used to send the crowds of forty and fifty thousand Yorkshire and Lancashiremen wild with delight. Whilst England forgot, South Africa remembered, and in 1906, and again in 1912, it was South Africa which showed English crowds the type of football which used to delight their fathers—and which they unhesitatingly pronounced to be good. Colonial football, New Zealand and South African, has helped to rebuild the Rugby game in the Old Country, and the seed ■which was sown by those tours in ’BB, ’B9, '93, etc., has borne fruit a hundredfold.

“Now, in 1913 South Africa completed a most successful tour in the United Kingdom; the quadruple crown was worn, and this established the repute of South African Rugby for all time. Then came the war; had it not been for this, there is little doubt that South Africa and New Zealand would have met, as the Rugby Board had practically pledged itself to this policy at a meeting held in Durban during the tournament played on the eve of the war. So far as Rugby football is concerned, the war has proved a blessing in disguise, because it has brought about a perfect understanding between South Africa. New Zealand and Australia: false impressions have been removed, aq excellent understanding has been created, and we now know that our fellow-colonists are most excellent fellows, and play the game just as we would have them do. All the talk about unfair tactics that used to be circulated has been proved to be absurd—due probably to a lack of understanding of the game. In all the matches that the Australian troops played at Cape Town—and there were more than a dozen of them—l never saw one bit of play to which the slightest objection could be. raised. Their referees were scrupulously fair, and erred, if anything, in favour of South African teams which opposed them. They played bright, vigorous football, just as good as ours, and they are mightily pleased at the performance of their representative team which beat the famous combination now in South Africa. So much for the Australians. “But it is the lessons which the matches of the All Blacks can teach which mostly concern us. It has been impressed upon us that this is not a representative team. Granted that this is correct, it is a rare good side The team which could hold up and beat that great Mother Country fifteen at Twickenham is good enough for South Africa, and if they have better in New Zealand, well, good luck to them!

Value of the Tour. “Jo South Africa the great value of the tour, however, lies, not so. much in the winning or losing of matches, as in the methods by which this team accomplishes its ends. Whatever its representative character may be, it plays the true representative type of New Zealand football. Since the All Blacks landed at Cape Town the New Zealand game has ceased to be a mystery Many theories had been advanced in explanation of the striking successes of New Zealand teams; we had heard much of the wing-forward, the five eighths, the scrum-half, and the scrum formation. In fact, so many tales were told that it was impossible to sift the wheat from the chaff. Now and then, by putting out a forward to act as an extra back, a club would achieve temporary greatness by winning a big match. And whenever this happened it was inevitably referred to as ‘another triumph for the New Zealand game.’ But how far from the truth. This tour has shown us wherein lies the true Secret of the effectiveness of

New Zealand Rugby football. It is a game far more intricate than ours, not perhaps so uniformly epectacular, but demanding from the players a greater degree of efficiency and skill. For the New Zealand game, if played badly, nay, even if played carelessly, is always in danger of collapsing entirely, whereas our forward play has frequently saved a badlv-beaten side from entire collapse. “In the course of this tour it has been my mission to try to discover the source of strength, and any weaknesses which may have been revealed in the various matches. But the team has not played consistent football at any time; it has always played as a team, but the form has differed so materially in various games that it is advisable not to place too much dependence on any of the results. In other words, my advice is to accept the lessons of the tour with certain reservations, because any little weaknesses which may have been revealed may be due entirely to the limited field of selection, and the fact that this team has played a tremendous amount of football since the Armistice was signed, and may be suffering a little from staleness —and hospitality. That the team .has had a happy time is undeniable. They will confess, frankly and freely, that it has been tho time of their lives, but —is all this tremendous hospitality likely to conduce to good football ? The wonder to me is that they have done so well for since they reached Cape Town every town seems to have done its best to excel its predecessor—and Johannesburg stands easily head and shoulders above all others. Hospitality-^And Football.

“One endless succession of busy, interesting davs and cheerful nights in the best of good company. These gallant fellows will carry back delightful impressions of South African hos pitality, but it has not tended to improve their football. Who cares! Through the smoke and flame of the blood-sodden fields of Flanders these big-hearted lads have stormed their way; they have delayed their ‘Homeward voyage’ for our benefit, and it is little enough that we are able to do in return for all they have done for us. Make no mistake about it: the sentimental value of this tour is incalculable. It is responsible for the tremendous crowds which have attended the matches, and it has given the Rugby game just the stimulus which was badly needed. We owe New Zealand a great debt; let our Rugby legislators see that it is paid without delay. “In the space at my disposal it is not possible to refer to all the features which help to make New Zealand football what it is. Their play differs materially from ours because they make far greater use of their forwards than we do. Even now I am not quite certain whether their back play is not subordinate to their forward tactics, but there have been moments when the backs and forwards have ‘linked up’ in the attack, when their play has positively scintillated. It is at such times that one wonders whether South Africa can hold its own against such skilful tacticians, for when a New Zealand fifteen has found its game, and is launching attack after attack on an opponent's lines, there is enough fire, sparkle, and life in their play to rouse the most phlegmatic crowd. The Johannesburg public has seen that style Of game; the second half of the match against the Mines saw the visitors at their best. They played as if inspired, and the marvel was the way in which the forwards developed attacks after the backs had been stopped, or the backs came into action with the forwards. This concerted form of attack, delivered with lightning thrusts, without pause, rush succeeding rush, forwards and backs together, is the most deadly attack that Rugby football can develop. It is difficult to follow, it is most difficult to hold, and it affords spectators an endless succession of thrilling moments. Points of Difference.

“That is where it differs from ours. South African forwards work with one object; they are there to let the backs deliver the attacks, because we have proved that for speed, subtlety and skill there are very few to equal our representative players. But where a South African back movement breaks down, play ceases, the attack ‘fizzles’ out. Therein it differs from the New Zealand game, because the All Black forwards swing into line behind their backs and wait for the opportunity which they know will come when a pass is missed or mulled. That is where New Zealand footwork is so effective. In this country the player who ‘fly kicks’ would have little chance of securing representative honours. Yet the All Black players believe in ‘fly-kick-ing’; it is part of the game of forwards and backs, and its very unexpectedness has frequently led to surprising results. Personally, I do not like this style of football; it leads to the ‘kick and rush’ type of game, and, with our grounds, it will not do to develop a kind of glorified Soccer with an oval ball. If South Africa adopts this style of forward play the attractiveness of Rugby football will cease, and the sister code will reign supreme. In developing the most spectacular points of the Rugby game South Africa has appealed to the public, and to the daring of the youths of Qur land. That is why there is never any shortage of recruits for the game, because—the risk appeals. Scrum Formation.

“But our forwards can learn much from this team. Whether we adopt the 2-3-2 formation or not, time alone will decide. There are many points in its favour, and yet there are certain weaknesses which cannot be overlooked. The training of certain players for fixed positions, the utter dependency upon the efficiency of the ‘hookers,’ and the danger of being ‘screwed’ by a hard-pushing eight, make doubtful the policy of rashlv embarking upon these comparatively new ideas without considering well the cost. . The great disadvantage of the All Black scrum formation lies in the fact that it practically concedes the ‘loose head’ to any opposing pack which adopts 3-2-3 or 4-4 against them. No light matter this, in a big game. The Australians have never adopted the All Black scrum formation in its entirety, and they have frequently beaten All Black representative sides. But the Australians have learnt how to ‘lock’ their 3-2-3 scrum, and that is what South Africa must do. Once a scrum is ‘locked’ in this position, it becomes an integral part of the team, and is far more easy to control than with our own haphazard fashion of forming the scrum. The quick breakaway, the rapid following-up of the backs, the falling back to help a defence, and the virile footwork, are points that must be developed in the highest degree, for they will be badly needed when we meet New Zealand’s representative fiftee n.

Inter dependence. “One other weakness that has been most noticeable in the All piack back play is the dependence placed oq the five-eighths. This position demands brawn and brains, and if initiative is lacking, the team »s, from the point of view of back play. Halves, supported by five-eighths, with threequarters in reserve, seem to offer an ideal form of attack: but though in theory this may be right, in practice it has been found that so much time has been wasted in transfers between halves and five-eighths that when the ball eventually reaches the three-quarters the opposing defence is there to

smother them. That is where the South African game shines in comparison. The double line of attack, halves and three-quarters, on a sharp alignment, enables the ball to be slipped out to the flying wings far more quickly than with the All Blacks. But our back play is just a little too mechanical ; our wings have been made the great scoring factor, and that is where the weakness lies. Centres must learn the value of the reverse pass, and forwards must supplement the back play by close following up, so that when a pass is missed the play does not cease. These All Blacks have taught us to think, ~nd in thinking it may be possible to evolve a more deadly, subtle and yet attractive form of concerted attack than theirs. They have shown us how Rugby football can be developed by applying oxir brains to this most manly recreative sport, and for that alone our debt to them is incalculable. As a foretaste of repj esentative Now Zealand form, their play has been an eve-opener, and we cannot afford to disregard one little manoeuvre of the many which they have placed into operation, in what has proved to be the most memorable, and at the same time most enjoyable, of all Rugby enterprise* a tour which has brought South Africa and Australasia very close together.”