Clever Inside Backs Needed.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 19107, 27 June 1930, Page 15

Clever Inside Backs Needed.

CAN NEW ZEALAND WIN SECOND TEST? (By "CENTRE”) The first lesson of the test is that we must find some inside backs who can set off a proper attack and penetrate when opportunity offers. Mill and Lilburne were far too slow on Saturday, and the other backs had very little chance to show whether they were up to standard. We must also discontinue the habit of kicking to the opposing full-back, and could do no better than copy the style of our visitors, who either land the short punt so accurately that possession is regained, or else make sure of finding the line. The All Blacks of 1924 created a great impression by their intensive backing up; yet, in six years, the British players show an infinitely greater appreciation of this than we do. Cooke was the only back in the New Zealand side to do anything in this line, and he was covering possible weaknesses all day. Another thing we have to watch is that every player must be absolutely fit and able to last the full distance at top. The test team produced by the visitors is much better than anticipated, and though we had all the better of the second half, and might easily have been the winners, a draw would perhaps have flattered us on the whole of the play. The Second Test. Although the selectors have replaced Mill and Lilburne with Corner and Nicholls, I am not certain that this alteration is sufficient to give us any definite prospects of success in the second test. Should the ground conditions be really good, I expect the New Zealand fprwards to show to much greater advantage than at Carisbrook, especially if they have profited by experience and make the pace a “crack-

er” from the start. Our attack will depend very largely on Corner and Nicholls, but unless the former receives much more protection from his forwards than Mill was given in Dunedin, our backs’ attacking opportunities will again be limited. Corner is very light and may not prove a great success on defence against the big British packmen. while Nicholls has never had the reputation of being a great defender and has always showed ta greater ad vantage with a really solid defensive player immediately inside him Although the British backs handled so exceptionally well under the conditions prevailing in Dunedin, there was not a great difference between the two teams, and we should have a good chance of evening matters here next Saturday week, but our forwards will require to jump into their stride much quicker and our backs show considerable all-round improvement to give us really definite prospects of finishing “all-square” at thej end of the second test. If the men near the scrum can develop a quick attack and show a few tricks and a little variety to give the outside men some real opportunities. we should turn the trick. But I will not feel at all confident about a test until I see a team selected with Cooke at centre and a first fiveeighths of international class with a really resolute defence. First Test Form. In confirming, in the first test, the good impression they had made against the Otago fifteen the previous Saturday, the British team showed vastly improved form from that which they, displayed in their match against Canterbury. It certainly has to be admitted that there was a great difference in the personnel of the two teams which the tourists fielded against Canterbury and in the test, but no one, seeing the game here, could have anticipated that the visitors could field a team which would show to such advantage as that which played at Carisbrook on Saturday. At Lancaster Park, in the match against Canterbury, the visiting backs showed that they were anxious to throw the ball about, but individual shortcomings prevented them from making a great deal of their rather limited opportunities. In the test, however, with their forwards giving them a comparatively generous share of the ball in the first half, the British backs proved themselves dangerous in attack under conditinos which made good passing a trifle difficult. The New Zealand Scrum. The New Zealand scrum went down very well, and, in spite of the extra man in the opposing pack, our men were not pushed back to any noticeable extent. Although the New Zealanders had not the same control of the ball in dribbling, our loose rushes seemed to have more snap than those of the opposition, and the “All Blacks” made many smashing rushes, especially in the second half. Our forwards appeared dull in the first spell, but after the interval they played up in great style and were attacking strongly for long periods on end. Finlayson played

magnificently in all departments, be"useful in the line-outs. M Williams also played well, while Batty was conspicuous in the loose and did some valuable following up. Cottrell certainly justified his inclusion and was toiling hard all the time, while Steere and Hazlett were grafting m the tight, although the latter did not play up to his best form. Irvine seemed to be well behind the play on a number of occasions. and the majority c! those who witnessed the garae were surprised that he was retained for the second test. The British forwards are a very tough proposition and we cannot afford to carry any players who are not doing their share or who can not last the full distance. . Porter, though certainly taking liberties with the off-side rule, got through some very useful work. Disappointing Backs. The disappointment of the game was the display of Mill, at half, and Lilburne, at first five-eighths. Mill was at his worst, his passes from the scrum generally being very poor, and he was slow in getting hold of the ball. Many blame Mill for the poor display which Lilburne gave, but the Canterbury man, though certainly suffering a severe handicap, could not be altogether excused on this account. He and Mill appeared to have no understanding whatever, and the first fiveeighths, when he received cleanly, certainly did not show the quick dash of Spong. On too many occasions he right up to Bassett, the opposing full-back, and many of his passes to Cooke were extremely poor. In defence, however, Lilburne had a lot to do and he did it very well; in this department he will probably be sorely missed in the second test. To my mind, Lilburne did not; appear to be himself when he stepped out on Saturday, as he seemed listless and lacked sparkle, as though he was labouring under some physical disability. After his game, I am more than ever convinced that his place in big football is at second, and not at first five-eighths. Cooke, though starved on attack, wa s darting around looking for opportunities, and on two or three occasions he dashed after the ball and had the defence severely troubled. He still retains the wonderful gift of anticipation. Hart played a really good game on the wing, scoring a fine try and getting out of some awkward corners on defence. If the backs in the second test can let him away outside the opposing three-quarter, I don’t think Bassett will get near enough to stop him. Oliver, on the other wing, created the impression that he is better on defence than on attack, but his chances in tlie latter direction were very limited. Lucas was only fair at centre, and Cooke had a big job keeping him in position. Lucas tackled better than was anticipated, and he was handling and kicking quite well. However, he does not seem fast enough for the opposing players, and he gave no assistance in backing up the last lines of defence. Nepia gave the first exhibition of his real prowess in the South Island, and his display was at times simply wonderful.