CANTERBURY RUGBY TEAM GIVEN A SEVERE LICKING.

Star (Christchurch), Volume XLIV, Issue 188, 10 August 1931, Page 9

CANTERBURY RUGBY TEAM GIVEN A SEVERE LICKING.

Harried by Southern Forwards; Backs Smothered and Break down.

CANTERBURY Rugby followers were given a rude shock on Saturday when a young team from South Canterbury completely overran the provincial fifteen on the Oval. Few anticipated such a result. It had one goftd purpose, however, in weeding out the weaker men before the team goes North, and in pointing out very obviously some glaring faults in the Canterbury men. The Red-and-Blacks were beaten by a better tactical team, sounder in the forwards and snappier in the backs. The Canterbury backs, who were expected to do most of the damage, never bad a chance, principally due to the poor display of Hodgkinson at half-back, and secondly to the deadly spoiling tactics of the South Canterbury men. Hodgkinson threw away all his chances of getting away with the touring team for the North Island by failing to connect with his passes. Edmonds at full-back was another weak link.

South Canterbury had the measure of the Canterbury forwards and outplayed them all through the match. They were faster, put more life into it, and were right up with the game. The advantage from the scrums broke fairly evenly, but Canterbury were too slow in getting the ball away and the opposing forwards were round like a flash on to it while the backs played close up and were on the spot if a mistake was made. Plenty of mistakes were made. A surprising feature was that the Canterbury backs did not attempt short punting, considering the fact that the opposing backs were close up to them. There were plenty of opportunities for this style of play, but they were neglected. Forcing the Play. It *vas left almost entirely to South Canterbury to force the play, and force it they did. They possessed a very compact team and a very well-coached team. Canterbury tried two disastrous experiments in dropping Mullan and Edmonds, although to soma extent the changes were justified. Mullan has not been at his best but is undoubtedly the best of an average selection, with Vincent in the running, too, and due to show improvement. Mullan is the most reliable man to have around. He can profit *by his mistakes, but apparently Hodgkinson can not. Sighs for Roberts. Edmonds was almost a disaster as full-back. Roberts could not have played even had he been selected, so that it was a case of making the most of a bad job. Ilowatson gave a good display at Southbridge with the Canterburv B team and to all accounts would have been by far the better man for the position. Edmonds’s fielding and kicking were poor. A lot of ground was given away where a decent punt would have put Canterbury on attack instead of on the defensive. He was caught in possession repeatedly and once or twice things were really dangerous and Canterbury got out of it only by chance. The Canterbury forwards were outpointed all along the line. They won a fair share of the scrums, but that was all for the ball was not much use to them once they did get it. The Old Brigade.

The “ old brigade,” in Manchester, Cottrell and Andrews, were by far the best, and Manchester did not get much of a chance. His specialty is in the line-outs, but he was too well marked to be able to get away with anything. He had a hard row to hoe and came out of it with flying colours. With average support there would have been a different tale to tell as his supports could have made capital out of this very move. It did not occur to them

Andrews was again one of the best on the ground, and certainly tried to set an example to the rest of the team. His inclusion in the South Island team seems a foregone conclusion. He was ably seconded by Cottrell, who never let up and played a sound game although he, too, was paid a lot of attention by the South Canterbury men. Two country forwards in Thompson and Ryan, gave a fair display, with Roberts, Suckling, Kearney and Sweeney in about that order of merit. The Inside Backs. Day had a hard job and all his dash seemed to have disappeared from his play. His kicking was wild and erratic. Oliver had few chances but did his best to liven things up once in a while when he showed up conspicuously. Innes was particularly sound on defence and started some effective dribbling rushes which gained a lot of ground. Hart had few opportunities. Brown, on the other wing, brought off sound tackles. Canterbury could do with some livelier forwards if they are to have a chance against Wellington, a possibility which many now regard as remote. However, it is not so remote as the result of last Saturday’s match would indicate. A Great Trio. Giddings, Callanan and Adkins are a great trio and the pick of a jolly good bunch. Adkins, particularly, found the game to his liking and proceeded to play merrily, along with M’Donald, among the Canterbury backs. Callanan preferred the tight, but did his bit in the loose, with tons of support from Giddings. Cremins was another who made the most of things, and Shewan and Duke were always ready for anything that came along.

Pro van is another man whom the Canterbury selectors would like to have on tap While not in the top class, he has a good understanding of Strang, and that makes for efficiency. He was smarter and more agile than the Canterbury half and opponents had to be quick to catch him napping. Snappy Strang.

Soutli Canterbury's strength in the backs turned a great deal on Strang, and he never once let them down. He is as sure of South Island honours again as anyone could reasonably be. lie has all the advantage of the experience of the South African tour behind him and makes use of it. His tackling was a revelation and his general play sound, tactical and heady. In Gonley, South Canterbury have a valuable second five-eighth who will attain to a higher grade of football. He shot defiance at Canterbury by dropping over a neat goal just as the whistle was due to go for time. It was the last straw' for Canterbury. Gafifaney. too, is no sluggard and played a fine game. Morrison and Trotter, the wingers, turned on some good football, although they met their match in Hart and Brown Con no!! v, the full-back, belies his grey ha. : ra He made a few mistakes but gave at. excellent display of sound handling and strong kicking that saved his side a lot of trouble.

CANTERBURY B TEAM DEFEAT ELLESMERE,

By 25 points to 11, the Canterbury B representative Rugby team defeated Ellesmere in an open and interesting but rather ragged match at Southbridge on Saturday afternoon. In the first spell the forwards were more or less even, but the Canterbury backs were better than their opponents. The first spell ended in favour of the visitors by 11 points to 8. The Canterbury backs got going whenever possible, Vincent throwing the ball out on every possible occasion; but they lacked finish, the handling being weak, and movement after movement collapsed. The Ellesmere backs made little effort to combine and individual efforts, following upon loose rushes by their forwards, often saw them within the Canterbury twenty-five. Bowes and Quaid, the Canterbury hookers, were getting a fair share of the ball, but often it hung in the scrum. In the loose, however, the forwards worked well together. The second j?pell saw the Canterbury backs getting more of the ball and Vincent repeatedly set his backs going. They showed speed and initiative, but, lacking finish, were unable to crown their movements until the end, when Spicer went over on the blind side. The other four tries were scored by the forwards. The backs were inclined to hang on to the ball too long and to indulge in short kicks when it would have been better to retain possession. Vincent, the Canterbury half, played soundly throughout, feeding his backs with clean passes. He was not afraid to go down on the ball. Hazelhurst, at first five-eighth, was the weak link, many rear attacks breaking down when he mis-handled. He showed much improvement in the second spell. M’Phail, his partner, was the best of the inside backs, although apt to hang on too long. He played a heady game and was responsible for several nice movements. Ounshea’s defensive work was sound. The wingers, Thompson and Spicer, saw little of the ball at the start, but toward the end were each responsible for good runs down the lino. Howatson, the full-back, used his long line-kick to advantage. In the first spell he handled cleanly, getting his team out of difficulty on more than one occasion. He showed a falling-off later and fumbled the ball, occasionally being caught in possession. Crockett, wing forward, played well until he was ordered off after the interval. He was with the leaders in every lose forward movement, tackled soundly and was often responsible for breaking up attacks. Foley gave a good account of himself, and with Quaid, Crofts and Brown worked well in scrum and loos£. In the Ellesmere team Hoskin (half) and Murchison (five-eighth) were often in the picture, while Wheeler, on the wing, was closely watched. Their forwards were called upon for a lot of work and Johnson, Adams, Bowden and Watkins were always useful. The teams were:—

Canterbury—Full-back, I. Howatson; three-quarters, W. Thompson, N. Dunshea, H V. Spicer; five-eighths, C. H. M’Phail,. R. Hazelhurst; half, W. H. Vincent; forwards,’ I. Crockett (wing), K. Brown. W. W. Cofts, F. J. Foley, J. J. Busch, T. Hooker, C. Quaid and A. Bowes.

Ellesmere—Full-back, F. Eden; threequarters, T. Wheeler, N. Mussen, J. Millard; five-eighths, M. Cox, J. Murchison; half, E. Hoskin; forwards, C. Miller (wing), W. J. Bowden, E. Watkins, S. Robinson, G. Rookes, R. Adams, A. Hodgen, R. Anderson. The Flay.

Canterbury kicked off and immediately entered Ellesmere territory, where their backs got going. M’Phail cut in and sent out to Dunshea, to Thompson, who dropped his pass. Ellesmere returned the attack. Mussen missed a shot at goal from a penalty. The Canterbury backs all handled the ball in the next movement, but not a foot was gained. Hc-watson, with two good kicks, retrieved the lost ground. Led by Hos-

kin, Bowden and Robinson, Ellesmere swept down to the Canterbury goal line, where the defenders were penalised. Mussen piloted the ball over but there was a man in front and a scrum followed. The game was quiet for a while until Ellesmere, on their own twentyfive, were penalised and Vincent goaled. Canterbury B 3, Ellesmere 0. Canterbury were showing a slight superiority in the backs but the forwards were not packing well Crockett and Foley led a great forward rush upfield and Crofts dived over. Vincent failed with the kick. Canterbury B 6, Ellesmere 0. The Ellesmere forwards bustled Canterbury and from a free kick on the twenty-five line Mussen goaled. Canterbury B 6, Ellesmere 3. S. Robinson retired through injury, being replaced by J. Johnson. Howatson came up into line to take part in a fast back movement in which Vincent, Hazelhurst. M’Phail, Dunshea and he took part. Wheeler intercepted and with a great run brought play to rest in the Canterbury goal area and Ellesmere scored, Watkins forcing his way over and Mussen converting. Ellesmere 8. Canterbury B 6. Thompson provided excitement when he made a determined run almost to the goal line, but his pass 'infield went astray. Fox and Murchison brought Ellesmere again within striking distance and Howatson was called upon to relieve twice. M’Phail provided a sensation when he swerved through his opponents to the full-back, passing out to Brown, who scored. Vincent converted. Canterbury B 11, Ellesmere S. The Second Spell. The second spell opened brightly. The Canterbury forwards indulged in a fast dribbling rush which ended in Crofts scoring his second try. Vincent converted. Canterbury B IC, Ellesmere 8. « From a penalty in front of the posts Mussen had a poor shot at goal. M’Phail made a nice opening but spoilt it with a wild pass. Brown carried on and went to the full-back, who downed him. The next minute he was rewarded when he got possession and battled his way over. Canterbury B 19. Ellesmere 8. THE LOWER GRADES. SENIOR B. Merivale 8, Christchurch 3. Sunnyside beat Training College b3 r default. North Canterbury 17, Old Boys 12. Second. Albion 14, Athletic 3. Technical Old Boys S, Lin wood 6. Sydenham 9, Christchurch 0. Fourth. Technical 0.8. 4. West 0.8. 0. Fifth. A Section. Merivale 6, Sydenham A 0. Technical 0.8. 10. B.H.S. 0. B Section. Sydenham B 5, Ricearton 3. Papanui 11, West 0.8. 8. Under Seventeen. Ricearton beat West ©B hr default Athletic 10 Technical 08. B 9. Merivale 14. Sydenham 6. Old Bovs 18. Aranui 0. Technical 0.8. A 11, Christchurch 0. North Canterbury 10, Brornh y 0.