“INFERIORITY COMPLEX”

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 71, Issue 221, 18 September 1928, Page 4

“INFERIORITY COMPLEX”

SPRINGBOKS’ MAIN TROUBLE ALL BLACKS’ OVER-RATED REPUTATION “I think that the All Blacks’ greatest difficulty on this tour has been to try and live up to their reputation, whereas South Africa's problem has been getting rid of the ‘inferiority complex.’ ” Sueh is the arresting preface to a long letter written by Mr Leon Downes, of Cape Town to “Cross-Bar” anent Nev,’ Zealand’s 1928 Kugby lour of South Africa. The writer is an officer in the Standard Bank of Cape Town and a very keen Rugby supporter. His criticisms, apart from their nattiral interest as coming from a South African, are refreshing in that they are a distinct change from the usual Press comment. His letter constitutes a candid review of the play of the world’s Rugby giants as it appealed to the average looker-on.

“Inferiority Complex His letter, which is dated August 4, proceeds: “We in South Africa are somewhat disappointed with the All Blacks’ showing to date although they certainly have improved of late. Of course, I am naturally a Springbok partisan, hut at the same time I try to get a square view of both sides. Before the arrival of the All Blacks the papers were full of the capabilities of individual players, and I am afraid that the majority of South Africans expected them to waltz through us and I am inclined to think New Zealand expected tho same. Forwards “Left Standing” However, on arrival they proved to be nothing out of the ordinary. No doubt you will say this kind of talk cannot be regarded as constructive criticism. To get down to tin tacks, the AU Blacks as a team arc not outstanding; the backs are capable but not bril liant; the forwards are magnificent in tho loose and are far ahead of the Springboks in this department of the game, but when it comes to scrummaging—well, they arc left standing. I saw both games in Cape Town and have seats reserved for the other two still to be played. Dealing with the first two games, it has been said that the All Blacks had not had a chance to settle down and a certain amount of criticism was levelled against those who drew the itinerary up for arranging these games so early in tho tour. All other touring teams have started with the same games, however, and even allowing for their unpreparedness the All Blacks were fortunate in losing to the Town team by such a small margin (7 —3). It is said that in Rugby, a team plays as ‘'veil us their opponents allow them, but this argument could not be applied in this case as we had a star back division which was supplied with the ball from the scrum at will. It was one long chapter of dropped passes and knockon s. A week before the game the Town team played the Country team and gave a brilliant exhibition of back play, beating the country 38 to 3, but against the All Blacks the same back division threw away certain tries, one after another, throughout the game. It is stated that the All Blacks now appear to have found their feet and are showing vast improvement. I hope so, but while there is every indi n - ’ion of improvement, it must be remembered that apart from the second test, the opposition has been composed of moderately weak teams. Those Scrums You raise the question as to tho scrum formation being the cause of the comparatively disappointing show. This is quite right and, after seeing and studying both styles, I am convinced that the 3-2-3 or 3-4-1, with forwards individually of more or less equality to those forming 2-3-2 will gain at least eight out of every ten scrums (tight). Regarding your opinion that the All Blacks should have played us at our own 3-2-3, this was tried in the Transvaal match and abandoned, but a different story might have been told had the teams played this formation in New Zealand for a year or so before the tour, and the forwards picked for South Africa on their showing in this formation. Th? 2-3-2 formation seems to have produced the type of forward who shines in the loose but who has lost the art of using his weight in the scrums. This was paxticularly demonstrated in both the Town match and first test. In the game against Town, at the commencement, the local team packed 3-4-1 and heeled monotonously. Bennie Osler who was well marked, received a bad gruelling and was temporarily forced to leave the field. A forward (Daniel) was taken out of the scrum and placed on the wing, Bennie Osler was given a roving commission and the forwards packed 3-4 and still obtained possession at will. South Africa’s Fourteen Men The same remarks may be applied to the first test when Duffy was injured and South Africa played 14 men throughout the second half. South Africa packed 3-4 and still obtained 75 per cent of the ball. 1 mentioned previously the South African team’s problem in getting rid of the “inferiority complex” and I think this had something to do with the poor showing given by the Town backs. Tho forwards had theirs removed by “Boy” de Villiers, an old Springbok (.1906), a few days before the match. He gathered together a strong pack of forwards, including two star hookers, and placed them in the 2-3-2 formation against a comparatively ordinary pack forming 3-2-3 and 3-4-1, and the latter heeled the ball nine times out of every ten set scrums. This certainly gave our forwards all the confidence in their own formation they required.

The “Loose Head” The method adopted by the All Blacks in counteracting this scrum superiority in the second test, by Stewart coming up and joining the front rank, thus gaining the loose head, has caused a considerable amount of discussion and F. M. Howard (an English correspondent specially brought out from England by the Cape Times to report on the games) has questioned the legality of it. Ido not altogether agree with him and it seems perfectly legitimate, but 1 do not think that this alone was responsible for the improved hooking by the All Blacks. I am of opinion that, to a certain extent, the Springbok forwards were “stale.” In fact, the whole team appears to have given a lifeless display as compared with their .showing at Durban. There is every indication that they were content to sit on their three point lead but they were a different proposition after Strang dropped his goal. After that they were all over the All Black defence and, for the last few minutes, did everything bar score. Port Elizabeth “Unlucky”? However, we now have the third test to look forward to at Port Elizabeth and this is South Africa’s unlucky ground. Somehow or other, the Springboks have never done well there, but if the right team is chosen they will give a good account of themselves. Personally 1 would like to see a draw result at Port Elizabeth, so as to have the final decision at “Ncwlands. ” At any rate, it is my sincere hope that South Africa will be in a position to field her strongest back division at “Ncwlands.” Owing to injuries South Africa has been rather unfortunate in her l»ack divisions in both tests. We have had a centre (Tindall) playing in the full-back position, a full-back playing on the wing (B‘rand) and three star centres and five class wings were unable to attend the trials owing to injuries. If we can field the following back division in the last test (they will not all be fit for the third), then I can’t, under any circumstances (bar injuries), see the All Blacks winning: Wings, J. C. Slater and J. Van Niekcrk or J. J. Pienaar; centres, Stanley Osler and Willie Rosseau; stand-off half, Bennie Osler with J. do Villiers at the base of the scrum. Nicholls “An Osler.” That would constitute South Africa’s strongest back line available but, unfortunately, owing to injuries they have not been able to take the field together., J. van Niekerk, in form, is superior to any of the All Black wings, and 1 think that Rosseau and S. Osler have the pull over your centres and your nearest approach to a Bennie Osler is Mark Nicholls, who has not been played in the tests so far.

Since writing the above South Africa has had further misfortunes in the way of injured players and. it is definitely certain that none of the star backs will be on view. However, we are not complaining?—it is all in lhe game. Tne All Blacks continuing on their winning way. but I do not place much reliance on their showing against the very weak teams they have been meeting lately (Aug. 9.) ns wo are quite used to seeing other defeating them by largo scores. ‘ ‘ I am quite satisfied that our men have been overdoing it. What with keeping up their own club games, travelling round the country participating in trials, representative matches, etc. f the result is a loss of good players through injuries. We have not got th© va. ‘ reserve of players in {South Africa that you have in New Zealand owing to the size of the country, and sparsely developed centres. there is not so large a following. However, the game is the thing and here’s luck to tho winners—may they be the best team! PIRATES FIFTHS’ TRIP MATCH AT PETONE The first of a serie, of annual Rugby matches was playcvl at Pctone by the Pirate fifth grade team against the Pctone fifths on Saturday. Although Pirates worn beaten by 14 points to 6 the score was no indication of the merits of the respective teams. The two tries scored for Pirates one by A. Reed and one by H. Smith were splendid individual eftforts both started from near the ha'f-way line. Outstanding players on the Wanganui side were Reed, Cook. Waters, Smith and Jones. Mr G. G. Campbell, who managed the team, commented very favourably on the clean nature of the play, the treatment accorded the visitors by Pctone and the splendid behaviour throughout of the Wanganui boys.