WALLABY TEAM

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 79, Issue 246, 17 October 1936, Page 4

WALLABY TEAM

AUCKLANDER’S CRITICISM DEFENCE WAS TOO WEAK SUGGESTION ABOUT COACHES

"Disappointed Aussie” writes frora Auckland to the Sydney Referee in bitter mood about the defence of the Australians on tour: Having read so much in praise of the Australians before they reached New Zealand, it was pardonable if Australians living in New Zealand should have formed the opinion that at last Austral a had developed Rugby Union footballers capable of nolding the ! r own on the playing fields of other countries. Even New Zealanders got the habit of talking aboutli the great team that was coming. ' In due course, the team arrived and played against Auckland in the mud to lose by two points. This was considered a good performance, but the old hands thought they could pick a weakness in the defence of the, team, particularly in the backs. As other games were played, this weakness became more evident until the game at Napier put the question beyond doubt. Then came the second Test debacle. The New Zealand players having found the the Australians out, cut their defence to pieces and scored at will. I am not going to say anything about the forwards except that it would be to the advantage of the side if one or two of them devoted more attention to the ball and less to the man. But what of the backs? The general opinion here is they would do better in a basketball game. Their kiss-in-the-ring methods might be all right, in Australian football, but are of no use against real footballers. In the olden days in Australia, players were taught to tackle low and hard, an many other defensive tricks, and it is just as essential that these sound methods should be practised to-J day. Australians are not deficient ot* intelligence! Why don't they apply it Io their football? One would think that after all the lessons they have received from New Zealand they would know better than to employ such tactics as the present visitors adopt. However, it would appear they still require instruction in the finer points of the game, and I would suggest that a New Zealand coach, who know? Rugby, be engaged to teach them Australian flashy methods have beer ’.el) tried out. and found wanting So what about it? There is fortunately, no need to send to New Zealand for coaches, the Referee comments in reply. They are in Australia, if their services be sol?-' cited by the nowers-that-be. Under an experienced international of (he calibre of T. Lawton or A. C. Wallace. or a fdw others to he named, a first-class XV could be moulded this season. If the failure of the Australians has its fitting outcome the Australian authorities should revert to the International law relating to kicking into touch, brin- to light a few solid inside backs, and enlist the advice of the plovers who have been through I lie mill to fit the team in scrummaging. rucking, and defence for their tills ith the Springboks. W In South Africa Ihe Australian part of lhe programme is held to b» "easv." ft is, nevertheless, nosstble for the R.U. authorities to develon a team capable of making it no easv job for them In triumnh. There is the talent in the Runby Union to make a highgrade international team—it Is a matter of netting the rl-ht players and developing them as a team. Accidents Record No Australian touring team ever struck such bad luck in accidents to nlayers as the Australians in New Zealand in 1936. On the whole the forwards shaped very well, but the backs were uncertain." The defeats included only one severe on points—• the second Test, in which the second half defence broke down, and 38 points were scored against them. Despite the numberof defeats, opposing teams score'! only 33 tries to the Australians’ 25. the points marheld by their onoonents being 3, 6,6, 5, 25, 8, and 1.