N.Z. ARMY RUGBY TEAM HAD TO “PLAY THE CROWD”

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 90, Issue 7, 9 January 1946, Page 5

N.Z. ARMY RUGBY TEAM HAD TO “PLAY THE CROWD”

COMMENT ON WELSH MATCH:

SMITH GIVEN PRAISE IN A TEAM THAT DESERVED TO WIN

There is evidence in comments of Rugby critics in Ihc English Press that the New Zealand Army Rugby team, which beat, Wales last Saturday by .11 points to three, had to “play the crowd” as well as the team on the field. The special correspondent of the New Zealand Press Association in London, has cabled lhe following comments from leading British critics:

The “News of the World”: “Never have I seen a crowd try so hard to win a match for Wales. Rattles, bells, saucepans, caps in the air and an inspired rendering of ‘Land of My Fathers,’ but all in vain.” The “Daily Herald": “It was a fair result. To defeat the Kiwis, their opponents must win a forward battle for a considerable period of the game. And that Wales failed to do. It was joy to see such a grim, hard game fought in such a fine sporting spirit, and there was not the suggestion of a deliberate foul. But I disliked the crowd's shouting while Scott was taking his kicks at goal.” A word must also be said about Winston McCarthy, the New Zealand broadcaster, whose racy description and good humour introduced a new note to the rather staid, immaculate

men of the 8.8. C. McCarthy’s commentary on the second half of the glime against Wales was heard throughout Britain. Previously the 8.8. C. discarded a Sunday m irntng commentary on Soccer lor a recording cf McCarthy’s comment on tne match against Newport. He will also be heard in Britain when the game against the Combined Services Is piaj ed. A stop l goes that one listener to a description of the Cardiff game was eating an orange and became so excited that he choked and died. The New Zealander was known to his friends as “Killer” McCarthy.

Another former international refused to listen in, saying he oecame overexcited, while yet another Rugger player went off to watch a (ocal Soccer match instead, remarking than it would be less exacting on his nerves!

While commiserating with Lloyd Davies over his one mistake aft?? a flawless game, that allowed Sherrati to score, newspaper commentators all ar? of the opinion that the New Zealand Army team deserved its win o\er Wales at Cardiff.

Smith is regarded as the star plaver on the field, while Saxton justified his place in the team with long, faultless fast passes. There is much disapproval a* the Welsh crowd’s antics while Scott was taking his kicks at goal. “The Times” eajs: "Few until quite recently had imagined the Kiwis cepable of accomplishing what the Ab Fslscks twice failed to do before the war. Nor should the comparison be sttesied over-hard. Compaeisoiis c: n be deceptive, as well as odious. None-thr.-less, the men of 1945-16 are entitled to all the honours of a n»llearned triumph, all sweeter perhaps because it was won in the presence of their Piime Minister. Luck entered into their victory, but they also had plti.ty of bad iuck before the I.de suddenly turned in their favour. “Defeat was a long time coming to Wale.'-, and it was ironical that their be:t player on the day shou-d bare helped to bring it about, but. defeat was always in the ofl'ing. Even if Wales had pulled .1 off by means of

their own penalty goal—a grand kick bv hapless Lloyd Davies they could hardly have been satisfied with their own prowess. Indeed, the match was

a jumble of mistakes, of near things and brilliant passages which came to nothing, terr.fic handling and kicks at goal, and it cannot be said that Wales provided many of the brilliant passages.” SUPERLATIVE TACKLING The “Daily Telegraph” declares: “Nothing couid have oeen better than the Wesa tackling. Had lhe Welsh attack been of the sama superlative standard, it would nave ueen a different story. In fact, the Welsh back division never shaped as if a score were imminent. On th e other hand, when Saxton had the ball out, the Kiwis looked an impress.ve scoring machine, especially when Smith was in possession.

“Smith was quick to sense an opening and was through it in a flash, and it was only the excellence of the tackl.ng that prevented his splendid efforts leading to tries.”

Other comments are: Sunday Times”: “Though not playing their best lootball, the New Zealanders tried all they knew, using their weight, speed and skill, only to find a rock-hke defence. They passed, they ran and they never relaxed. When a side does this, more often than not chances of scoring are bound to come along. Smith was his best self, which means a lot, for Smith is of the highest class of mid-lield plajers this country has seen here. Then Allen was also good and took a lot of watching. Saxton led his team quietly and effectively, and also sent his backs away with smooth passes that were well timed and accurately given. Scott’ made a steady, sale full-back, catching the ball well and kicking with great effect. The back division as a whole now and then looked confused, but just managed to pull themselves together before anything serious happened.” SAXTON A HERO. “The New Zealand forwards were not so good as usual, well though Finlay led them. Perhaps it was due to the grand work of tneir opponents," says “The Observer.” “Smith, and to a lesser degree Allen, were even threatening danger. In the forwards there was nothing between th e teams in the loose, but New Zealand had at least their share of the ball from set scrummages. My own hero was Saxton. He is no longer in the flush of Rugby youth, but he stood up to a game that was never distinguished by its delicacy, and maintained an accurate service from the scrummage.” The “News-Chronicle” says: "It was a grand match—over-tense to produce something out of the bag, where sure tackling and brave recoveries. With

all the might-have-beens, few of the 28,000 spectators would deny that the Kiwis were the better side. The forwards gave their outsides much more of the ball, both from scrums and line-outs and these outsides always looked as if at any moment they would produce something out of the bag, whereas the Welsh backs—never giving that impression—were sadly disappointing. Other memories are of the brilliance of Smith—one of the best centres ever sent here from New Zealand -and the constant aptitude of tackled Kiwis in gelting rid of the ball to an attendant colleague. The fullthroated roar set up while Scott was taking kicks at goal for New Zealand was unworthy of a Welsh Rugby crowd.”

RESULTS TO DATE

The New Zealand Army Rugb> team has had the following results in its 14 matches:— v. Swansea, won 22—6. v. Llanelly, won 16—8. v. Neath and Aberavon, won 22—15. v. Northern Services, won, 14—7. v. Ulster, won 10—9. v. Leinster, drawn 10—10. v. England, won 18—3. v. Army, won 25—5. v. R.A.F., won 11 —O. v. Navy, won 6—3. v. London, won 30 —0. v. Cardiff, won 3—o. v. Newport, drawn 3—3. v. Wales, won 11 3. Summary: Won 12, drawn 2, lost 0; po’nts for 201, points against 72.