Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

INDIAN HOCKEY TEAM

FORMER DOMINION VISIT. DYAN CHAND’S BRILLIANCE. AN EPIC OF SCIENCE AND SKILL. (By “Korotangi.”) At a cost just three times as great as that involved-in the tour of the Indian Army team in 1926, the redoubtable Dyan. Chand and a titled prince, H.H. of Manavadar, will lead an All-India hockey team to the Dominion on May 13. Epic phases of the former visit when pace, dexterity, and scientific skill overran all opposition are revived in the minds of thousands of sportsmen throughout the Dominion.

The tour of nine years ago was opened amidst climaxed interest at Te A'wamutu, where the tourists met a strong Waipa team. It was child s play for the Indians. As the score rose so did the pressure increase, a thrusting power almost irresistible, smashing a path through the forwards and bustling and -confounding the home backs. Dyan Chand, a mere slip of a boy, but sprung on India rubber, was everywhere, the king pin of a brilliantly fast forward line. It was an overwhelming victory. Never before in the history of hockey in the Waikato did a game attract so much attention as the match with Waikato on the following, Saturday. The home team, playing on iSteele Park ground, the scene of so many first-class hockey matches, A\ r ere defeated by 7 goals to nil. The Indian combination Avas as a smoothrunning 'machine; red and white jerseys and twinkling white sandshoes were everywhere. Six of the seven goals came off the perfectly balanced stick of the great Dyan Chand/ and were it not for “Jerry” Fletcher', who time after time Avas Waikato’s salvation, the score would have been high In double figures.

Fletcher Best In the World

The Waikato team boasted few young -players, most of the men being seasoned veterans of many seasons, and most of it's members have since retired from active participation. R. E. Conradi, who captained the home eleven/and G. Fletcher are about the only two to remain in the game until recent years. The referees, K. P. Fade and 11. B. Speight (Auckland), have also retired from active participation. Even the Indians had to acknowledge Fletcher’s skill and they did so ungrudgingly. At a dinner which followed tlie match, Captain Cowan observed that “the -game had been Waikato’s goalkeeper." Fletcher’s display he described as marvellous and he said that every Avile had been necessary to -get the ball past him. In the Lahore there were several truly magnificent ’keepers, hut all were agreed that “Jerry” Fletcher was second 'to none in the world. It was the finest exhibition of keeping they had ever seen. m Then followed a -succession of vic-

tories. Hawke’s Bay went under by 12 goals to 2, Wanganui by 12 to 1, and Dannevirke—dhe best victory of the series—by a round score of 20 to nil. Wellington put in some solid opposition but the Indians had no trouble in holding out and the borne eleven went under toy 8 goals to 3. Extended by Canterbury. For the first time the Indians were extended when they met the Canterbury representatives on June 12. Excitement ran high among the crowd of 12,000, and the tourists were cheered to the echo when they gained a win toy 2 goals to 1. 'Canterbury were distinctly unlucky not to force the tourists to a draw. Dyan 'Ghand •scored characteristically twice for the Indians, but in the second spell S. Bell sent in a shot for 'Canterbury which left 'Ghularn Ali standing. . A few minutes later Teague found the net, but was penalised for sticks and the goal was disallowed. In tactics, combination, and stickwork; on attack and on defence, the Indians were supreme in the first Test at Christchurch. Fletcher, the Waikato star, was the busiest person on the ground for, although New Zealand were defending strongly, they were unable to get the ball away. It was a victory for science over a tenacious, willing but disjointed defence by 5 goals to 2. 'Dyan Chand, in the pivot position, swung the whole team around him. The penetration of the attack came from his stick. Just as much an opportunist as an individualist, in the words of a Christchurch critic, he made the New Zealand backs look like cab horses alongside Gloaming. As always the Dominion half-line was weak, desperately weak, although the vigour and determination of the opposing van was inclined to make their tackling look weaker than perhaps was the case. The forwards could have done much to assist by-back-tackling, but they neglected this opportunity and preferred to wait upheld for opportunities which never came. Indian's Only Defeat. Aucklanders were disappointed when a week or two later their eleven went under to the Indians toy 11 to 1. The prospects were all against it; on 'Canterbury’s showing, a single goal loss or even a draw seemed probable, but the Auckland forwards lacked, fire and, poor positional play, coupled with wildly inaccurate shooting, nullified many chances. Seceomlte, who scored the city’s solitary goal, was the only one to put in a shot that looked like finding the posts. Few sporting events attracted such •manifest interest as the second and final Test which was played at Auckland. A gallery of 10,000 saw tile Indians defeated for the first lime by 4 goals to 3. The Watts brothers put on two goals apiece For New Zealand in the first half and the visitors were faced with a hard uphill tight. The issue rested wilh the New Zealand defence. The ’keeper was safe and the backs held out. The visitors just failed by a single goal. It was the finest and the most exhilarating game of hockey seen in the country.

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/WT19350501.2.15

Bibliographic details

Waikato Times, Volume 117, Issue 19564, 1 May 1935, Page 3

Word Count
951

INDIAN HOCKEY TEAM Waikato Times, Volume 117, Issue 19564, 1 May 1935, Page 3

INDIAN HOCKEY TEAM Waikato Times, Volume 117, Issue 19564, 1 May 1935, Page 3