N.Z. TEAM TO PLAY BRITISHERS.

New Zealand Illustrated Sporting & Dramatic Review, Volume XVI, Issue 952, 4 June 1908, Page 11

N.Z. TEAM TO PLAY BRITISHERS.

NOTES ON THEIR PERSONNEL. The team selected to represent New Zealand should give general satisfaction. There are, of course, one or two places where the' team may be open for criticism (writes <‘Harpqstum’t in the Taranaki “Herald”). For instance, the writer does not . think that Cameron should have been included. The Stratford man is good in attack, although I think others could have been found even better. In defence he is poor, and continually needs support. Still, he will have that sterling player, Wallace, behind him, and this may give him some confidence. Wallace has been playing up to his old form, and seems to have lost none of his dash and brilliancy. A better full-back could not have been found in the Dominion. Deans and “Mona” Thompson have also shown that this year they are as good as ever, and thoroughly deserve their places. Threequarters of international calibre are somewhat scarce this year, and it is

lucky that the two “All-Blacks” have re-entered the field. Coming to the five-eighths, some people may express surprise that Mynott has not secured a place, as he and Hunter know each other’s play so well. But Stead is the better player, and this season, according to reports, has been playing quite up to the level of his best form. Of Hunter’s claims to inclusion there canbe po doubt, and the same applies to Roberts. Time has not dimmed the brilliancy of either. Gillett has not been seen out on the Rugby field so much this season, as he has been taking part in the Australian game. On two or three occasions, however, he has assisted Ponsonby, and has proved that he remains the premier “rover” of the Dominion. In the forwards, Casey, Hughes, Cunningham, Francis, Seeling and McDonald have all played together in New Zealand teams. They are as good as ever. Wilson, the remaining packman, has not yet represented New Zealand, although he deserved to do so on his play for the last couple of seasons. Last year he played for the North Island against the South, acquitted himself well, and scored a try. He is a splendid player. Tall, fast, and brimming over with dash, he is on the ball from whistle to no-side. A splendid tackler, a fine dribbler, good in every department of the game, and heady and tricky withal, he is a man who is always to be reckoned with both in attack and in defence. He plays far above his weight, and thoroughly deserves his place in the team. He is also one of the cleanest and most sportsmanlike players it is possible to find. Taken all round, the team is a fine one, brilliant in attack and solid in defence. Some people might prefer to see more young blood in the backs, but they should remember that the rear division as a whole have the advantage that belongs only to experienced players, of not only knowing every trick of the game as played but also of foreseeing and forestalling new moves by their opponents. The forwards are a fine lot, full of “devil” and untiring. At the same time it must be remembered that the British forwards have been specially selected to meet forwards of the calibre of the “AllBlack” vanguard of 1905-6. They also are doughty, fast, and of the “rip-and-tear” order. The AngloWelsh combination has been severely criticised in some places, but I think this criticism was purposely unfair. When the British team of 1904 came out they did so with a great reputation, and heralded with paeans of praise. But they found that their opponents had been under-rated. Is it not possible that the present team has been decried so that if it is beaten the critics may say “I told you so,” or, if it is successful, that they may again flaunt their remarks that the “All-Blacks” of 1905 were an exceptionally lucky lot?