Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

LACROSSE

. (By'-"Second Home.") WE WON", AND WHY WE WON. The Right Match for Coronation. Played at the Basin on Coronation. Day, this match was in keeping with the day. It was "crowned"- with success. The writer has heard many tales concerning it. .Usually wc.are told that there are two sides'-to. a- story. Well, there are sometimes more.than,two. The strange interpretations of "writers on the game" move onei betimes—into smiles. Also into deep thought. ■■•■'■-•■ ■ Wellington- won by ■12 (some soy 13) goal to 4. ..We.are told, then (and no doubt weave expected to believe the statement from the scores), that there is nothing good to bo said of the play of the Aueklanders. . •We forget that (Borrodale excluded, and Borrodale, who played last year' for Wellington, is really an Auckiander, so' far as New Zealand la-cros-s is concerned) Auckland is a much Stronger combination-than that, which romped so gloriously over the Wellington team of 190 S. We forget, oven, that Borrodale was mainly responsible for the success of' Wellington against his own province last 'year. Had Borrodale being playing for' Auckland on Coronation Day, had he been further assisted by the elder Philson, who -was available, but whoso sporting instincts prompted' him to stand out of a team of which he was not properly a member,' it is safe to say that there would have been much less said of the "brilliant play" of our local players, aiul much more generous comment would have been'made.'upon, tho play of our sturdy northern opponents. But. beyond this, Auckland played well, and quite up (o representative form. Edwards played goal-for (he Auckland team. Ho allowed about a dozen shots to go through,' and. it is doubtful if tho most skilled goalkeeper could have stopped ten of them. It is quite certain that there must have been some thirty shots at his goal by Wellington that day. Wellington's goal allowed four goals to pass. Ho was not.slv'ot at, more than seven times during the match,' this'being owing mainly to. the-weakness of the Auckland "wing attacks." -Yet he. is spoken of as'"tho redoubtable," whilst Edwards is not heard of. Mdran (point) is also mentioned in tho Wellington, dispatches. . He certainly played a good game, and was worth his place, but what about Stewart (point), on the Auckland side. He had more hard work to do than Moran, and did it equally as well. 'We have.not, however, heard of his play. O'Loary . (cover-point - for Wellington)" is commonly believed to have made, the most of/every opportunity.: He was a good man on the day, as he always is, but why not extend the same recognition to the sturdy efforts of Auckland's "cover-point," Brown? Proud is spoken of as having played "a safe game." He usually does. On Coronation.Day lie did not. 'Still, Kelly, who was one of the most brilliant players of the Auckland, defence, is not -heard, of at. all. One might go. right through' the list. "We Won for Certain Reasons." We ■ won for • certain reasons, and because we won we forgot why. Meyer, for -instance, was brilliant, and it was a treat to see the way in which he caught the ball. He was sluggish and uncertain at the start, and we forget the fact. He certainly played a good game, but so did Auckland "third man," Swales, who, thon«h only a bov. beat his man repeatedly," and shot the best goal of tho day. Let-us be just, if not generous. We won by. 12 goals to i, and we are just about forgetting why. Renkin played well at centre. Leyuon and Ryder were both good as wing-attacks, and Ryder, in particular, was'at the top of his form. Grant was well marked by Stewart, but. put up a serviceable game, while Fama played the best game of his-life. Meyer opened the attack well, and got some pretty shots, whilst King and Jordan were always after the ball when it came their way. Proud was good at times, with a'tendency to lose sight of his man. O'Leary did a lot of work in his usually neat style. Moran had not. too much to do, but did it vigorously and .successfully, whilst Eeg, in ggal, stopped such shots as came his way in. good style. ■ '~.'■ Wellingtons chief weakness rested m the fact that their shooting was not very true. The weakness of the Auckland wing-attacks brought the ball their way more often than they arc, in future, reasonably entitled to expect,, and still'they did not make the best use of their opportunities. Out of about thirty shots they got through twelve. Auckland got through four out'of about seven. ' For Auckland, Edwards (goal) was quite successful, and protected his nets in good style. Stewart 'was /vourcoful and active, Brown was fleet-footed and strenuous, while Kelly was one of the best' defence men on the ground. A. Brown is not quite strenuous enough in his play. J. Walters is a,tried goal, and in that position is, perhaps, the best man in the Dominion. At "third man," he is not convincing, and is far too fond of trying to beat his opponent. He was greatly responsible for the weakness of the Auckland wing-attacks. Still hodid much hard work. Swales played a resourceful and fruitful game at.."third home." Walton is accurate with the stick, but is getting o'trifle stale, whilst young Philson is improved from last year.' On the wingattacks, Nolan was not convincing. He mado openings, certainly, which were not seconded by the man with the ball, and was frequently in the best of shooting positions. But Nolan is too slow for effective attack 'work. Jlalle.r was weak. 'He. is a youug nlayer with plenty nf enthusiasm, but hardly knows sufficient for Kine'. For-him if. may be said that, I when bis ream was aUacVvnp. \io -\\-ns frequently on the attacking side of his m«n. ... The same was a eood one. and I am pleased to see that the local (earn proved victors li.r a substantial margin. I foe] anxious for another, victory next year, and, in Irving t-> vewiinrt o«v players if the necessity of fccpins in trim notwithstanding, victory. I eon only rencat my stntrmcnK "We iron' by 13 cwijs to t. and we are inst about ■ forgetting- why." Mr. Tll'Tiovprn was a cmnpoVpiit'rpferrp. Mr. .Tanfko (selector) should feel nrnwl of tho success which His chosen have attained. The Proud'flip fixtures will be resumed rn-dny. Well-'utoti will nice' IColburue at the, Basin Reserve, while Capitol and Columbia' 'ry their strength at Dnppa Street. Mr. Antlxfan wf/1 hlw Wiarco of (V former match, wMlst Mr. Murray will hold the whilst at Duppa Street. '

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/DOM19110701.2.151.5

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1168, 1 July 1911, Page 18

Word count
Tapeke kupu
1,104

LACROSSE Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1168, 1 July 1911, Page 18

LACROSSE Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1168, 1 July 1911, Page 18

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert