ROWING.

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1491, 13 July 1912, Page 12

ROWING.

[Bγ "Hebcbey."]

OUR DEADLY PAROCHIALISM. July 18 and 19.—Olympiad Bowing Events, Stockholm. July 29.—World's Championship i Arnst ■ v. Barry, the Thames.

"Well Done, Australia!" The heartiest congratulations to the Australians for their great win at the recent Henley Royal Eegatta are in order, and all rowing men in the Dominion will re-echo the sentiment expressed in the cable of the president of tho N.ZA.B.A. to tho .authorities across the Tasman, "Well done, Australia." To tho New South Walos Association, in particular, tho success of the Olympic Eight must.be singularly pleasing, as it is to the enterprise and enthusiasm of this body that the crew was enabled to bo sent, and tho victory achieved.

Outside the Pale. '. There is a fly in the ointment for Now Zealandors, however, which ia this. Now that our Australian cousins have proved il'eir worth against tho oarsmen of tho Old World, more than eve; , must it be borno homo to us that tlio recent deoreo of the N.Z.A.8.A., that our amateur definition is not to bo so, amended as to allow of our competing with, and against, Australian oarsmen, was a ead and farreaching mistake. ' Wo can now but join in tho general satisfaction as outsiders. In our present state of splendid (?) isolation, we can take- no more intimate' pleasure in the fact that tho Australians splendid showing has placed their rowing fairly among tho world s" best than can participants in any _ othor sport. As oarsmen, wo aro outside tho there by the act of our own associations. When this matter was discussed in w^ 0 a "° luml is—at tho time of the n.6. A.R.A. b enactment some weeks ogo —the writer then pointed out the benefits from which the retention of our present amateur codo .was cutting us off. Chief among these was the privilege of competing against oarsmen l overseas, ia general and Australians in particular. At that time, perhaps, this did not appear to bo e sovcro deprivation-there may not hare appeared. to bo a great deal in carrying our, rowing outside our own waters. aut how different arc things rion-, and now much more marked will tho'difference be if tho Australians win at the Games next week? Then will we hare tiie proved world's best in nmateur rowing right at our door, 60 to speak ready and willing to extend to us the glad hand and to accept us as ono of themselves. , . .•'

And What are we Golngfo do-About It? And WG-what are we going to do about i » 7? stlll to B° on depriving ourselves of the opportunities to .benefit our sport, and to prove our worth before tho world for the sate of petty duly feeling and parochialism. Surely not! , It is admitted that tho work entailed m putting our house in order will bo found troublesomo-the constitution of a big body like the N.Z.A.R.A. cannot, .of course, bo altered by a stroke of tho pen—but would not tho ultimate benefit bo worth some trouble? Certainly it would—it has always been worth it,'and now it would be well worth while even to_ completely dismantle tho present constitution of the association, and to reestablish the governing body on a footing that would place our rowing men on a competitive equality with those of other countries.

Let Us Talk It Over. Just one other feature of the case may be advanced at this juncture, although in reality it has no bearing on the ethics of tho matter. It has no tearing, for the reason that our present locus slandi is either a sound one or it is not, quite apart from the prowess of our oarsmen iii Now Zealand. Tho fact that New Zealand crews may or may not a chance of teating Australian crows is in no way responsible for tho desiro that they should be given tho right of attempting to do so. This aspect of Hie case is quite , by the way. Ann yet, as it may possibly count in the scale, it is worth a passing glance. Tho question then arises as to how New Zealand crews mensuro up with the Australians now that wo know to a certain extent (and shnll know more next week) liow the Australians mensuro up witk/ho Canadians and European crews. ■ It is not such an easy question to answer os it might appear. This issue is complicated by the fact that while all big New Zealand rowing ie dono in fours, in Australia it is done in eights. Exactly what difference this makes is hard to say, but presumably it is not a gieat deal. Four-oared rowing calls for neater work ami finer watermanship—"sitting tho boat" is a far bigger factor than in eights—whilo in tho latter boats strength, endurance, and combination— essentially combination—aro tho big factors, given a good stylo of rowing in the first place, and of this more anon. In : eight-oar rowing wo have no grounds of comparison with (ho Australians, but in fours we can safely assert that New Zealand oarsmen have proved themselves , lo l>o at least as good. It will be remembered that three years ago, at tho Australasian Champion Fours, at Ilonni't (rowed beforo tho embargo was placed on bur men on account of our amateur code), tho two Now Zealand crews (Wanganui Union and Blenheim)' secured lirst and second places respectively with ease, the nearest Australian boat 'being four lengths behind nnr second crew. It does not, of course, follow that the stylo of rowing that makes for success in fours would be ns .suitable for eights and vico versa, which.

may ■ have militated against tho Aus tralians on this occasion, but, as said abovo, wo may safely assume that this raco showed our form to be at least as food as theirs. Is it not a pity, then now that their form is hall-marked, thai we cannot tost oura against it? Other Places, Other Styles. Now to the question of stylo. A Henley thoro were tho English crews, tin Canadians, and tho victorious Australians For the purposes of this discussion, tin two latter may bo considered us cue, a: they each differ from the English' In tin same respects—chiefly in the shortaninj of tho swing fore and aft. Tho general consensus of opinion in th< Homo papers, judging from tho cabl< messages (Guy Nickalls to the con trary), appears to ho that the time luw arrived for a commission to Iμ tot up U inquire into tho eflieucy of tho Englisl etj-10. In tho Grand Challenge boats, tin only crew to trouble tho Australian seriously was tho Canadian eight, row ing a similar style, while tho Englisl crews, tho New College, and the Ijeandei Club were defeated without difficulty Thero appears to bo a moral in this. Next week, at tho Games, in additior thero will bo tho Continental styles to con tend with. Tho chief exponents of thes< will l)e tho Swedish and Belgian crews Of the former, "Mercury" must confes to complete ignorance, but tho short, han jabbing methods of the Belgians, all icrl and leg drive, are well known to follow ers of rowing. Thus in the English and the Belgiar styles \ro liavo tho two extremes, Aus fcralia and Canada come somewhere in. between, and as far as one can judge, th< present most successful stroke in Not* Zealand—that adopted by tho Blenheim, l J icton, and Wangamii Union crows—musi Mine somewhere between tho Australian md tho Belgian. Another detail of difference is that ivbeims the' English boats pro "sideseated," tho Australians (and ours) arc 'centre-seated," which to the Antipodean idea makes for a better balance and 'run." A good idea of tho Australian wing in comparison to tho English , jivon in tho following extract from an irticlo' by aoi Australian expert:— Mere' Australia Differs. So far as ono can judge from photographs of English oarsmen in action, it seems to us that they havo a tendency to over-reach. True, they have a tremendous swing forward; true at that moment the physical power, of the body is the greater; but, speaking with reference to many models which have fallen under review, they seem to got, quite frequently, a reach which, according to our ideas, is not a legitimate ouo; tho shoulders, instead of being braced back in their sockets at the crucial timo in an endeavour to get more water, over-reach. Again, it is suggested, noj; without some hesitation, that those who unfavourably criticise tho length of our forward swing havo failed really to perceivo its true length. Unless the catch is very carcfuly watched, the Australian crew no doubt will bo credited with being even shorter forward than they in fact are. It has been a feature of our rowing for some years that the men, immediately the water is caught, come up quickly, not with a pronounced shoulder lift, but, nevertheless, quickly, and crows that rowtins way, oven here, havo been voted short at the catch, while, in fact, they were not so. Now, as regards the swing back at tho finish, our oarsmen in this respect, too, havo not slavishly followed English models—whether , with good or ill results events alono can prove. But, on tho contrary, whilo swinging well back to it, they have not "laid down" at the finish. Our objections to tho practice, shortly, are: Firstly, because at that moment the power applied, both physical and mechanical, is comparatively weak, tho oar by this time beingl at an aeuto angle to the boat. Then, again, the rcry long finish occasions, according to our ideas, moro exhaustion to tho oarsman than is compensated for. by additional speed, and for this reason, that his stomach muscles, which have principally to boar the brunt of recovery, aro by far ■ tho weakest—a chain is no stronger than its weakest link. Besides, by moving the slide and l body quickly for- i ward again on recovery tho head of the boat is released, and that, too, tends to • < greater pace.', '

The "Diamond , ' Scullers. Disappointment will bo felt- in Australia.particularly in Tasmania,,at'the defeat; of 'Cecil McVilly in tho Diamond hculls nt Echley, but Borne balm is to b© found in- tho fast that liis conqueror A J M'Culloch, is also nn Australian. J. lie latter won tho Diamonds some years buck, and is a big man of tho rough, rather than stylisli, order of sculler.