"PROGNOSTICATIONS".

Evening Post, Volume CXVI, Issue 49, 26 August 1933, Page 20

"PROGNOSTICATIONS".

In accepting, on behalf of Wellington College Old Boys, congratulations upon the winning of the championship, Mr. J. .Prendovillo (chairman of the Wellington' Rugby Union) made a statement at this week's meeting of the management committee which must not go-unchallenged. "I think our friends the Press," he is reported as saying, "rather missed in their prognostications this year. They now say that tho Old Boys' defence has been particularly weak." So far as "Tho Post" is concerned there is no justification whatsoever forJ the statement. The fact is that the defensive qualities of the Old Boys have been recognised and noted from time to time. The one caso in which Old Boys slipped on defence was in the second round'match with Hutt, and that'fact was duly'recorded. The following arc some of the references made in "Tho Post" this season to Old Boys' defence: — Then came Halt's turn to go with tho wind, and it was then that Old Boys had a very trying ordeal. . . In some cases the attackers lost touch with the ball just as a try seemed imminent, but mostly the defenders (Old Boys) broke in sharply with effective spoiling work, and often burst through to cause a Hult retreat. —May 29. Eastbourne's rearguard functioned well, though generally encountering a strong defence (against Old Boys).— Juno 5. The role of main aggressors was taken over by Petone in the second half, but Old Boys proved to bo a much harder nut to crack than, was expected. Fighting every inch of ground, smothering well, and ever ready to take advantage of tho other side's mistakes, they repeatedly compelled Petone to beat a hurried retreat, the forwards in particular showing fino driving force.—June 19. On defenco Baldwin, Atkins, and Dus-t-in slipped noticeably, even allowing for the excellence of the iilburne-Killoen combination.—July 31.' ' . Old Boys, keyed up to. a high pitch, crashed in repeatedly to smash iip many of the attacking movements initiated from scrummages in which Poncke's backs were rather more liberally served than those of Old Boys. In a keen, hard game there was much to do on defence, and tho resolute manner in which this work was carried out made effective attacking play so much more difficult. Breakdowns were frequent, but in the general run of play Old Boys, back and forward, functioned to much better purpose than Ponekc.—August