THE ALL BLACKS.

Hokitika Guardian, 26 February 1925, Page 4

THE ALL BLACKS.

(By A. J. Harrop, M.A. in “The Press.”) LONDON', Jan. 4. With the close of the British tour, it may he interesting to give some impressions of the players’ performance, in view of the adverse criticisms which the selection of certain members of the team caused. The team had surpassed the 1995 team’s record by losing no match, and has set a new standard which can hardly be surpassed. Deprecatory remarks concerning the 192! All Blacks were made in the early stages of the tour—some of them by members of the 1905 team—and it is only fair that the team should receive praise where praise is due. i Last night 1 heard Dr T. E. Mor- ■ gau who scored the decisive try in the Wales-All Blacks’ match of 190-5, give ! his opinion of the merits of the two teams. Dr Morgan began by remarking- that comparison was difficult ow- | ing to the improvement in English 1 Rugby, but be felt that the following generalisations were true. The 190-, I team was one largely composed of spieii--1 did veterans, whose form, brilliant at . the start of the season, gradually went back, as that of all veteran teams was ' likely to do. The 1924 team was oomi posed of comparative youngsters, whose ■ form gradually improved till it reached ! its climax when it was most wanted. ! The 1924-25 side had established a won- ! derful record, and anyone who knew its members recognised that they were sportsmen to the core. •Mr (!. G. Ait-ken, who was also present at the gathering after the match I referred to the difficulty he himself had i experienced on coming to England in 1 getting used to the different rules and the different and varying interpretations of the rules by British referees. When he saw the first results of the tour he felt that this matter of rules was probably affecting the team’s form to a very considerable extent. He congratulated the members of the team or. a wonderful performance in the face of what be felt certain was a hundred per cent, improvement in .English Rugby as compared with 1905.

THE PLAYERS. Xupia—A sufficiently vivid summary of the prowess of the team’s full-back is given bv Hie fact that be played in twenty-eight consecutive matches and never" left the side down. One of the brightest memories of the great tour will be that of Nepia taking the ball at full-speed and finding touch far down the field. Steel—The brilliant 55 est Coast three-quarter played bis best games when they were most needed. 1 sliali never forget the game he played in the Welsh international at Swansea. Regarded as essentially an attacking three-quarter, lie reached superb heights in defence in that match. In-jni-ml early in the English game, he yet succeeded ill doing bis full share in the achievement of a notable victory. Cooke -Cooke- achieved lasting lame in Rugliv history during the tour. His lightning dashes, quick following-up. ami genius for seizing an opening plcao him on a level with the greatest. In the English match be was closely marked owing to the team being short of a man. but bis sound defence was

conspicuous. Svens,m—The s\'ellitigton three-quar-ter lias scored in practically every important game of the tour. His try against Newport saved the match. Svciison, without being particularly fast, lias contrived to surpass practically every opponent he has met. Nielmlls—The achievements of -51. Nil bolls during the tour require very little comment. They speak for themselves, A Iwavs cool and confident, Mark Nielmlls saved the side in many critical situations.

McGregor---55’bile many reputations were consolidated during the tour. McGregor's became definitely established. Harsh things were said of him before the tour began, but they cannot be said now. In the gruelling contests against Cambridge, Wales and England, -McGregor proved iiimsell a marvel in defence, lie laced forward rushes with unflinching valour all the more praiseworthy, as every match imposes a great nervous strain upon him. Mill—Rather disappointing early in the tour, .51 ill reached his best form at the critical stages of the team’s programme. playing hi-dliant. games almost invariably, fn the English match be performed a double duly with con-

spiriious success. Dailey—The Canterbury ball’s strong defence was particularly valuable in the early stages of the tour, when bard and close games were the rule. Dailey more than justified his inclusion in the

Brown-The compand ivo failure of Brown to rise to the occasion was one of the low disappointments of the (our. He played several sound games. Init did not develop sufficient thrust to qualify for the centre position in the interna-

tional games. Paewai —The Maori live-eighths did not strike very good form during I intour, and there were very lew games in which experiments could be confidently made with the back formation of the team.

1 Bobilliard—lnjury precluded the selection of Bobilliard in many games, but in those in which lie did play lie showed very good promise. Hart—His prolific scoring was a feature of the team’s tour in lire North. He proved better in attack than in defence.

Lucas-—Lucas played many splendid games during the tour, particularly in the second London Clubs’ match. Both in the centre and on the wing he reached a high standard. Badeley—The exclusion of Badcley from most of the games has given rise to some criticism of the selectors, but: in fairness to them, it must be said I link the Aucklander did not strike form when be was tried. It might-have been advisable to give him a chance earlier, Init- the closeness of the early games was some justification of the policy of preservin'' the existing combination. THE FORSVARDS.

Detailed mention of the work of the forwards is perhaps unnecessary. Of the wing-forwards Barker showed the better form and was brilliant in all bis games. Porter failed to produce the form lie displayed in Australia. This was probably due in some measure to the duties of leading the side. Of the hookers Irvine and Donald were generally chosen and they both played very consistently. Munro was early injured, and bis partner McClenrv did not get many games. Of the two locks, Hnr-

vey was for a long period incapacitated by illness, and Masters bad to bear the brunt of this department of the play. .He played exceedingly well throughput the tour. The work of the two Brownlies throughout- lias been magnificent. M. Brownlie must be regarded as one of the finest forwards in the world. Richardson’s play was consistently good throughout the tour. 55'hite. Stewart, 55'est and Chippies wore all excellent vvlien the forwards as a whole settled down to the new methods necessitated liv the opposing scrum formation.