THE WING-FORWARD

Hokitika Guardian, 9 May 1929, Page 2

THE WING-FORWARD

31 It A. J. GEDDES’ VIEWS

(From the N.Z. Sportsman.)

3rr Arthur J. Geddes is one of the most prominent Rugby administrators in the Dominion to-day. Mr Geddes speaks as a player, referee, and selector. After giving up playing some 30 years ago be took up refereeing and was considered (one of the best rep. match referees in the South Island. He is well known as Southland’s selector and also as selector of Now Zealand teams during the past five ydars. Mr Geddes would like to see the wing-forward done away with and the referee put the ball in the scrum. He writes:— “Is*the wing-forward a necessary adjunct to modern football?” is a question that has been occupying the minds of all true lovers of Rugby for some considerable time east, and more particularly since the amending “kicking into* touch” rule has boon in vogue. WING-FORAYART) A HINDRANCE. “As every footballer is aware, the new rule was adonfnd a fair years ago with the idea of brightening up the game of Rugby in the Dominion, and white in some respects it has achieved its object, the game to my mind, would ho still brighter and bettor if .the wing-forward was abolished. L r ad with interest 3Tr J. AY. Stead’s article on the question, and T heartily endorse what lie lias said, both in icgard to the 'wing-forward and the referee putting the ball in the scrum. “T, like Mr Stead, played- Rugby both with and without tb§ wing-for-ward, and, later on, as a referee, put the ball in the scrum both in club and interprovincial mat olios. I. am firmly of tlio opinion that a return to the old practice of the referee putting the ball into the scrum is highly desirable, in the interest of the game, and, whether the wing-forward is aoolished or not. II am strongly opposed to the halfbacks. or any other player, undertaking this duty. <)[ have spoken to several fiveeighth nlayers who have played with the half-back putting the bull in Hie scrum, and they are firmly of the opinion that they are knocked about more by the breakaway forwards charging l at them through having to hesitate, to see whifh way the half is going to throw the. hall after lie rctfirns to his position. In many cases he has to take his pass Standing, which has a big tendency to slow up the game, and at the same time he lias to take an unnecessary. Ipt.of punishment, which could 'bo avoided if the referee was to co-operato by putting the ball in the scrum.

REFEREE SHOULD CONTROL

SCRUM BALL. «. “I iwifcncssod a game last season, Auckland v. South Canterbury, at ,Timaru, in which Auckland played the jpilesenjt-day iV.Z. .scrum, with a, wing-forward, while Canterbury adopted the 3—2—3 sj|nmi formation, necessitating tlio halfback putting the ball in tlie scrum. ' In almost every case when South Canterbury hooked the ball, the opposing wing-forward was round on the half as soon as ho took bis position, with the result that the ball very rarely got past the half, and the good work of the front row men went for nothing, on account of the big handicap put on the half through having to fill the dual positions. It is needless to say that the game had not proceeded long before South Canterbury were forced to put out a wing-forward, to save their half; but if the referee had been putting the ball in the scrum, it would not have been necessary to make this change. The wing-forward is out to beat the referee at every opportunity, but I maintain that tlie referee can control the scrum work much better if he would do the job himself., and lie would, at tlie same time, get more pleasure out of his duties than he does at the present time with the pkiycrs operating the ball. “The N.Z. team is to leave shortly on ca visit to Australia, where the wing-forward is looked upon as a spoiler, and, in the eyes of the referee, a menace to the game. It would lie a great opportunity to do away with the wing-fonvard during that tour, and at tlie same time invito the Australian referees to put the ball in the scrum. “I hope the question of-.th'o wingforward will he discussed at the animal meeting of the N.Z. Union next month, and that a recommendation will he carried asking all unions to abolish the position for this (season, and at the same time, ask for tlie cooperation of all referees’ associations to instruct their officials accordingly. I feel confident, if this is done, we would have hotter and brighter football all round. DOES NOT FAVOUR 3-2-3. “I am not in favour of the 3—2—3 scrum formations. I firmly believe that our present-day scrum, properly packed, and tlie players, made to realise that they are there to use their weight, would bo able to bold a 3_2—3 scrum. If necessary, the wing-forward can be used in the back row as a second lock, which would form a wedge formation that, tinder ordinary conditions, would bold and push any other pack that may he pitted against it. There are many \\a\s

of using the spare man if tile wing forward’s position is done away with (which could be left to the judgment of thoso controlling the teams), such as two full-backs or four three-quar-ter backs, or, as I have suggested, using the player in the back row. “I fully realise, in writing these comments, that I am opening up a big question, which may bring forth opposition in certain circles; hut T am firmly of the opinion that the gamo can be mado much better with the wing-fonvard out of the way, providing that we can get the support that nil'll be required from the referees throughout the Dominion.’»