RUGBY TESTS

Hokitika Guardian, 20 June 1930, Page 8

RUGBY TESTS

CAN BRITAIN WIN. (Auckland Star.) The fascination of Rugby’ is its uncertainty. Away clown the corridor of the past-—1894 to be precise—a New South Wales team came to New Zealand, was liberally beaten uy all the provinces, and, finally, to the surprise ot themselvs and much more i\ew Zealanders, they won the sole jest match of the tour, which was played at Christchurch. Just as pride comes before a fall, so defeat has a chastening effect. I is equally true that history has a. tricky ha.bit of repeating itself. Just two seasons ago, New Zealand tasted the bitterness of defeat in two Test matches in South Africa. Yet those defeats led to better endeavour and the squaring of the rubber before the Test series was completed.

THE AI ram Y-G O-ROIJND. Up until the Wellington match, the British team sailed merrily on the.r winning way. then came defeat by a potted goal in a match which they were unlucky to lose. Against Can-

terbury the team they fielded was not nearly so strong as the one beaten by Wellington. The best side the Englishmen can field a still highly .dangerous combination. They are sure to have learned a lot by their two defeats.

Memories of the All Blacks’ tour of South Africa come racing through toe mind. This British tour so far is a tale of South Africa all over again. Just as the All Blacks had to change their methods against the Springboks, so will the British team have to make a change against New Zealand. The merry-go-ronud of football is telling 'its tale. In 1924, the All Blacks in England were named “The Juvincibles.” At that time, New Zealand forwards were developing the “shilling” game, the fast, loose style of play. And England, paralysed by their sweeping attacks, and appalled by its own defeat, was nevertheless full of praise for the brilliant play ol tiie All Blacks. Since 1924, if tins British team reflects the present-day style of play at Home, the old traditions or British forward play have been forsaken, the old lnembfls have gone by the board, and in their plate more lias been developed the fast>roaking “shiner” type •of forward. Solid scrummaging, for which once upon, a time the English forwards were famous, has apparently been forgotten. Prentice's team lias come to play New Zealand at its own game, i.ney have sue. ceded in all but two matches. Line ot the biggest factors in those two defeats was me sonti scrummaging of the local packs. rud.,i rioL’in a Hula. So the Brii.sh have caused a surprise by their last a-i.d loose forward piay, a.id in tneir turn they have oeen surpiised at me excellent pack worn at Wellington and Lanteroury. .so far as New Zealand is co nee lined, me South African ciiuk&i.s have come home to roost. VVe in New Zealand have benefited by ti.e bitter lesson tne Springboks taught us in the fiist test ot t fie i92tt tour and we have realised that to w.n the ball in the scrums, solid scrummaging is essential. No longer will the selectors tolerate the “shiner,” and it was not surprising to hear a selector at the -rial match at Palmerston North the other day tell the two packs that any man who did not scrummage effectively, would not lor a moment be considered.

Realising then, that New Zealand teams have settled' down to solid .scrummaging again, is it likely that the British will continue their “shining” tactics? It is likely that we will see in the tests Ivor Jones, the famous breakaway, and Prentice, and vv ilkinson each resting with just one Hand on the pack. 1 ' Hardly. When tiie British forwards scrummage as British forwards can, it- ivill he a desperate battle just as it was in South Africa in 1928.

These British players produce attractive football: They are, without doubt, reilecting the lessons they learned from the All Blacks of 1924. The whole team backs up splendidly, and their positional play is superb. Their oacks have great pace, resource and judgement. They launch attack after attack with lightning rapidity, and often bewilder the defence with tneir fast and incisive methods. They

have a brilliant footballer in R. S. Sp'ong, the stand-off half, who has the characteristics of a Bert Cooke. He has the speed of Cooke, the thrust of Cooke, and the brilliance of Cooke, but lie has not that touch of genius which is all Cooke’s.

THE LOSS OF SOBEY

It is unfortunate for the tourists that they have lost the services, in the meantime at least, of Sobey, a scrum-half of many gifts. So far the Britishers have not fielded the famous Sobey-,Spong combination. Poole and Hurray have served as the substitutes ror Sobey, and aithongn Murray . is really a three-quarter he has turned out to he quite a serviceable half. The three-quarter line is a last quartet. There is Bowcott, who never fails to run straight, and Aarvold, who on his day is brilliant, and Morley, one of I he trickiest wing three-quarters who have collie this way for many a day. 'I he handling of the hacks is superb. 1 hey can give and take a pass from any angle, Their style of attack is

now our style. No longer do they depend entirely on their wings. Their inside hacks know the art of penetration. Jhe team plays hard football, robust, fast football, but it lias not the appreciation of the tactical side that New Zealand teams have. Too often thy open rip tli£ game in their own twenty-five. Such a move is always attractive to watch, and may he dangerous if the hacks get properly going, nut it appears to he unneessary when they have such fine line kicks in the team as Spong am. Bowcott. The British forwards do not get a sfranglomld on the game as the work is filling on the hacks. It is a good side, his British side. and. as Hark Xicli>l Is was overheard to remark after the iVcllington match, “Put Bennie Osier, tie famous South African fly-half, holind the pack, and they would be a jreat side.”