RUGBY RULES

Hokitika Guardian, 31 May 1932, Page 3

RUGBY RULES

NEW ZEALAND’S DECISIONS.

HOME PEOPLE GRATIFIED

LONDON, April 27

The decisions taken at the annual meeting of the New Zealand Rugby Football Union regarding scrummage formation, resulting in the abolition of the wing-forward, have naturally been the subject of comment in Rugby circles in this country. It may be taken lor granted that members of ihe English Union are pleased, though they retain their usual silence when approached by a representative of the Press. The “Sporting Chronicle”' (Manchester), 'however, goes 'straight to the point, and proclaims 'as a natural sequence of the decisions the right of New Zealand to representation on the International Board. The “Sporting Chronicle” says—

There is a touch of the ti ue'British spirit in the reply which the New Zealand Rugby Union have just given to the invitation to take a. seat on the Commission which is proposed to be set lip for the consideration of the interests in the game in the Dominions. The New Zealand Union formally expressed thanks for the offer (which, by tile way, emanated from the International Board), but declined to become a member of the Commission, adding that until they were given a seat on the supreme body of control, they would be content with affiliation with the English Rugby Union, on whose committee they are directly represented,

Scottish Objections

It is well known that the English Rugby Union considers that both New Zealand and South Africa ought to be granted a seat each on the International Board as being the supreme controlling body in the Rugby game. Tile chief objectors are the Scottish Union.

Tn a manifesto published' in May, 1928, the Scots explained that the hoard was formed for the purpose of framing laws of the game for international matches and the settlement of international disputes.

They quoted comments by colonial representatives to show that the principle underlying their gqvernment was to speed-up the game and make it more spectacular; and they bodily added that these reasons had not the sympathy of the Scottish Union Committee.

Seeing that the New Zealanders have accepted all the law changes and rulings laid down by the International Board for the season now closing, it surely ought to be patent to the Scots that the presence of the Dominion representative on the International Boat'd would be for the general strength of the game throughout the Empire. The view in the rank and file of Rugby must he that the time has come when the Scottish authorities should relax the reserve in this matter and begin to act as well as to think Imperially

The New Zealand Union have accepted the invitation to send a team to the United Kingdom in 1936 37. They will have got used to the British formation and to the abolition of the wingforward by that time.

Difficulties in Home Rugby

Although members of the N.Z.TLF.U. are probably fully conversant with the forces and feelings which underlay the friction that has from time to time arisen between New Zealand and the International Board, the matter is possibly not so well understood by the. general public. Scotland, .if course, consider themselves the purists of the Utigby game, and they even go so far as to prohibit the numbering of theii players in international matches, much to the an novnnee of the public at 'I wickenham On the other hand, they a-v. doubtless just as keen lor gate-money as an\ other Union, so their disregard for the convenience of the public is somewhat inconsistent

Now, of recent years, the s'-rumniarro formation lias been a difficulty' in t-jus couiitr g even where every team the 3-2-3 formation. Referees have acted with varying degrees of lenienty in their penalties in regard to breaches of the rules in the scrummage. A too-strict referee has not only the teams to consider but the impatient and irate spectators. It is only natural that he should sometimes compromise. There is among the controllers of the game a decided dislike for the specialisation that lias developed in serum work, and there ar e those who would like to see a reversion to the old lack of system when the first men who came up formed the front row and the rest took a imposition and pushed.

With these difficulties of their own it it perhaps natural that the authorities in Great Britain should he irritated to have to eon side:-, in legislating for the game, a country which had developed a formation and a scrummage play entirely different from the others. There is no doubt that the genera,! feeling was that’if New Zealand wouVj give up their 2-3-2 formation it would lie an easier matter to frame scrummage rules that could really he carried out. The decision of the New Zealand Union is. therefore, most weleome, and the corollary which follows—the aholi-

tion of the wing-forward—is naturalh also welcomed. Question of Psychology. When a young and small country beats an old and powe.ful competitoj there is -a danger of developing a seriousness in regard to die game which may develop into a. “complex,” ■) New Zealanders • ever did suffer from an “inferiority complex” tneir recen. decisions are indisputable evidence thul- - have overcome ..it. A.ter all, New Zealand has done so well in the past that she can well afford to lie generous and open-handed. Even before now sin might in effect have said: “You doll i like, our scrummage and wing-lonvart play. That is quite a- small matter. Wcan well afford to alter that and \v< shall get. on just as well. Can wo. con form in any other way to your play: It is quite immaterial to us. The,si little matters don’t trouble us.” ■ Such an attitude would long ag" have removed any friction, and possibK would have shamed the Scottish llnim into acting more reasonably ■and Imperially. ... In the meantime our good friend 1 , the English Union will have every sym patliy in our re using tin* suggested “Commission” —the shadow for the sub stance and they will find considerabL more satisfaction in forwarding Nc Zealand’s claims now that the ei.ntro versy about formations and wing-tor ward is cleared from the arena.