FOOTBALL.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XLVIII, Issue 3630, 26 April 1927, Page 1

FOOTBALL.

THE WING FORDWAKD. ,

CRITICISM AND SUPPORT.

A debate at the annual conference of the New Zealand Rugby Referees Association, at Masterton on Wednesday, on the correct method of placing the ball in the scrum, created an interesting discussion on the playing of the wingforward, (Who was aptly described by Mi’ T. Fletcher as a “colonial practice as opposed to British traditions.”

The Auckland delegate, Mr F. G. Sutherland, outlined the action taken by the Auckland Union when forced to brighten up the game against the inroads of a rival code. He stated that 90 per cent, of wingforwards gained an illegal advantage when putting the ball into the scrum through calling or signalling to their hookers.

Mr E. S. Hylton, a member of the executive, thought the referees were responsible for the stigma of the wing-forward as they allowed too much latitude. Mr H. J. McKenzie: If the referee puts the ball into the scrum there is no further use for the wingforward. Mr S. S. Dean said that four years ago he had recommended the New Zealand Union to abolish the wing-forward, and he still thought the wing-forward was an encumbrance to the game. Far too much latitude had been allowed, and the wing-forwards had imposed on it. He said that on the tour of the All Blacks in 1924, when Parker and Porter had deserted the scrum for the. roving game, they played better l oot ball, were of greater assistance to their team, and had become more popular with the spectators. Mr D. McKenzie, the veteran president of the Association, defended the wing-forward and claimed that that player had made New Zealand football. He was there ostensibly to open up the game, and the “lighting” at the scrum could be overcome by placing opposing wingforwards on either side of the scrum. The Auckland delegate stated that Aucklanders had found that by removing the wing-forward from the side of the scrum they had developed a blind side live-eighths, and had thus opened up a different avenue of attack. Mr. Fletcher held that those countries playing the 3-2-3 scrum formation had forwards just as clever in obstruction as New Zealand’s wing-forward. This remark was endorsed by Mr Dean, who stated that the English forwards, Blakiston and Voyce, who “merely placed an ear on the scrum,” were greater offenders than ever the New Zealand wing-for-wards were. Mi'. Fletcher added that the wing-forward was a useful member in defence, and for opening up half-back play, and he thought it a pity to abolish him altogether. It was decided to recommend to the New Zealand Union Mi’ McKenzie’s suggestion that opposing wingforwards should occupy positions on either side of the scrum.