THE SPRINGBOKS.

Shannon News, 29 July 1921, Page 4

THE SPRINGBOKS.

IMPRESSIONS OF WELLINGTON | MATCH. The victor of the Springboks in Wellington,has been widely discussed in Rugby circles. The following notes; by Mr R. Smith, of Levin, an old Rep. player, will be read with interest:— t went to Wellington to study the tactics of the Springboks, and have not changed my opinion of them. They are a purely defensive side, and the gale on Saturday tested them to the utmost. They were hard put to it on several occasions to stop Wellington from scoring. However, we cannot put it.all down to the defence of the. Springboks, as I think another factor has to be brought, to bear —that was j the poor method of attack made by the Wellington backs, whose wings were far too slow to take advantage of the openings made. There appears to be a dearth of wing three-quarters in Wellington this season, for the three-quarters all play centre for their clubs; and a centre never'has the nippiness nor the speed to finish off a passing rush. May I give an instance on Saturday. Aitken received the ball at/ the end of a passing bout in the Africans 1 twenty-five. The full-back was the only player in front of Aitken. and he made as if to tackle the Wellingtonian, but the latter beat him. nstead of cracking on all speed and making over the line, Aitken continued at' his usual bat, and a Spring- ' bok came up from behind and collared him. With a speedy wing this would have been a sure try. The two college wings in the curtain.-raiser, one of whom scored three tries and 'he other two, gave a capital idea of what their play should be. Another weakness noticed was the machine-like passing of the Wellington backs—from half to five-eighth, to centre, to wing.• No attempt was made 1o van’ the play during the first half when they had the wind wilh them. The Africans, playing close up to the. Wellington backs, smothered them before they could get the ball away. Roberts tried to get over this-difficulty in the second half by short punts over their heads. This was worse than their passing, for the full-back got it and sent it well down the field and gained ground by this method of attack. I point these failings out to show that the half-back must have initiative—he must either work the blind side of the scrum or beat the opposing backs by a feint pass. This latter method would certainly have worked on Saturday, for when the Wellington half got the ball, the Africans made straight • for the five-; eighths, and they got-the man and the < ball before it got far. In the course of a career which included “big” fodtball for both Otago and Tlorowhenua, the writer used the feint with _ a great deal of success. This method can be brought off- very successfully when close up to the opposing-line. The ball being sent out regulax*iy to the five- ' eighths and so on, is expected there again, and every back opposite you is on the alert. The least movement made towards the usual pass has all the opposing backs moving, and if the half hangs on instead, he simply slips in behind them. That is how the Springbok half scored the second try To sum up the Wellington-side, there is no Wallace or Freddy Roberts among their backs. 'Hie forwards played a sterling game, and more than held their own with their weighty opponents. In the loose rushes they excelled, and in the tight and lin6out were about equal, but they lacked combination. I said that the Africans were a defensive team. That is because the small scores put up by them and their methods of play on Saturday cannot make me think otherwise. Their passing can only he carried out by a team that is constantly playing together. They very seldom draw their man— the ball away when anyone goes 1o tackle them, knowing that some of their men will he there m take, and invariably some one would be there; but they never scored from a passing rush. Another point is when two are running together with the ball, one hands the hall to the other. It is also done on the line-out. The' four three-quarters have a tendency to crowd the wings on the line and cramp their movements. The two half-hacks is an old style that was played in New Zealand and was done away with over thirty years ago after Stoddard’s English team played here. One makes himself a wing forward’, while the other plays behind the ! scrum. j The scrum 3—2—3 and 4—4 formations are all right for a teqm with such weighty forwards as the Afiri- | cans, with the opposing pack < about, equal weight, the 3—3—2 is the j better method, for the Springboks never got the hotter of the Wellington . j pack. The same formation heat , Rffrtel-Sievwright’s 32 —3 formation | 17 years ago. Yet the 4—4 formation ; has something to he said for if. This is purely a defensive scrum, and was resorted to when Wellington was near their line. It enabled them to break

up quicker and fall out when Wellington got the ball, which proved such a stumbling block to the Wellingion backs. As. a combination the Springboks w.ere the belter team, but our players, individually, are as good as any.l saw play. How is New Zealand to get on with them in the test? I think that New Zealand can beat them. Steel and Storey, with Aitken centre (the latter appeared to be out of his place on Saturday) will strengthen the threequarter line, and if Kingston is better than Siddells there is nothing to fear from that quarter. Badley will strengthen the five-eighth attack, and after the display of the Wellington forwards, I. consider the New Zealand pack will more than hold their own.