A NEW ZEALANDERS’ IMPRESSIONS.

Shannon News, 14 November 1924, Page 4

A NEW ZEALANDERS’ IMPRESSIONS.

(By R. BARR) Special “Times”. Representative ‘All Blacks.”

GLOUCESTER, September 25, 1924. The All Blacks were again triumphant in their fourth match of the British Isles tour 'against a strong side representing Gloucester by two tries (6 . points) to nil. The small score in New Zealand’s favour does not accur. ately represent the respective merits of the contestants, as* on the run of the play, the All Blacks showed marked superiority in every department of the game. |A bigger score might easily have been recorded' had the All Blacks received their due, but th e rulings of English referees are beyond belief and past, all understanding. The rulings and interpretations are so foreign to New Zealand that the All Blacks are handicapped at the outset of every game by the decisions of the

referee. This .unfortunate position was created in marked degree in the opening match of the tour against Devon County, when the referees, by strange and ;at times weird and disconcerting interpretations and rulings of the laws of Rugby, completely upset the All Blacks’ play. There was little improvement in the second match against Cornwall, and, again, no less so, against Somerset, while the fourth match against Gloucester’ still leaves the All Blacks “(thinking.” Uniformity and, not to say, intelligent interpretations of the rules of Rugby, are absolutely imperative if <the game and its standard is to improve in England. As an illustration of a position prevailing'to-day 'in English County matches, taking a line through the contest against Gloucester, at Kingsholme ground, on Thursday, September '2sth, the game—or rathe/r the, rulings of the game, and the alleged infringements created in the play, accounting for no less than xlO line-outs, 47 scrums, 13 of which were twice j formed, four three times and five on two occasions. These scrum statistics are accurate records of what took .place. New Zealand supporters may imagine the effect on the game and ,the playnig of it. If New Zealand Rugby had reached this stage, as it has in England, every grouiid throughout the Dominion would be Closed up. New Zealand spectators would not stand for it, but English supporters have to accept it, whether they like it or not. v The lessons taught by the famous AH Blacks have long since been forgotten, the system and style of play are reminiscent of the first stages of Rugby, when scrum and maul tired tortured brain. The standard has improved' in most of the counties, but the - old stereotyped methods on attack and systems still prevail to the hurt and distress of the national game. Where ■ The All Blacks Have Failed. Where the All Blacks have failed in their contests agai’nst Devon, Cornwall, Somerset and Gloucester j Counties, is, strangely enough in the scrums,’ and line-outs, in which department the New Zealanders have invariably beeh beaten, though net j out-played or out-classed, i Had the All Blacks the enhances afforded the four counties from the j scrums and line-outs, I hesitate ,to J think what might have happened to ( Devon, Cornwall, Somerset and Gloucester. , ' The lamentable lack of combination and accurate team play has also been an unfortunate factor in the finishing touches, the backs playing* a purely individual game, only on occasion | backing up in support of each .other j In the passing rushes. Frequently they j were forced to play such a game of individualism, that two tries were thrown away. Lucas, in truth, has not; yet settled down to his game, allowing for the fact that the grounds on which three contests, Devon, Somerset, and Gloucester, were in such a shocking condition owing to heavy rains. It was utterly futile and hopeless to anticipate any certainty in the passing and fielding—which for the. most part, with a wet 'and greasy. ball, has been faulty and Uncertain to a degree, while finish has been woefully lacking with the result that almost certain tries have been lost. Another weakness is the failure of ithe team to adapt themselves to the conditions of ground ahd ball, only when too late, and the. opponents have got their measure. This has been so in the two matches played during tue first the third on a sea of slush at Weston-Super-Mare against Somerset aud the latest match on a heavy sodden field at Kingsholme, against Gloucester. It is absurd and ridiculous for the English Press critics to attempt to compare, as they injudiciously have done, the All Blacks of 1905, with the All Blacks of 1924. It does not require a very close study of the game, the style and. systems of play, extending over a period of nearly 20 years, to realise how futile and hopeless it is. The game in England to-, day is of a relatively higher standard

than it was in. 190 5, the styles and systems have materially changed; while ' the pace .is infinitely faster than it | was in the year of 1905, when the j original All Blacks made history. The

I 1924 All Blacks have yet to make hisfory, and they will make it ' against sides vastly stronger thah the Bdzes of 1905. Impossible it is to make any comparison with the respective All Black teams. Whereas the 1905 made fame in England when English Rugby was at a decidedly low ebb, the All Blacks of 1924 have struck Rugby i*a ftlie counties at a distinctly high standard. If the 1905 team played the four Counties, Devon* Cornwall, Somerset and Gloucester to-day that fern, ous team would not have won by such high scores as it did in 1905. The sooner English Press critics • drop this futile attempt to compare, the All Blacks of 1905 with the All; Blacks of 1924, to the attempted hurt 1 and distress of the latter# just so soon

■will they realise-the utter futility of it, when styles, systems, methods ( and movements are so totally divergent over the intervening 20 years.