THE BETTER TEAM DID WIN

Sun (Auckland), Volume I, Issue 135, 29 August 1927, Page 10

THE BETTER TEAM DID WIN

WHAT THE RECORDS SHOW Long before the League code/ of Rugby football came into existence, a famous New Zealand player laid down an equally famous maxim: "If you’ve got the ball, the other side can’t win.” ‘‘Keep possession,” he said. “Don’t kick it to the other side. Better to run on and be tackled than to kick to an opponent.’’ Essentially, the Auckland Rugby League final on Saturday between Newton and Ponsonby was a battle for possession of the ball, although the game itself was decided on goal-kick-ing. Hardly had play started than it became apparent that a terrific tussle was afoot between the respective forward divisions. Neither team is any great shakes on demonstrating the vital differences between the two codes of Rugby; and it was a curious feature of Saturday’s big game that both sides played more of a Union Rugby game than the real 13-a-side game. TEAM WORK AND INDIVIDUALISTS The reason for this is not far to seek. Newton has a superb pack of grafters in the forwards, and a great little half in Mclntyre, but the inside backs are scarcely equal to the task of opening up an attack on an extended front with that speed and snap which makes the vital difference between success and failure. Further than that, Newton’s star back, Dufty,

is essentially an individualist, with a style of play that is not easily moulded into fast combined work. Mis great all-round ability move than compensates for his comparative slowness on attack, and liis powerful linekicking (either high punting or “scoo-tcr”-kicking) has given Newton a

basis on which its style of play largely rests. Either Dufty gets the line for Somers to again secure possession, or else the backs in general bore into their markers with the obvious idea of bringing their forwards into action again when the ball is played after the tackle. This style of play has proved most effective in Newton's case, and is largely the reason }vhy the Red and Whites are the League champions of 1927. Ponsonby’s game is not so markedly different from that of Newton. What Dufty is to Newton, Tim Peckham is to Ponsonby. A player of surpassing brilliance as a running half, he nevertheless is comparatively weak as a quick and rapid connecting link between backs and forwards from a firmfooted stance behind the pack. Here, again, is the reason for a team, consciously or unconsciously, having modelled its style of play to suit individual requirements. Both Peckham and Gardiner are essentially individualists, and with two of the most important positions in the attacking line tilled by soloists, it necessarily devolves on the rest of the backs to sacrifice themselves so that to some ex-

tent individual brililance may have full play. For instance, the writer thinks that in another team where his attacking ability could have free rein, Riley would be a very brilliant player, but as it is, he must necessarily play in a more subdued role in club football.

THE MARGIN OF ERROR Both teams are more solid than bril-

liant, and both depend largely on mistakes by the opposing sides to yield scores, Newton more so than Ponsonby. As a matter of fact, every point scored on Saturday was the result of mistakes by the opposition, Dufty’s two goals coming from penalties; McNeil’s try from a mistake by Herewini; while the latter in turn profited by a Ponsonby player kicking the ball from right in front of his own line into Herewini’s hands. Under conditions such as these, it can be readily realised why many of the fans at Carlaw Park on Saturday sighed for the brilliant team work that might have been expected from the two leading teams in League Rugby in Auckland. But for those who could appreciate the intricacies of high-class forward £lay, and the grim and deadly tackling, it was a match that will not readily be forgotten either for its fierce intensity or the element of the unexpected, which was again and again in evidence. FIGHT FOR POSSESSION So hot was the battle for possession, and so deadly the tackling, that all the. scores were actually side issues to the general trend of play. None of them came from any well-thought-out plan of attack, but the whole four were part of the price that any team must be prepared to pay for making mistakes in a game where two teams are so evenly matched that the orthodox attacking routes are bottled up. Some people say that Newton was lucky to win, but a close analysis of the game shows that the score bears a fairly accurate relationship to the run of play. Newton got nearly twice as much ball from the scrums, and made fewer serious mistakes, as estimated by the number of free-kicks which were awarded—ls to Newton and 10 to Ponsonby. The overwhelming superiority enjoyed by “Wally” Somers and Co., who secured possession of the ball 58 times out of 88 occasions in which either side was credited with definitely gaining possession of the ball from set scrums, threw the undoubtedly strong Ponsonby rearguard into a defensive role, and in adidtion, as soon as the Newton forwards had done their work in the scrum, they fanned out on an extended front to serve as a screen for their inside backs. Clark, the rugged Newton forward, proved himself a past-master in this branch of play. He was the best forward on the ground, as judged by ordinary standards, but he might very easily have lost the game for Newton by a mistake which was surprising in a player of his calibre. There ought to be a rule posted up in every club room in Auckland to the effect that any forward who tries to pick up a ball with a clean field in front of him and only a dozen yards to go, should have his beer ration stopped for one month. And in a lesser degree, that applies to backs a beneficient providence did not supply footballers with two big and powerful pedal extremities simply to serve as a means to carry bungling hands to the ball. Other good forwards were Stack, Rhodes and Hall (Newton) and Ward, Payne and McNeil (Ponsonby). The latter played a surprisingly good game. Where has Ponsonby been hiding him? Ponsonby was unlucky to lose Usher early in the second spell. The unfortunate part of it was that Hutt had to be pulled out of the pack, leaving the Ponsonby forwards to battle on one short. Still, this is the fortunes of war. THE FULLBACKS Neither of the fullbacks showed up with their accustomed brilliance. The pace was too hot, the following up too keen, to give them much chance for fireworks. Early in the piece Herewini showed signs of cracking up under the pace that was set, and several times he was bustled into weak returns, and once missed so badly that he gave a try away. However, the dusky Newton lad made a gallant recovery, and redeemed his earlier mis-

take by potting a goal which morally clinched the game for Newton. In the second spell he played the right game by running on until tackled when there was little advantage to be gained by kicking. “Chilla” Grey, too, had his off spells. Once he speculated, and missed badly, the Newton forwards surging past him and only being prevented from scoring by the prompt action of Delgrosso. Many of the old hands in the stand started to scratch their heads and tried to remember how long it was that they had ever seen “Chilla” miss one. Most of them gave it up. When all is said and done, however, Grey did enough to make up for that mistake, and leave a lot over to his credit. THE IMPERTURBABLE DUFTY Dufty was his usual imperturbable self throughout the game; never bustled, never at a loss, seeming as if his only care in the world was to properly masticate the generous allowance of “P.K’s,” which must have been allotted him. To him more than any other player is due Newton’s position as club champions for He revived the lost art of “scooter” kicking in a most refreshing manner on Saturday. The only thing Tim Peckham and Mclnytre have in common is size. Their styles are as different as chalk from cheese. Yet both played great football, the former shooting out his passes with unerring swiftness and precision. It was no fault of his that the Newton backs did not make better uso of the opportunities which that prince of hookers, “Wally” Somers, gave them. Peckham, for his part, played magnificently on defence, and even if the palm must go to Mclntyre on the ground that the first essential of a half back is to get the ball out as quickly as possible to his backs, Peekham had the harder task to perform behind a pack that was being beaten for the ball. For all that, Tim shines on defence, and he stuck to his job on Saturday like a hero from start to finish. THE CLUB FIRST Delgrosso was the most serviceable wing-threequarter on the ground. “Delly” has had to sacrifice his own interests this year for that of his side,

having had to play a sort of “jack-of-all-trades” role, but he has been consistently good throughout the season. The same remark applies to Morman, the Newton skipper, a rare grafter, wh gave up the wing- threequarter berth to fill a position inside for which he is scarcely suited. This is the club spirit in its best form, and while it does gain men rep. caps, it is worth infinitely more in esprit de corps. With so much at stake, it would not have been surprising if tempers nad got on edge in some of the fierce clashes that took place during the game. But while the game was hard, it was pleasantly free from some of those “incidents” which have marred other club games this year, and both sides are to be congratulated on their fine sporting display. A word of appreciation is also due to Mr. Bull for the manner in which he controlled the game.