Brilliance Muzzled

Sun (Auckland), Volume II, Issue 396, 3 July 1928, Page 9

Brilliance Muzzled

HOW THE SPRINGBOKS WON Hour Battle of Forwards ( V nited P.A.—By Telegraph Copyright) i Special to Press Association.) Tii o. DURBAN, Monday. ILL newspapers throughout South Africa devote columns al J d leadin » articles to the first Test match with the All Blacks at Natal.

The “Mercury,” in a leader headed, “Triumphs of Tactics,” says: ‘There is one serious question which must inevitably be raised after a game of the type seen at Kingsmead on Saturday. That is the effect of the tactics adopted by the Springboks on the popularity of the game, which must after all be a large consideration with those in authority. “To counteract the brilliance of the New Zealanders in the open South Africa had to close up the game and keep it close throughout. This was done and wonderfully well done. There were many who witnessed the game who asked the questions, ‘ls this Rugby? Is this the best that South Africa, having built up a reputation by brilliant back play, can do?’ “The Springboks in 1906 were capable of playing Wales at her own game and beating her. Should not the Springboks in 1928 be able to beat New Zealand also at her own game? FORCE MATCHES FORCE “The tactics adopted formed a tacit admission of inferiority in that respect, so we had a game that was glorious in the matching of force with force, a remarkable demonstration of the physical fitness of the two teams, but not beautiful to watch. There was none of that captivating back play which has been in the past South Africa’s peculiar pride—none of that swift passing to speedy wing men, followed by exhilarating bursts for the line. “The battle of styles is for the moment over. South Africa has gained the first round, r.nd that so decisively that the tactics followed appear to have been more than abundantly justified. But the general public demands a spectacular game to-day, and if it does not get it that support is liable

to fall away. Eor South African Rugby to prosper the play must count almost as much as the result.” FINEST FORWARD PLAY Mr. F. M. Howard says: ‘‘South Africa won one of the greatest triumphs of her Rugby history when the New Zealanders were beaten oy 17 points to nil in a match which must go down in the records as productive of some of the finest forward play ever seen. For the South African pack, acknowledged to be a fine one, played extraordinary Rugby from the start. It gained such a strangle-hold on the All Blacks that they were never able to get away in their specialty—fine combined attacks with the ball slung about with glorious freedom. ‘‘Never for a moment did the Springboks relax their grip on the game. The All Blacks were pinned down to dour defence for the greater part.” ALL BLACKS ANNOYED Great exception is taken by the New Zealand team to the following paragraph which appeared in the Natal “Mercury”: “It is common talk, based on concrete fact, that everything has not been well, or run as smothly as it might have done for some time in the All Blacks’ camp. “Where the fault lies is not our business to say, but any dissension, or lack of pulling together, must reflect equally upon every member of the party, who should be held together as one man by the thought that they are above all other minor considerations the chosen representatives of their country and charged with upholding the honour of their common homeland in another part of the globe.” Both the manager and the captain of the team strongly deny any suggestion of dissension. The reporter responsible for the paragraph was asked by the All Blacks to substantiate his statement, but he could not do so and he has promised to publish an apology.