LADIES’ HOCKEY

Wairarapa Times-Age, 10 July 1939, Page 8

LADIES’ HOCKEY

ADVICE TO PLAYERS

WHAT RECRUITS SHOULD KNOW.

POSITIONAL PLAY

(BY LES. M. MURPHY). (Wellington Ladies’ Hockey Critic.)

This week’s article deals with the importance of positional play, what a wing forward should avoid where necessary, and her waten

word. . n One of the principal axioms laid down by leading exponents of the game which must appeal to those, with a clear perception of the possibilities of the code, is that players should at all times keep their respective positions during a match. It should not be necessary for any player in control of the ball to have to look round to find out where the other members of her team are. If she is in her correct position she should know for a fact to within a few yards where each of her other team mates is at any time during a match. The time lost in searching for an objective' before playing the ball is invariably the time when the ball is lost to an opponent or fumbled between two or more players of the same team. To give effect to this suggestion does not mean clock-work precision. A yard or two in one direction or another is ample manoeuvring area to beat an opponent in or to back her. Players—l particularly refer to those who have been participating in the game for some time and who have not as yet solved the great advantage of positional play —would be amazed how much less really hard work should devolve on them if they only kept as near as possible to their correct places at all times. Should Never Score. In an ideal team and to carry the “position” theory to its logical conclusion, a wing forward should never score. It is, of course, possible for unforeseen circumstances to crop up which may make it convenient for her to rush in to score. For example, if the defenders have been enticed . to one wing, due to the play remaining on that side for a time, a cross pass into the circle may find the inside forward beaten, then the winger, but preferably the wing half, should rush in for a shot, but as quickly shift back again to the vicinity of the live yards line. How many shots are cleared to the side or goal line near the centre. The right wing in particular should hug the five yards line right into the corner, for naturally a goalkeeper’s clearing shot would more than often be returned to the circle only the overeagerness, or want of thought, or something else not in the sphere of her duties, has enticed the winger towards the centre. Watchword at all Times. It is hard work rind calls for any amount of self-control for wing-for-wards to “keep out,” but, nevertheless, it should be their watchword at all times. . ’ . I have time and again pointed out this weakness to Wellington club teams and advised them the same as I am now doing you, and the difference in the play and success of teams was most profound. Still I do not profess it an easy task for players who have not been checked of roaming habits to adopt the positional play for the eagerness to shoot across the field out of position will always remain with one. It will take a tremendous amount of perseverance, but it must be remembered perseverance generally succeeds. (To be Continued next Monday.) REPLY TO MR STUBBINGS. AN UNFORTUNATE ERROR. I am indebted to Mr Arthur N. Stubbings, hon secretary of the Wairarapa Hockey Umpires’ Association, for his promptness in pointing "out a rather Unfortunate error in the interpretation of a rule which appeared in the article of June 20. As it appeared in print,, the interpretation was obviously wrong, the fault not being with the writer, as the original manuscript shows, but in a line being dropped in subsequent transcription, The paragraph to which Mr Stubbings takes exception then read: “...

Ii is not every player who knows that if an attacker shoots at goal, and the ball is sailing into the net over the head of the goalkeeper, and the latter raises her stick over her head and hits the ball out ... that the penalty is a penally bully ... I have seen an umpire give a penalty bully and even a goal ...” The error occurred in the last sentence. “Give a penalty bully.” The original copy slated: "I have seen an umpire give a 25 bully, an absurd ruling, instead of a penalty bully ...”

which certainly reads differently from what was published. If some of the hockey rulings and interpretations in past articles have, as Mr Stubbings infers in his letter, caused dissent in his association, I once again express my humble apology. I would deem it a pleasure if Mr Stubbings would be kind enough it, forward to me, c/o 15 Hall Street, Newtown. Wellington, the actual rulings and interpretations which he considers to be wrong. 1 am open to correction and would appreciate same; none of us is infallible in such matters, even the best of umpires.