01 December 1923

CHAMPIONS MASTERED

 KINGSTON ROVERS LET OFF LIGHTLY AT FEATHERSTONE

How to account for the ineptitude of the Rugby League champions and their defeat at Featherstone is a point that might puzzle the most profound expounders of football philosophy. It is true that the conditions made it bad for both sides; but, even so the play of the majority of those in the losing team was so emphatically lacking in almost everything that goes to make up even passable performance that the effort to find an adequate explanation of the visitors' failure can only be partially successful.

Adopting a defensive policy, even though enjoying the assistance of a slight back wind, the Rovers from Hull were more or less passive resisters from the first. Their quiet start presaged the tone and tenor of subsequent events, and so far as they were concerned in attack, exciting moments were much like unto the terrestrial journeys of angels.

FORWARDS OUTPLAYED

During the first half the Champions supplied an occasional attack, but their forwards appeared more or less helpless against heavier and faster set, who also packed with precision and purpose. In consequence of this uneveness in front, the visitors' backs had precious few chances of showing any ability except in defence.

On a muddy surface, the Colliers were the better footballers, and had much greater number of scoring chances, but the defence of the visitors was dour, as well as lucky. In the circumstances, a two goals victory for the homesters was well-merited, indeed, had Featherstone more than doubled their score, no one could have quarrelled with the verdict. The winners kept their hold on the ball with a certain degree of skill, and it was only when they came within scoring range that their efforts were wasted.

THE WINNING SCORES

It is true that Featherstone only won by two penalty goals, which was reflection on the tactics pursued by the losers. This seemed a pity, because the game, on whole, was not excessively rough. I think that both the scoring penalties were awarded for illegal work at the expense of Jack Hirst, who played excellently throughout. Had the winners been as well equipped on the extreme wings they would have scored at least two tries, as quite apart from Kingston Rovers' sterling defence there was a woeful lack of finish in the winners' work.

I heard that Needham, who has had to be surrendered to Castleford again, is in a class a long way ahead of Kirkham as a scrimmage half-bark, but behind winning forwards the latter player was good enough on Saturday. Milton on the losing side sustained a nasty kick early in the game, which did not help to sparkle him up. However, he played gamely behind forwards who were out-generalled, and Mclntyre lent his companion such excellent assistance in the effort to curb the home half-backs as to rank among the efficient men on the losing side.

RESOLUTE DEFENDERS.

The Kingston Rovers' threequarters were given little time to evolve attacking campaigns. They tackled with fine courage and deadliness, and Harris revealed sufficient speed to save a couple of tries. He was the only member of the line that seemed to get a scoring chance, and in being tempted to kick over the head of an opponent, he discounted what chance he had of getting through the opposition. On another occasion in the second half the ball was kicked square across the field where J.H. Wilkinson was racing along, but, though doing his best, he had not the necessary speed to turn what might have proved a winning opening to account. I cannot recall any other real chances falling to the visiting players, whose weakness the front rank was the chief cause of failure. Boagey probably did the soundest work here.

The best feature of the game far as the losers were concerned was the almost faultless work accomplished "China" Brett at full back. I don't think that he made false kick, and though there were long spells when Featherstone attacked with great spirit, he never turned a hair. Sid Denton, the home custodian, was often cheered by the 1,500 spectators on the most depressing afternoon we have had this season, but the home full back almost invariably had plenty of room in which to operate, whereas Brett was generally surrounded by the enemy. For the majority of the losers it was one of their unhappy days.

Hull Daily Mail 3 December 1923