Port vs Norwood, Round 3 1909

[spell_check]

100 years ago, the lowest scoring match ever to take place under the current method of scoring occured. When one glances at the scoreline 1.4 (10) to 0.5 (5), the first thought would be that the ground must have been fence to fence in mud, with pouring rain not ceasing. Well, it did rain throughout the match, with some heavy bursts, but the ground "remained in fair order - with the exception of two small patches, for cricket pitches, the soil is of a sandy nature and absorbs the moisture capitally"

The main reasons the scores were so low (even for 1909) was because of the gale force cross wind, superior defences and weaker forward lines. The players that took part were:
Port: E.M Beare, C.T Cocks, P.Crowley, J.Davies, H.Davis, P.G Dempster, H.B Dewar, J.S Dickson, M.G Donaghy (Capt.), S.Hosking, H.McEwen, J.Mack, W.Manson, E.Mason, H.Pope, H.F Rose, H.Soar, A.Turner.
Norwood: E.Buist, C.McGavisk, L.W Chamberlain, L.McNamara, C.Cope, F.Perry, V.Cresdee, B.Nash, W.L Plunkett, L.R Hill, P.Robin, L.A Lewis, H.W.D Stoddart, P.Thomas, J.Morison, R.J.B Townsend, J.A Bahr (Capt.), L.L Hill.

The teams entering this match were 5th and 6th, Norwood being the former. Port having lost their opening two matches and Norwood winning one of them. Two late changes to Norwood, with Brunel Nash being promoted from the reserve player to replace Gwynne (Business reasons) and Victor Cresdee for Harold Miller (Influenza).

The teams entered the ground in a "drenching shower". The early play was dominated by Port, playing smarter football in the wet conditions by knocking the ball on and kicking off the ground but the Norwood defence was on top, with Roy Hill "repelling many attacks", with able assistance from Stoddart, Plunkett and Morison.

It was McNamara who scored the first behind for Norwood, another was added (I couldn't find who), and it took until a mark just before the bell by Crowley to set up Ports first score - a behind. His shot was carried by the westerly wind into the goal post. Norwood went into quarter time with a 1 point lead.

The two scores of the 2nd quarter came in quick succession - Chamberlain restored the 2 point lead, only for the ball to go down the ground from the kick off, ending up with Crowley, who missed again. Ports half back line in Beare, Donaghy and Rose were also on top like their Norwood counterparts.

In the third, Norwood dominated the centre area, Robin and Lionel Hill featuring a lot; Robin "seemingly having the ball on a string". Norwood scoring both points in the quarter, Chamberlain and Buist were attributed to them.

The decisive period in the match came about halfway through the last quarter; Port having "caught Norwood by surprise", putting on a burst at the start of the last quarter, but could not find the sticks in the first 10 minutes; then Arthur Turner snapped a goal which the crowd recognised even with about half the quarter to go as the winning score, the cheers "were deafening". Port added a further two behinds (again I couldn't find who they were), but one of these was touched on the goal line.

It was Beare for Port who was reported to be the best player on the ground.

Port 0.1 0.2 0.2 1.4 (10)
Norwood 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.5 (5)
Alberton, 4500

Port: Turner 1.0, Crowley 0.2, two behinds unaccounted for
Norwood: Chamberlain 0.2, McNamara, Buist 0.1, one behind unaccounted for

On the same day, a scoreless match was reported in the Chronicle the following Saturday by H.Brown from Balaklava: "A match between Werocata and Balaklava teams in the Balaklava and Port Wakefield FA on May 15 had a rather unusual termination, for after a hard fought match, neither side had scored a point. This result, or rather want of result, gave rise to a deal of discussion, neither players nor onlookers having heard before of such an occurence".

[whufc]

Thats crazy about the Balaklava and Port Wakefield match. Grand stand finish hey . It would have been exciting, any point could have won it.

On a unrelated topic, it's my pet hate when people bag a 0-0 soccer game and start calling it a bore draw. At least it was close and anyone could win it until the very last minute, unlike many sporting events.

[Adelaide Hawk]

Thats crazy about the Balaklava and Port Wakefield match. Grand stand finish hey . It would have been exciting, any point could have won it.

On a unrelated topic, it's my pet hate when people bag a 0-0 soccer game and start calling it a bore draw. At least it was close and anyone could win it until the very last minute, unlike many sporting events.

Sorry mate, but if you expect people to pay to watch the sport, then you need to provide entertainment. Any game that returns a 0-0 return suggests that neither side were prepared to take the necessary risks to win the game. Boring.

[JK]

Thats crazy about the Balaklava and Port Wakefield match. Grand stand finish hey . It would have been exciting, any point could have won it.

On a unrelated topic, it's my pet hate when people bag a 0-0 soccer game and start calling it a bore draw. At least it was close and anyone could win it until the very last minute, unlike many sporting events.

Sorry mate, but if you expect people to pay to watch the sport, then you need to provide entertainment. Any game that returns a 0-0 return suggests that neither side were prepared to take the necessary risks to win the game. Boring.

Sorry AH, but whilst the scenario you described above CAN sometimes happen, it would be the minority case ... There is no doubt some 0-0 draws are boring if it comes about because both teams had one of those days and played like Dogs, but I agree with WHUFC that if it involves your own team they are generally still very exciting and nerve-wracking.

0-0 fair enough is probably boring to a neutral supporter, but then again if both goalies had a day out and the woodwork's been struck, it would still be an entertaining game.

Sorry to go off track ... Thanks Spelly for that piece, I found it a fascinating read.

[Adelaide Hawk]

Thats crazy about the Balaklava and Port Wakefield match. Grand stand finish hey . It would have been exciting, any point could have won it.

On a unrelated topic, it's my pet hate when people bag a 0-0 soccer game and start calling it a bore draw. At least it was close and anyone could win it until the very last minute, unlike many sporting events.

Sorry mate, but if you expect people to pay to watch the sport, then you need to provide entertainment. Any game that returns a 0-0 return suggests that neither side were prepared to take the necessary risks to win the game. Boring.

Sorry AH, but whilst the scenario you described above CAN sometimes happen, it would be the minority case ... There is no doubt some 0-0 draws are boring if it comes about because both teams had one of those days and played like Dogs, but I agree with WHUFC that if it involves your own team they are generally still very exciting and nerve-wracking.

0-0 fair enough is probably boring to a neutral supporter, but then again if both goalies had a day out and the woodwork's been struck, it would still be an entertaining game.

Sorry to go off track ... Thanks Spelly for that piece, I found it a fascinating read.

We must agree to disagree. 0-0 draws are like watching grass grow, which is pretty much all that's happening out there anyway. It's funny, when at the death of a match, how a team can score an equalizer, or a winner. That's because they've pulled out the stops, taken a few risks, and actually put some pressure on the goal keeper.

I've seen soccer matches, especially in the World Cup where both sides were so determined not to concede a goal that the goal keepers had stuff all to do. Can't see how you can win unless you take a few chances.

[JK]

Thats crazy about the Balaklava and Port Wakefield match. Grand stand finish hey . It would have been exciting, any point could have won it.

On a unrelated topic, it's my pet hate when people bag a 0-0 soccer game and start calling it a bore draw. At least it was close and anyone could win it until the very last minute, unlike many sporting events.

Sorry mate, but if you expect people to pay to watch the sport, then you need to provide entertainment. Any game that returns a 0-0 return suggests that neither side were prepared to take the necessary risks to win the game. Boring.

Sorry AH, but whilst the scenario you described above CAN sometimes happen, it would be the minority case ... There is no doubt some 0-0 draws are boring if it comes about because both teams had one of those days and played like Dogs, but I agree with WHUFC that if it involves your own team they are generally still very exciting and nerve-wracking.

0-0 fair enough is probably boring to a neutral supporter, but then again if both goalies had a day out and the woodwork's been struck, it would still be an entertaining game.

Sorry to go off track ... Thanks Spelly for that piece, I found it a fascinating read.

We must agree to disagree. 0-0 draws are like watching grass grow, which is pretty much all that's happening out there anyway. It's funny, when at the death of a match, how a team can score an equalizer, or a winner. That's because they've pulled out the stops, taken a few risks, and actually put some pressure on the goal keeper.

I've seen soccer matches, especially in the World Cup where both sides were so determined not to concede a goal that the goal keepers had stuff all to do. Can't see how you can win unless you take a few chances.

Im guessing your only a casual fan of the game mate? Fair enough if your watching the Italian League where nearly the sole emphasis is on ensuring our team finishes with 0 conceded (and they'll happily accept 0 for).

Different strokes for different folks I guess and happy to agree to disagree.