In 1908, to celebrate the 50th anniversary of Australian football, a carnival was organised and took place in Melbourne. The New Zealand team - dressed in black with a gold fern - competed in the Jubilee Australasian Football Carnival with games played at the MCG. They defeated New South Wales and Queensland, and lost to Victoria and Tasmania to finish fourth out of the seven competing teams.

The New Zealand team was captained by ex-Collingwood player Tom Wright, who was a WWI Military Cross winner before being killed in action. New Zealand was represented by 25 players at the Carnival. Players recorded as taking part were:

Tom Wright (Captain), Dempster, Fisher, Ross, Porter, Smith, West (Christchurch), Paul, Ward, Bonas, Patrick, Furness, McGrath (Wellington), Abfalter, Fletcher, Marshall, Lording, Breese, George, Gillett, Monteith (Auckland), Darby, Swann, Wickens (Dunedin) and Elvidge (Waihi).

The following match reports are reproduced from The Leader newspaper.

New Zealand v. New South Wales

The New Zealanders having the advantage of a good breeze in the first quarter, established a lead of 5 points, scoring 2.2 to 1.3, but it was not surprising to close observers of the play that in the second quarter New South Wales very distinctly prevailed, showing much better system in exchanging, greater pace, and making long effective kicks, which were much more effective than the New Zealanders' attempts at hand passing. New South Wales as soon as they got the wind's assistance, rattled up 3 goals to 1 behind before the New Zealand score was increased. Later in the second quarter New Zealand succeeded in scoring 2 behinds only, and as the others scored two more goals and 2 additional behinds they led at half time by 26 points.

At that time New Zealand's chance of success seemed very slight, but in the third quarter they roused the spectators to a high pitch of enthusiasm by taking possession of the game and putting on 4.5 to 1.3, which left New South Wales with a lead of only 6 points at the last change of ends. The latter however, again having the breeze, though it had considerably moderated, were generally looked upon at that stage as probable winners. The New Zealanders, however, quickly got even through the agency of Wright, and when the latter again scored a goal New Zealand led by 5 points. The New South Wales, scoring another goal again, led but only by one point. They, however, put on 4 behinds, and were 5 points ahead when within a minute of time Paul, of New Zealand, with the last kick of the match, scored a goal, and landed his side winners by a single point, amidst a scene of intense excitement and enthusiasm.

The most conspicuous players for the winners were Darby, Marshall, Elvidge, West, George, Fletcher, Lording, Dempster, Breese, Abfalter and Paul. Goal Kickers: Wilkins (2), Wright (2), West, Darby, George, Fletcher and Paul. On the losing side, the best work was done by Colley, Mansfield, Rahilly, Gluyas, Hunter, McConachy, Delaney, Shipton, Robertson, Haines, Carrick and Scott. Elder umpired erratically, allowing too much holding.

Victoria v. New Zealand

On the second day (Friday 21 August), the weather up to midday threatened an unpleasant afternoon. The rain, however, ceased before the hour appointed for starting, and the ground, although heavy, was in fairly good condition. As might have been expected, the Victorians showed a knowledge of the game which left the New Zealanders almost helpless against the team representing the birthplace of the game, and when the first quarter had resulted in Victoria scoring 10.8 to 0.2 it was realised that Maorilanders had no chance. The home team, although they represented ten different clubs, played a systematic game which has yet to be developed in New Zealand, and each separate quarter told the same tale.

Description of the play in detail is quite unnecessary, in face of the facts that the scores in the various quarters were 10.6 to 0.2, 6.6 to 1.1, 4.5 to 1.5 and 5.4 to 3.2, Victoria winning by 131 points.

The New Zealanders, as in their match against New South Wales, played a much better game in the second half than in the first, but the result was a foregone conclusion after the first few minutes' play, and it is reasonable to assume that after the interval the Victorians "took a pull" - in fact, it was evident in the later stages of the game that they were amusing themselves by indulgence in hand passing, feeling that earnestness was no longer necessary.

Amongst the specially prominent players on the winning side may be mentioned McNamara, Franks, Lee, Busbridge, Bruce, McGregor, Johnston, Bailes and Kelly, and the best of the New Zealanders were Darby, West, Wright, Dempster, George, Abfalter, Wilkins, Elvidge, Fletcher and Paul. McNamara kicked 7 goals for Victoria, and Lee 6.

New Zealand v. Queensland

Only one match was played on the fourth day, Monday, 24th August, and several circumstances conduced to the attendance being only moderate. One of these was the fact that Queensland, who were playing New Zealand, had shown poor form in their initial game, and another was that the weather was cold and showery. Only £20 was taken at the gates, which makes the aggregate for the first four days of the carnival about £804. With the ground heavy and slippery in patches, the conditions were against good football; never the less, a spirited game was witnessed, the Queenslanders showing an improvement on their first display.

New Zealand won the toss, and had the advantage of a strong southerly breeze in the first quarter. They were the quickest to get going, and after Wright had scored a minor point, Fletcher immediately afterwards snapped a goal. The northerners then rushed the ball forward, and passes from McKellar to Hideman to Atkins eventuated, but without result. Greenwood also failed to make anything of a free kick. It was noticed that the Queenslanders were picking up badly forward. Nor did the All Blacks' forwards do much better for some time. Eventually, however, some good passing resulted in Ward obtaining two goals for the islanders, who showed the better combination. Monteith, West, Darby, Paul, Ward and Wright showed fine individual play for New Zealand; while Paget, Kelly, Aitkinson, Morris, McKellar and Watts performed well for Queensland in the opening term.

The scores were 3.4 to 0.1 in favour of New Zealand when the ends were changed. As was expected, with the wind behind them Queensland did better in the second term. New Zealand opened with some good marking around the Queenslanders' goal. West snapped a fourth goal and Ward secured a fifth. Queensland then showed more dash, and good wing play enabled them to keep up a fairly constant attack on the New Zealand goal for some time. Their forward play, however, was again badly organized, until a series of marks gave Hopkins a chance close in which he converted into a goal. Just before half time some further good marking placed the ball into the hands of McCormack, who punted a second goal for the maroons. The scores at the interval were:- New Zealand 5.5; Queensland, 2.3.

In the third term, though playing against the breeze, Queensland again got into good swing, and showing more pace than their opponents got some what the best of the play, scoring a goal, kicked by Hicks, and 2 behinds to 4 behinds. Queensland were first to attack in the last quarter, but New Zealand playing well together soon became the aggressors. The latter, however, failed to score more than singles and Queensland, through the instrumentality of Hopkins, got another goal. The northerners again put great dash into their play after this, but eventually New Zealand rallied, and Tucker, marking from Fletcher, made victory assured by a shot which was stopped a yard inside the posts. Queensland were pressing New Zealand again when the final bell rang, the scores being:

Taking the play right through, New Zealand played the more skilful game, their players being apparently more seasoned and better accustomed to the Australian rules. Queensland, however, are a fast team, and are capable of much improvement. They resorted a good deal to handball, which was not always well judged. The New Zealanders got rid of the ball better. For the winners, Monteith in the centre, Wright in the ruck, Dempster, Patrick and George (back), Darby on the wing, and Paul, Ward and West (forward) showed capital play. Paget (half back), McGregor (in varying positions), Kelly (in the centre), Watts and Hideman (in the ruck), Hicks, McKellar, Keir and Atkinson always showed out well for the northern team. Boyle as field umpire had a light task in controlling the game.

Tasmania v. New Zealand

Tasmania 11.18 (84) defeated New Zealand 1.12 (18).

As the score indicates, this match was very one sided, the Tasmanians dashing off with the lead, and increasing their advantage up to the end of the third quarter, when they led by 70 points. In all departments of the game they had shown the effect of their more intimate knowledge and longer experience. The New Zealanders were notably deficient in pace, few of them ever being first to the ball in individual battles for possession, and in marking and exchanging they were no match for the Tasmanians.

In the last quarter several of the most prominent of the latter palpably eased off, and on sufferance New Zealand wiped 4 points off their deficit, neither side kicking a goal after the last change of ends. The greasy ball completely baffled the New Zealanders, who could do nothing with it, 13 scoring shots producing only 1 goal.

For Tasmania first class work was done by Mahoney, McLeod, Forster (2 goals), Burrell, Bailey, Pannam (4 goals), Lee (3 goals), Searl, Arnold and Webster; and the best of the New Zealanders were Darby, Dempster, West, Lording, George, Bond, Porter, Paul, Wright, Swan and Wilkins."

The aftermath

The participation of New Zealand created a great deal of enthusiasm for the international potential of the Australian game.

"To anyone who can read the signs of the times the writing on the wall is plain enough, that not only will the Australasian game be dominant in the Commonwealth as a whole, but also in Sydney and Brisbane, where hitherto the imported game has held full sway. Rugby is foreign in every element, and must take a back seat, its proper place." (The Victorian Football Follower, Vol. XI, No. 19, 1908)

And again:

"New Zealand was a bit of a surprise packet. If ever they succeed in playing the game up to the standard, their matches will be worth seeing, for force will not be lacking. They went into the contests with a good swing, fought like terriers, and thereby warmed the hearts of the crowd. The chief drawback in connection with New Zealand football, however, is their distance from the main land. However, if they can keep improving, they will always be a draw on the Continent, and a championship game between Victoria and the Dominion would be worth going a few miles to see." (The Victorian Football Follower, Vol XI, No. 22, 1908)

Writing in the Official Program, H.D. Newby commented on the success of the Carnival:

"Nor does the popularity of the Australian game end there. For, in Canada, in South Africa, and even the United States of America, the game is finding favour and popularity, alike with players and spectators; while, even in conservative old England, where tradition dies so hard, and prejudice is as strong as in politics and trade, an attempt is being made to introduce it in the great Public Schools. Is it too much to forecast that those who live to see the centenary of the Australian game will witness the competition of teams from all parts of the Empire for the honor of the Imperial Premiership?"

Unfortunately, the answer would prove to be a resounding yes.