All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.
-
@No-Quarter said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Crucial said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
I also find it funny how before the match everyone was bitching about Julian's selection and afterward voting for him in MOTM votes. He did exactly the thing I wanted to see him there to do. A Lomu-esque run to break the game open. I haven't seen Naholo do that.
Excuse me, @Bones and I were fluffing Savea as hard as we could before the match in the face of all the detractors. Bones even posted evidence to back up our fluffing (very rare on the Fern).
Now the MOTM poll has him as one of our top 3 peformers. I feel very vindicated.
I'm just confused as to why people only watched the last 20 minutes of the game.
-
@Nepia said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@No-Quarter said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Crucial said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
I also find it funny how before the match everyone was bitching about Julian's selection and afterward voting for him in MOTM votes. He did exactly the thing I wanted to see him there to do. A Lomu-esque run to break the game open. I haven't seen Naholo do that.
Excuse me, @Bones and I were fluffing Savea as hard as we could before the match in the face of all the detractors. Bones even posted evidence to back up our fluffing (very rare on the Fern).
Now the MOTM poll has him as one of our top 3 peformers. I feel very vindicated.
I'm just confused as to why people only watched the last 20 minutes of the game.
What's got me confused is I thought @Crucial was the reason I posted those stats in the first place!
-
@Bones said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
Ahh yeah but we're not talking about those decisions. I seem to recall someone earlier moaning about whataboutery? Sounds like good advice...
Actually its just examples of what the TMO could see that affect play. The result of any penalty from the scrum, through to DHP is the same in terms of scoreboard: no try.
Read the blog post. It'll clear up what I'm getting at. Unless you're Baron.
-
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Marty said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Marty said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Marty said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Chris-B. said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@mariner4life said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
Thoughts on the All Blacks playing without a goal kicker?
Wondering about this.
Beaudy was pretty ordinary in the first part of the Super season. Came right in the ABs camp, but he seems to be regressing.
I wonder how long the coaches will put up with substandard goal kicking - eventually it will cost us a match, so he needs to sort it - otherwise he'll have to be relegated to super-sub status again.
General performance from Beaudy has me wondering again how effective he can be when his forwards are getting munched. I didn't see him trying to take control at any point. In fact after the game I realised I could barely remember seeing him.
They had 30 something percent possession in the first half. He barely had the ball enough to make an impression before he was hooked. When and where was he supposed to take control?
35% is not great but it's adequate. A more controlling performance from a Beauden Barrett would include, for example, taking on the line himself - something that has been his hallmark this season. Aaron Cruden had more direct influence on proceedings when he came on, though admittedly not always positive.
As mentioned, he only had the ball a handful of times in attack. It would be interesting to know at what stage him taking the ball to the line would have been a controlling performance or indeed called for under the circumstances.
Cruden came on and failed to find touch from a penalty and then sent a harmless kick into the 22. With much more possession and a tiring opponent of course he's going to be more involved.
BB totally deserves any criticism for his kicking, which could prove crucial in some of the typical arm-wrestles up north. It could even be argued that Lima S gets the nod if BB cant get at least 70%. But complaining that he didn't control the game enough when his team had 35% possession and he barely touched the ball in attack is absolutely ridiculous.
Far from ridiculous but OK, if you're happy with that level of influence from your field general , then fair enough. You can probably even argue that the pattern this team plays removes the need for one central decision maker and that's probably what got them through on Saturday.
Still, the great first five performances I remember were the ones where, when things weren't panning out, the player demanded the ball and took the game on his shoulders. And that includes situations where possession was poor. Andrew Mehrtens is a classic example, he often played behind a pack that served up less than 40% possession, especially in the latter half of his career. Dan Carter was frequently in those situations too.
I've got no doubt Barrett will get there with more time under his belt but he hasn't yet and Saturday's game was clear evidence of that.
Jesus, the way you're banging on you'd think we were getting hammered and severely under the cosh. But the abs were farking leading at half time and if BB had had his kicking boots on the buffer would have been rather healthy. So you have a team that has scored 3 tries to 1 and is leading at the break and you reckon that's a poor reflection on the flyhalf, who has had little ball to work with?
I'm sure BB would have become much more involved as the game wore on, but it's absurd to criticise him for a first half performance when the abs scored 3 tries with 35% possession. But I'm sure if he put his head down and took the ball to the line those stats would look so much better and the forwards would start winning the collisions and making tackles.
He touched the ball 6 times in the 1st half and missed 3 kicks at goal.
6 times. For a 10. Did we only win 6 ducks in the half?
I agree with Crucial, this is exactly the sort of game that you would like your general to take hold of and steer his team around the park and make the play and yet he only touch the ball once every 7 minutes.
Then it is revealed that he has an ear infection.
Perhaps he should have been left out be wise he clearly wasn't right
-
Watching at the ground it seemed like Owens decided to refer the try to the TMO after watching a couple of replays on the big screen. Is that correct procedure? I remember the grumbling when we got a try disallowed in SA a few years ago and I wonder if the protocol for using the TMO has changed?
-
@Bones said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Nepia said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@No-Quarter said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Crucial said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
I also find it funny how before the match everyone was bitching about Julian's selection and afterward voting for him in MOTM votes. He did exactly the thing I wanted to see him there to do. A Lomu-esque run to break the game open. I haven't seen Naholo do that.
Excuse me, @Bones and I were fluffing Savea as hard as we could before the match in the face of all the detractors. Bones even posted evidence to back up our fluffing (very rare on the Fern).
Now the MOTM poll has him as one of our top 3 peformers. I feel very vindicated.
I'm just confused as to why people only watched the last 20 minutes of the game.
What's got me confused is I thought @Crucial was the reason I posted those stats in the first place!
Not me. I wrote a post explaining why I was happy with Saveas selection after reading some grizzles
-
@canefan said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
Watching at the ground it seemed like Owens decided to refer the try to the TMO after watching a couple of replays on the big screen. Is that correct procedure? I remember the grumbling when we got a try disallowed in SA a few years ago and I wonder if the protocol for using the TMO has changed?
Says under Guiding Principles
The TMO is a tool to help referees and assistant referees. The referee should not be subservient to the system. The referee is responsible for managing the TMO process
• The referee is the decision-maker and must remain in charge of the game
• Any relevant information taken into consideration must be CLEAR and OBVIOUS and in the context of materiality
• The application of the TMO system must be credible and consistent, protecting the image of the game. -
@da_grubster said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Marty said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Marty said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Marty said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Chris-B. said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@mariner4life said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
Thoughts on the All Blacks playing without a goal kicker?
Wondering about this.
Beaudy was pretty ordinary in the first part of the Super season. Came right in the ABs camp, but he seems to be regressing.
I wonder how long the coaches will put up with substandard goal kicking - eventually it will cost us a match, so he needs to sort it - otherwise he'll have to be relegated to super-sub status again.
General performance from Beaudy has me wondering again how effective he can be when his forwards are getting munched. I didn't see him trying to take control at any point. In fact after the game I realised I could barely remember seeing him.
They had 30 something percent possession in the first half. He barely had the ball enough to make an impression before he was hooked. When and where was he supposed to take control?
35% is not great but it's adequate. A more controlling performance from a Beauden Barrett would include, for example, taking on the line himself - something that has been his hallmark this season. Aaron Cruden had more direct influence on proceedings when he came on, though admittedly not always positive.
As mentioned, he only had the ball a handful of times in attack. It would be interesting to know at what stage him taking the ball to the line would have been a controlling performance or indeed called for under the circumstances.
Cruden came on and failed to find touch from a penalty and then sent a harmless kick into the 22. With much more possession and a tiring opponent of course he's going to be more involved.
BB totally deserves any criticism for his kicking, which could prove crucial in some of the typical arm-wrestles up north. It could even be argued that Lima S gets the nod if BB cant get at least 70%. But complaining that he didn't control the game enough when his team had 35% possession and he barely touched the ball in attack is absolutely ridiculous.
Far from ridiculous but OK, if you're happy with that level of influence from your field general , then fair enough. You can probably even argue that the pattern this team plays removes the need for one central decision maker and that's probably what got them through on Saturday.
Still, the great first five performances I remember were the ones where, when things weren't panning out, the player demanded the ball and took the game on his shoulders. And that includes situations where possession was poor. Andrew Mehrtens is a classic example, he often played behind a pack that served up less than 40% possession, especially in the latter half of his career. Dan Carter was frequently in those situations too.
I've got no doubt Barrett will get there with more time under his belt but he hasn't yet and Saturday's game was clear evidence of that.
Jesus, the way you're banging on you'd think we were getting hammered and severely under the cosh. But the abs were farking leading at half time and if BB had had his kicking boots on the buffer would have been rather healthy. So you have a team that has scored 3 tries to 1 and is leading at the break and you reckon that's a poor reflection on the flyhalf, who has had little ball to work with?
I'm sure BB would have become much more involved as the game wore on, but it's absurd to criticise him for a first half performance when the abs scored 3 tries with 35% possession. But I'm sure if he put his head down and took the ball to the line those stats would look so much better and the forwards would start winning the collisions and making tackles.
He touched the ball 6 times in the 1st half and missed 3 kicks at goal.
6 times. For a 10. Did we only win 6 ducks in the half?
I agree with Crucial, this is exactly the sort of game that you would like your general to take hold of and steer his team around the park and make the play and yet he only touch the ball once every 7 minutes.
Then it is revealed that he has an ear infection.
Perhaps he should have been left out be wise he clearly wasn't right
Those were clearly the tactics. Blame Hanson for that. Probably makes perfect sense when BB has a target on him these days. Perhaps he would have seized control in the 2nd half (i.e. when games are usually taken control of), but we will never know because he was hooked after 44 minutes.
Ultimately my beef is that certain posters were trying to use this game as evidence that BB can't control a game when under pressure. Obviously I think that's boulderdash.
-
-
-
@Crucial said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Rancid-Schnitzel Which is why I have spelled out clearly that I am not taking this game as evidence of my concerns.
How are those reading comprehension classes going?Didn't you say that your fear came to fruition or something along those lines? Or that he didn't impose himself as DC always did in the first half or something? Ifyou don't see it as evidence then why are you continuing to debate the point about his involvement, control etc.?
-
@NTA I don't think we are giving enough credit to the Wobs defence. They played us very well for the first 55 odd minutes, they rushed up and cut our space down, hence the handling errors that occurred in midfield with frustrating regularity. We needed more hitups in the forwards but we seemed intent on trying to pass our way around them instead
-
Can someone explain to me why, when I joined this site I wasn't issued a whip to beat a dead horse like everyone else?
-
@antipodean Have you got anywhere better to be right now?
-
@NTA said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
And it shows that no matter how good a player the flyhalf is, if his pack isn't doing it up front, he's not going to feature much.
Forget about the flyhalf, apparently Savea was meant to make his mark on the match out on the left wing despite the pack going backwards. NZers can be incredibly harsh on particular players. Often one poor performance, even at Super level, can blind people to any good performances henceforth.
-
@canefan said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@antipodean Have you got anywhere better to be right now?
I should be writing an assignment for uni.
-
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Crucial said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Rancid-Schnitzel Which is why I have spelled out clearly that I am not taking this game as evidence of my concerns.
How are those reading comprehension classes going?Didn't you say that your fear came to fruition or something along those lines? Or that he didn't impose himself as DC always did in the first half or something? Ifyou don't see it as evidence then why are you continuing to debate the point about his involvement, control etc.?
The "BB can't control a game" line will be used whenever he has a slightly sub-par performance. Sometimes mud seems to stick to players well after they've improved an aspect of their game. Nevermind all of the games he's dominated from start to finish this year at both Super and test level, that one match at Eden Park has confirmed for some people that they were right all along...
-
@antipodean it's cruel to whip 'em when they are alive!
-
@da_grubster said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Marty said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Marty said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Marty said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Chris-B. said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@mariner4life said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
Thoughts on the All Blacks playing without a goal kicker?
Wondering about this.
Beaudy was pretty ordinary in the first part of the Super season. Came right in the ABs camp, but he seems to be regressing.
I wonder how long the coaches will put up with substandard goal kicking - eventually it will cost us a match, so he needs to sort it - otherwise he'll have to be relegated to super-sub status again.
General performance from Beaudy has me wondering again how effective he can be when his forwards are getting munched. I didn't see him trying to take control at any point. In fact after the game I realised I could barely remember seeing him.
They had 30 something percent possession in the first half. He barely had the ball enough to make an impression before he was hooked. When and where was he supposed to take control?
35% is not great but it's adequate. A more controlling performance from a Beauden Barrett would include, for example, taking on the line himself - something that has been his hallmark this season. Aaron Cruden had more direct influence on proceedings when he came on, though admittedly not always positive.
As mentioned, he only had the ball a handful of times in attack. It would be interesting to know at what stage him taking the ball to the line would have been a controlling performance or indeed called for under the circumstances.
Cruden came on and failed to find touch from a penalty and then sent a harmless kick into the 22. With much more possession and a tiring opponent of course he's going to be more involved.
BB totally deserves any criticism for his kicking, which could prove crucial in some of the typical arm-wrestles up north. It could even be argued that Lima S gets the nod if BB cant get at least 70%. But complaining that he didn't control the game enough when his team had 35% possession and he barely touched the ball in attack is absolutely ridiculous.
Far from ridiculous but OK, if you're happy with that level of influence from your field general , then fair enough. You can probably even argue that the pattern this team plays removes the need for one central decision maker and that's probably what got them through on Saturday.
Still, the great first five performances I remember were the ones where, when things weren't panning out, the player demanded the ball and took the game on his shoulders. And that includes situations where possession was poor. Andrew Mehrtens is a classic example, he often played behind a pack that served up less than 40% possession, especially in the latter half of his career. Dan Carter was frequently in those situations too.
I've got no doubt Barrett will get there with more time under his belt but he hasn't yet and Saturday's game was clear evidence of that.
Jesus, the way you're banging on you'd think we were getting hammered and severely under the cosh. But the abs were farking leading at half time and if BB had had his kicking boots on the buffer would have been rather healthy. So you have a team that has scored 3 tries to 1 and is leading at the break and you reckon that's a poor reflection on the flyhalf, who has had little ball to work with?
I'm sure BB would have become much more involved as the game wore on, but it's absurd to criticise him for a first half performance when the abs scored 3 tries with 35% possession. But I'm sure if he put his head down and took the ball to the line those stats would look so much better and the forwards would start winning the collisions and making tackles.
He touched the ball 6 times in the 1st half and missed 3 kicks at goal.
6 times. For a 10. Did we only win 6 ducks in the half?
I agree with Crucial, this is exactly the sort of game that you would like your general to take hold of and steer his team around the park and make the play and yet he only touch the ball once every 7 minutes.
Then it is revealed that he has an ear infection.
Perhaps he should have been left out be wise he clearly wasn't right
Perenara did most of the kicking in the first half.
Laws of the Game | World Rugby Laws
