AB Positions up for grabs
-
@bones said in AB Positions up for grabs:
@nepia when your other 7 is better than most other teams 7s then I'd not have a problem with it. Pretty sure they've played together before haven't they?
Not that I know of, I prefer our 7s to stay as 7s, but I guess I could handle a Cane, Todd, Ioane trio.
-
-
@bones said in AB Positions up for grabs:
@nepia I don't think you'd notice a huge amount change about either players game.
Hasn't Cane swapped sides before when Todd came on?
I'd assume so, I'm not sure, one of our Cantab bretheren must be able to tell us, I assume they keep detailed notebooks of each Cantab's minutes in black.
-
@bones said in AB Positions up for grabs:
@bovidae Cane seems to be very similar in size to Messam... He does OK in lineouts.
Yes, when jumping at the front, and Cane has done that a few times for the Chiefs too. The ABs have tended to use Read at 2 a lot so maybe L Whitelock (in a proposed trio) could do the same rather than Cane. The Crusaders get by in the lineout with relatively short loose forwards without Read.
-
@bovidae said in AB Positions up for grabs:
@bones said in AB Positions up for grabs:
@bovidae Cane seems to be very similar in size to Messam... He does OK in lineouts.
Yes, when jumping at the front, and Cane has done that a few times for the Chiefs too. The ABs have tended to use Read at 2 a lot so maybe L Whitelock (in a proposed trio) could do the same rather than Cane. The Crusaders get by in the lineout with relatively short loose forwards without Read.
If you're playing Whitelock at 8 you don't need to play Cane at 6, you can just play one of the loose 6s.
-
Fifita? I'm not really a fan of him as a starter in a top tier test. He could be a good option off the bench.
As I said previously, I have Whitelock at 6 and Ioane at 8 in my loosies so Cane would be the no.7. I'm not certain the ABs will go that way though.
-
@nepia said in AB Positions up for grabs:
@bones said in AB Positions up for grabs:
@nepia when your other 7 is better than most other teams 7s then I'd not have a problem with it. Pretty sure they've played together before haven't they?
Not that I know of, I prefer our 7s to stay as 7s, but I guess I could handle a Cane, Todd, Ioane trio.
The problem with the Wallabies playing Hooper and Pocock was neither have a strong physical presence on D. That's not an issue for us as Cane absolutely smacks blokes all day long so we could get away with him and Todd who is also a pretty strong defender. Those two and Akira would he my preference given injuries.
-
The benefit of playing the two 7s now ,
With bigger games and tournaments down the track ,
At least we get a look at how it goes , and that knowledge can be put in the bank for later ,
Yes it went well , no dont bother with that again .
-
I hate the idea of playing two 7s.
I hated it back in 1991 when John hart shoe-horned Mark Carter in, and I hate it now. Even though the game has evolved immesaurably since then ....
It's a good(ish) ploy for the desperate, the un-balanced talent (Australia), or the one-trick ponies (the get it wide teams of Hart and Mains).
It should not be an option for any other team that has actual options.
It may work for one game, maximum, until a competent opposition counters it successfully.
-
Me too. Just looking at the last test vs France in Paris, Todd replaced Read when he went off injured after 47 mins. Then you had a loose forward trio of Fifita, Cane and Todd. Cane moved to no.8. BUT the ABs really struggled in the 2nd half, only scoring a late try to Naholo.
-
@no-quarter said in AB Positions up for grabs:
@nepia said in AB Positions up for grabs:
@bones said in AB Positions up for grabs:
@nepia when your other 7 is better than most other teams 7s then I'd not have a problem with it. Pretty sure they've played together before haven't they?
Not that I know of, I prefer our 7s to stay as 7s, but I guess I could handle a Cane, Todd, Ioane trio.
The problem with the Wallabies playing Hooper and Pocock was neither have a strong physical presence on D. That's not an issue for us as Cane absolutely smacks blokes all day long so we could get away with him and Todd who is also a pretty strong defender. Those two and Akira would he my preference given injuries.
I think Cane hsa all the physical attributes to a really effective 6. Aggressive on D, kills people in tackles, mobile, and with skillsets to match openside flankers. Could be a bit short, (so is the alternative Ardie?). Shit never gets old.
-
@bovidae said in AB Positions up for grabs:
Me too. Just looking at the last test vs France in Paris, Todd replaced Read when he went off injured after 47 mins. Then you had a loose forward trio of Fifita, Cane and Todd. Cane moved to no.8. BUT the ABs really struggled in the 2nd half, only scoring a late try to Naholo.
Fair point but I don't think Cane suits no. 8, he plays a much tighter game. Having him at 6 instead of show pony Fifita would make a world of difference.
-
I've never seen the "two opensides" work for an extended period either.
And I can't see why we would try it to basically accommodate Todd over a specialist blindside flanker. He's a good player, but he's not that good.
If we were going to play two short flankers I'd rather see Jordan Taufua paired with Cane than Todd paired with Cane.
But, I think it will be Ioane, Cane and Whitelock - assuming that Squire isn't available.
I presume most people are thinking that we will name six loose forwards - Cane, Todd, Savea, Fifita, Ioane and Whitelock.
But, if Squire is available - who misses out? Personally, I don't see the point of three openside flankers! For me, it's Ardie.
