The Mystery of Josh Ioane’s Omission
-
“Surely it is better to carry your third-best No 10 who can cover fullback No 15 rather than your third-best No 15 who may or may not be able to cover No 10?”
Paul Cully on Stuff nails what many of us are thinking about the All Blacks’ selectors mystifying decision not to include Josh Ioane as a third playmaker for the World Cup, preferring to give a place instead to Jordie Barrett.
OK, it was Tonga, but did anybody - while watching Ioane’s composed, astute and commanding performance in the second half at Hamilton - reflect that the wrong person was being left behind? What, apart from height and a propensity for brain farts, does the third Barrett offer that Ioane doesn’t?
We know Ioane can play fullback, but has anyone seen JB play 10? Besides, the ABs already have plenty of cover at 15 in Barrett, Smith and Bridge. As for goal-kicking, who would you
rather trust to nail a clincher in a World Cup match?It puzzles me, as I am sure it does others. What would Grant Fox say in defence?
-
From answers to questions from the media about Josh Ioane in the past few weeks, I got the impression that the selectors think the RWC may come too early for Josh. All good starting Josh at 10 in a opposed training run against Tonga when the ABs are leading by 54 points at half time, but maybe there's something we don't get to see (at training, for example) that justifies their decision to leave him out of the squad and go for a more versatile player instead. Having said that (yes, broken record), I'd still pick David Havili over Jordie Barrett.
-
-
@rotated said in The Mystery of Josh Ioane’s Omission:
Cully does realize injury replacements can be called in right?
The gap between BB/RM and Ioane is so wide that having Ioane in the squad or out of the squad makes little difference.
I'd prefer a third 10 in the squad, and would probably have gone with Ioane over JB but I don't see the outrage.
The issue with replacements is the delay before a replacement can be added, and replacements are permanent.
-
Why take him when he can be called up? Looking great against a team that have already given up before you got on the field shouldn't give you a ticket to Japan. Also Jordie cleaned up after Josh's defensive display.
-
The RWC hasn’t come a year too early for Josh, it’s 2 - 3 years too early. He had some nice touches against Tonga but also showed why he’s not in the squad - defensive liability and his goal kicking is not there yet. His first conversion was on target but didn’t have the legs, which is a bit unforgivable if we’re talking about test class goal kickers.
If the unthinkable did happen and we lost Beauden plus Mo’unga I think the plan is to put Jordie there to defend the channel plus kick goals, and on attack we will mix it up a lot at first receiver with BFA likely slotting in, particularly when deep in our own half.
We can’t afford a deer in the headlights that can’t tackle at 10 in the knockout stages of the cup.
-
Perfect game to debut in. Game over, no defensive pressure, zero consequences.
Those attacking kicks looked great, but if he fuck them, no one cares.
I would have taken him too, but I agree it's a huge risk given our other 10 has barely played.
-
I would have picked both Josh Ioane and Jordie and left Reece at home.
Jordie because he provides lots of cover to a high enough standard and Ioane because if the worst case does happen he will have at least been with the team and had some time in minnow games.
If he is there already it also doesn’t require one of the other guys to be sent home to bring him in.We have plenty of depth on the wings.
-
@pukunui I was not a Reece fan after his early test appearance. But the Bled 2 performance showed me he is worth exploring because he just might have some X factor that could help us bring Bill home. Reece has a chance of starting, Ioane will only play if our two best 10s, by a considerable margin, go down
-
@canefan said in The Mystery of Josh Ioane’s Omission:
@pukunui I was not a Reece fan after his early test appearance. But the Bled 2 performance showed me he is worth exploring because he just might have some X factor that could help us bring Bill home. Reece has a chance of starting, Ioane will only play if our two best 10s, by a considerable margin, go down
It’s not so much about Reece it’s that I don’t think we need an additional option on the wing when we have proven guys and a new guy in Bridge. Wing can also easily be covered by makeshift guys during minnow games.
In both 2007 and 2011 we had multiple 1st 5 injuries so it’s not out of the realm of possibility that it happens again. Having to send one of BB or RM home when they might only miss a week because we need, at the very least, a goal kicking back up is a dumb risk to take to have an additional option on the wing.
-
@No-Quarter said in The Mystery of Josh Ioane’s Omission:
The RWC hasn’t come a year too early for Josh, it’s 2 - 3 years too early. He had some nice touches against Tonga but also showed why he’s not in the squad - defensive liability and his goal kicking is not there yet. His first conversion was on target but didn’t have the legs, which is a bit unforgivable if we’re talking about test class goal kickers.
If the unthinkable did happen and we lost Beauden plus Mo’unga I think the plan is to put Jordie there to defend the channel plus kick goals, and on attack we will mix it up a lot at first receiver with BFA likely slotting in, particularly when deep in our own half.
We can’t afford a deer in the headlights that can’t tackle at 10 in the knockout stages of the cup.
I think if the unthinkable happens and we lose Barrett and Mo'unga, we're basically fucked whoever plays 10.
That said, I'd want it to be Josh Ioane.
-
@Chris-B said in The Mystery of Josh Ioane’s Omission:
@No-Quarter said in The Mystery of Josh Ioane’s Omission:
The RWC hasn’t come a year too early for Josh, it’s 2 - 3 years too early. He had some nice touches against Tonga but also showed why he’s not in the squad - defensive liability and his goal kicking is not there yet. His first conversion was on target but didn’t have the legs, which is a bit unforgivable if we’re talking about test class goal kickers.
If the unthinkable did happen and we lost Beauden plus Mo’unga I think the plan is to put Jordie there to defend the channel plus kick goals, and on attack we will mix it up a lot at first receiver with BFA likely slotting in, particularly when deep in our own half.
We can’t afford a deer in the headlights that can’t tackle at 10 in the knockout stages of the cup.
I think if the unthinkable happens and we lose Barrett and Mo'unga, we're basically fucked whoever plays 10.
That said, I'd want it to be Josh Ioane.
I agree we are fucked by then. I guess opinions will be split between handing the reins to a greenhorn untested at test level and playing a utility player who is established in the existing squad.
My concern would stem from the Colin Slade experience. He looked good enough in cameos before the RWC that most posters were comfy enough with him as third option over beaver and cruden. Yet he was all at sea in the game he played and it was Cruden Beaver and Piri that came through with the goods in the end. Just. Josh is not Colin, but he's had less time in the black 10 jersey
-
@pukunui said in The Mystery of Josh Ioane’s Omission:
In both 2007 and 2011 we had multiple 1st 5 injuries so it’s not out of the realm of possibility that it happens again.
One of the biggest problems with the military is its propensity to train to fight the last war. I don't think we should take a third five-eighth just because in the past we've occasionally required one. The disparity between the top two and Josh is immense. Better to take the best possible squad and then deal with eventualities as required.
-
@canefan said in The Mystery of Josh Ioane’s Omission:
@Chris-B said in The Mystery of Josh Ioane’s Omission:
@No-Quarter said in The Mystery of Josh Ioane’s Omission:
The RWC hasn’t come a year too early for Josh, it’s 2 - 3 years too early. He had some nice touches against Tonga but also showed why he’s not in the squad - defensive liability and his goal kicking is not there yet. His first conversion was on target but didn’t have the legs, which is a bit unforgivable if we’re talking about test class goal kickers.
If the unthinkable did happen and we lost Beauden plus Mo’unga I think the plan is to put Jordie there to defend the channel plus kick goals, and on attack we will mix it up a lot at first receiver with BFA likely slotting in, particularly when deep in our own half.
We can’t afford a deer in the headlights that can’t tackle at 10 in the knockout stages of the cup.
I think if the unthinkable happens and we lose Barrett and Mo'unga, we're basically fucked whoever plays 10.
That said, I'd want it to be Josh Ioane.
I agree we are fucked by then. I guess opinions will be split between handing the reins to a greenhorn untested at test level and playing a utility player who is established in the existing squad.
My concern would stem from the Colin Slade experience. He looked good enough in cameos before the RWC that most posters were comfy enough with him as third option over beaver and cruden. Yet he was all at sea in the game he played and it was Cruden Beaver and Piri that came through with the goods in the end. Just. Josh is not Colin, but he's had less time in the black 10 jersey
It's really choose your poison.
We're going to have a mighty struggle to beat the top teams with our best team available - let alone a makeshift first five. He might as well have a big red button on his jersey saying "Press here for Victory". It would make our experiments of playing fullbacks at centre look like works of genius.
Think back to when Leon played a couple of games at first five. Pretty sure he conceded charge down tries in both games he played 10 - and he was a guy who'd played quite a bit of first five - in fact, he was initially a 10 who converted to fullback.
-
@Chris-B said in The Mystery of Josh Ioane’s Omission:
@canefan said in The Mystery of Josh Ioane’s Omission:
@Chris-B said in The Mystery of Josh Ioane’s Omission:
@No-Quarter said in The Mystery of Josh Ioane’s Omission:
The RWC hasn’t come a year too early for Josh, it’s 2 - 3 years too early. He had some nice touches against Tonga but also showed why he’s not in the squad - defensive liability and his goal kicking is not there yet. His first conversion was on target but didn’t have the legs, which is a bit unforgivable if we’re talking about test class goal kickers.
If the unthinkable did happen and we lost Beauden plus Mo’unga I think the plan is to put Jordie there to defend the channel plus kick goals, and on attack we will mix it up a lot at first receiver with BFA likely slotting in, particularly when deep in our own half.
We can’t afford a deer in the headlights that can’t tackle at 10 in the knockout stages of the cup.
I think if the unthinkable happens and we lose Barrett and Mo'unga, we're basically fucked whoever plays 10.
That said, I'd want it to be Josh Ioane.
I agree we are fucked by then. I guess opinions will be split between handing the reins to a greenhorn untested at test level and playing a utility player who is established in the existing squad.
My concern would stem from the Colin Slade experience. He looked good enough in cameos before the RWC that most posters were comfy enough with him as third option over beaver and cruden. Yet he was all at sea in the game he played and it was Cruden Beaver and Piri that came through with the goods in the end. Just. Josh is not Colin, but he's had less time in the black 10 jersey
It's really choose your poison.
We're going to have a mighty struggle to beat the top teams with our best team available - let alone a makeshift first five. He might as well have a big red button on his jersey saying "Press here for Victory". It would make our experiments of playing fullbacks at centre look like works of genius.
Think back to when Leon played a couple of games at first five. Pretty sure he conceded charge down tries in both games he played 10 - and he was a guy who'd played quite a bit of first five - in fact, he was initially a 10 who converted to fullback.
Goes to show how miraculous 2011 was. We were lucky to have 2 10s who had test match experience and time in the set up, and they did just enough to help us squeak through. Even then, it wasn't like Beaver ran the show on his own
-
-
@Chris-B said in The Mystery of Josh Ioane’s Omission:
@canefan An understated part of the miracle was that we played the last 30 odd minutes with Andy Ellis and Beaver as our halves.
In terms of flak copped, we could as well have had Anton throwing to the lineout and Akira Ioane at No. 8.
I forgot about that. Ellis was a great team man while not being at the level of the incumbent starters. A great little redemption story to add to the legend of the Beaver
