Hansen
-
@Billy-Tell said in Hansen:
@Billy-Tell said in Hansen:
Steve Hansen inherited Graham Henry's once in a generation team. He did nothing with it.
We've been poor for the past three years.
Flat track bullies who were owned by Ireland and England.
Like John Mitchell in 2003 he was out of ideas so he went with the hot Super Rugby team. And he selected a lot of duds. Bridge, Scott Barrett, Reece, Mounga. Discarded experience and selected mediocrity. Also like Mitchell he's an arrogant tool who likes to criticize players in public. I hope Ioane and Luatua are having some bitter laughs.
I can sort of imagine you ejaculating as you write. Like you’ve been waiting for a loss so you can beat your little drum. Pathetic
Rubbish, he and others have been worried about this all year. Nobodies happy we lost, but we are frustrated at the predictability of it
Ah the wise in hindsight brigade. Post me your pre match predictions...or no one will believe you.
Posts are up on the forum, feel free to use the search
-
-
-
@Billy-Tell said in Hansen:
@Kirwan Exactly. And dropping Ioane and Cane was really aggravating.
Every 50/50 selection call had a Crusader bias too.
Seriously?!
This is the conspiracy theory nut job stuff.
Hansen has even been saying as much the past few weeks. "Even the guys that haven't played a lot of rugby have experience playing big finals games for the Crusaders etc etc."
I don't think he is doing it out of myopia like Deans in 2002/3 but he for sure has drunk the Crusader's kool-aid this year.
-
@Billy-Tell said in Hansen:
@Kirwan Exactly. And dropping Ioane and Cane was really aggravating.
Every 50/50 selection call had a Crusader bias too.
Seriously?!
This is the conspiracy theory nut job stuff.
Bridge, Reese, stupid Barrett at 6, Richie over BB at ten, broken Read persisted with, Taylor over Coles.
Each selection went the Crusaders way.
-
-
and it likely cost NZ another RWC. Its essential that NZ selects a head coach that is seen as being a fair selector where any players gets a fair go regardless of team. And stacking the team with 9 Crusaders starters does not achieve this. Henry did it (being seen as fair). As did Smith.
-
@reprobate 5 to 1 in our examples, and still persisted with Franks for two years when he was rubbish.
-
and it likely cost NZ another RWC. Its essential that NZ selects a head coach that is seen as being a fair selector where any players gets a fair go regardless of team. And stacking the team with 9 Crusaders starters does not achieve this.
Unlikely to change much with the new CEO being an ex-Crusader.
-
I assume that he'll explain that this week we lost because of the shit coaching of Fozzie, Stormy, and Crono. If they were amazing last week, I assume it's due to them - in no small part (especially the fucking weak defense Stormy) - that we lost this week. I assume that will be mentioned at the presser.
-
Imagine if our loose forwards were Luatua and Cane.
-
-
@reprobate 5 to 1 in our examples, and still persisted with Franks for two years when he was rubbish.
Really? sbw was rubbish. Nepo was rubbish, ardie was rubbish, Brodie was outplayed, persisted with despite injury, TJ brought on early was rubbish, ALB did bugger all, jordie was crap. Where's the bias in that?
-
Bridge is too slow to be an international wing. Reece was fine, Beaunga isn't that bad. Cane should have started but we mostly lost that in the forwards, not the backs.
They made huge metres targeting where we were hiding Richie. Put us under huge pressure. Then he disappeared in the second half and BB tried to play two positions.
-
@antipodean said in Hansen:
Imagine if our loose forwards were Luatua and Cane.
Imagine a trio of Luatua, Cane and Vito with Ardie off the bench.
I think Ma'a Nonu would have done better than SBW off the bench too.
-
Agree. Limited coach who only won game because of the quality of NZ players.
But his decision to stack the team with a number of very limited Crusaders players (including Barrett who is not a 6) was really his main downfall
So he's a limited coach because he had great players AND a poor coach because he picked such limited Canterbury players? Surely he must have been a brilliant coach to get limited Crusaders players to support the brilliant players sufficiently to win a few games here and there.
And if we are flat track bullies, world rugby must have been dire over the last four years.
Focussing on it as a provincial issue ignores players that were tried and either found wanting or who were injured. While it might make you feel better blaming another part of the country, it ignores any real issues that need to be addressed.
-
Bridge is too slow to be an international wing. Reece was fine, Beaunga isn't that bad. Cane should have started but we mostly lost that in the forwards, not the backs.
They made huge metres targeting where we were hiding Richie. Put us under huge pressure. Then he disappeared in the second half and BB tried to play two positions.
True, but I was meaning more as a squad tactic than the the SF specifically. Agree that in the SF, Richie needed to be pulled early or trade places with BB on defence (similar to what they used to do with Mehrtens).
-
Bridge is too slow to be an international wing. Reece was fine, Beaunga isn't that bad. Cane should have started but we mostly lost that in the forwards, not the backs.
They made huge metres targeting where we were hiding Richie. Put us under huge pressure. Then he disappeared in the second half and BB tried to play two positions.
This is such ignorant bullshit. The 2 playmakers pattern has not Mounga and Barrett playing behind the line as dual fullbacks, they're not hiding Richie. It was exactly the same when jordie played 10. We're they hiding him too?
Bridge is too slow to be an international wing. Reece was fine, Beaunga isn't that bad. Cane should have started but we mostly lost that in the forwards, not the backs.
They made huge metres targeting where we were hiding Richie. Put us under huge pressure. Then he disappeared in the second half and BB tried to play two positions.
