Bledisloe Two: Auckland, October 18
-
I know he's copped a lot of grief but credit to McLeod's defence this week. The only Wallabies try came off of Moody knocking himself out. Coles showed the intent early and there was definitely a lift in intensity with the defence - far less passive and a lot more accurate. The more the game went on the more it felt like the ABs were starting to work out the Wallaby attacking pattern although I think a big part of that was Toomua going off.
Without Whitelock I thought the AB lineout could really struggle but it went well - was really impressed by Vaai - in a tough first 40 minutes he was really good for a 20 year old rookie. He doesn't seem to back down at all.
Clarke showing why he should be starting - this is why people have banging on about him. Having a threat like that out wide makes a huge difference - something the ABs simply didn't have last year - combination of size, power and footwork. I like the combination of Clarke getting himself in the game and the ABs trying to get him in the game.
Ardie was excellent - question marks remain about his game against bigger packs but credit to him he had a wonderful game.
The two debutants should be proud - both made a good impact when they were on.
The Wallabies shouldn't be too disheartened at all - I thought they would have been really happy at halftime right in the game but were just too sloppy after the break. I thought JOC had the better of Mounga in the first 40 and a complete role reversal in the second 40. Moving forward Wallabies should start Petaia on the wing and give Koroibete a rest.
-
@Chris-B said in Bledisloe Two: Auckland, October 18:
@DMX said in Bledisloe Two: Auckland, October 18:
I do have to wonder what Jordie is adding on the wing, didn’t see much chasing and a couple of times we seemed to be craving pace on his wing.
Couldn't help but think - when we kicked ahead into the in goal and Jordie was beaten in the chase - Will Jordan missed out on his first test try!
Think Will (and a couple of others) will be waiting for a game vs Argentina.
Both Jordie and Koroibete seemed to be wading through treacle chasing that ball.
Overall, that was a great game of rugby with harem-scarem passing, a referee who let most infringements go and both teams really going for it. A 20 point deficit was harsh on the Wallabies as the game slipped away from them fast. The wind that helped their kicking in Wellington wasn't there to make it a lottery and made too many of their kicks aimless - including the awful one by JOC that deserved to be punished and effectively ended the game coming so soon in the second half.
-
@Derpus i dont think people think everything is rosy, i think the game was won by the high skill of the players rather than the best team performance
-
@Kiwiwomble said in Bledisloe Two: Auckland, October 18:
@Derpus i dont think people think everything is rosy, i think the game was won by the high skill of the players rather than the best team performance
Yeah the players rather than coaching team/tactics won it
-
Heard Bryn Hall say a few months back on the Super Rugby Aoteroa podcast that Caleb Clarke is one of the best in the country under the high ball, so having Clarke and J Barrett on the wings might be perfect in the future to counter all of the box kicks from england and SA just saying..... we can afford to have J Barrett playing a Ben Smith (2015) role of the second full back safety net defusing bombs, with Clarke as a destructive ball runner too
-
okay, now that i'm sober
thoughts of a bloke who watched at a pub that was overwhelmingly full of kiwis, while deleting schooners.
Great fucking game of rugby. That is what test rugby should be, it was open and fast, errors were made while trying things, both sides had a fucking crack. Australia were amazing for the first quarter, controlled the ball, controlled the field, and picked us apart. It was a credit to the defense we didn't give up any points. I thought a couple of turnovers were a little dicey, but that proved to be the way the ref played it all game. Then we looked dangerous as soon as the game opened up, and i thought "shit this is Fozzie's chiefs alright". But we seemed to grow as the game went on, and our forwards got on top the old fashioned way.
And i thought the game was a seesaw contest from then on, with both sides having their opportunity to have a crack. The only difference in the score was that little bit of "luck" that stopped Aussie scoring, while we did.
The significant difference to last week, from an AB perspective, was the greater intent in the physical stuff. Harder shots, harder running, harder cleaning out. And this created more opportunity for the flair players, because they had a fraction more time, and more broken field opportunities. It also resulted in Aussie defending from their heels more (like we did last week) which always results in more missed tackles.
Clarke was obviously the eye catcher, but then a big strong quick winger is always going to look good in a game like that. BBarrett was a menace, and now very obviously our best 15 just because he's still such a threat in broken play. ALB made a difference on both sides of the ball. If A Savea is going to play like that every week he can stay. I thought the rookie locks were fucking good. Scrum wobbled as i expected, but around the tracks they both had good games. Good stuff from the newbies off the bench.
It's not all rosey by any means, but this was such a step up from last week. It's a simple game rugby.
-
@Yeahtheboys Bryn Hall said recently that the Crusaders had a game plan in this year's game v Blues to avoid kicking to Caleb Clarke because he is so good under the high ball.
-
@Derpus said in Bledisloe Two: Auckland, October 18:
@DMX It's funny how one week Foster is singlehandedly leading the downfall of NZ rugby and the next all is rosy.
I think the ABs weaknesses remain - i thought the Wallabies were at least several notches below where they were the week before and still managed to keep the losing margin to our lowest in 10 years at Eden Park.
As good as he is, I can't see Caleb Clarke running straight over the top of three Saffa or English forwards. That was a uniquely Australian performance.
You haven't been here long have you?
-
im going to ask a stupid question,
there was a ruck in the second half, aussie took it in, we tried to counter, pile of bodies with a halfback on either side, ball sitting on top dead centre...both half backs could reach it but when TJP went to pick it up the ref said no....if we have driven back and can now reach the ball...isn't is fair game?...i assume not
-
@Kiwiwomble said in Bledisloe Two: Auckland, October 18:
im going to ask a stupid question,
there was a ruck in the second half, aussie took it in, we tried to counter, pile of bodies with a halfback on either side, ball sitting on top dead centre...both half backs could reach it but when TJP went to pick it up the ref said no....if we have driven back and can now reach the ball...isn't is fair game?...i assume not
Mmm.
Some of the rucks where we had countered blowing them back off the ball defied logic that the Wobs still won possession.
-
@Kiwiwomble said in Bledisloe Two: Auckland, October 18:
im going to ask a stupid question,
there was a ruck in the second half, aussie took it in, we tried to counter, pile of bodies with a halfback on either side, ball sitting on top dead centre...both half backs could reach it but when TJP went to pick it up the ref said no....if we have driven back and can now reach the ball...isn't is fair game?...i assume not
It is, but Angus is special. He should've let it go because for it to be a ruck the ball needs to be on the ground. So instead he's determined that the defending team needs to drive over the ball which would make sense if it was on the ground.
-
@Derpus said in Bledisloe Two: Auckland, October 18:
As good as he is, I can't see Caleb Clarke running straight over the top of three Saffa or English forwards. That was a uniquely Australian performance.
I can't see a Saffer or English box kick into the midfield where things become rapidly shit.
-
Players aimlessly hoofing the ball downfield is what makes rugby exciting to watch.
-
@antipodean said in Bledisloe Two: Auckland, October 18:
Players aimlessly hoofing the ball downfield is what makes rugby exciting to watch.
-
@NTA said in Bledisloe Two: Auckland, October 18:
@antipodean said in Bledisloe Two: Auckland, October 18:
Players aimlessly hoofing the ball downfield is what makes rugby exciting to watch.
That would be you if other teams aimlessly kicked to yours.
-
Some of the ruck rulings leave you scratching your head. I think the ruck ruling was basically if you got hands on the ball quickly, everything was fine. But god knows - Hooper worked magic out there at times, but it seemed to be ruled inconsistently. IT was noticeable to me (after a couple of drinks anyway) that ABs seemed slightly slower getting over the ball, but did well in cleanouts when we did get there. If hands went to ball, it didn't seem to matter if you were on or off feet.
In modern rugby, you can get tackled hard, bounce off the ground after the impact, but concede a penalty for not releasing before you've actually stopped moving vertically is ... interesting. Still, that's the modern game, we need to be good at it.
Seems you get good reward for body position in the tackle - getting the ball well back on your side prevents turnovers
-
-
@Frank said in Bledisloe Two: Auckland, October 18:
Ardie does the best dramatic flailing arm gestures right after he tackles someone.
That combined with Kieran Read and his whinging at the ref antics made it very dangerous to stand near either of them back in 2019.
-
@MN5 said in Bledisloe Two: Auckland, October 18:
@Frank said in Bledisloe Two: Auckland, October 18:
Ardie does the best dramatic flailing arm gestures right after he tackles someone.
That combined with Kieran Read and his whinging at the ref antics made it very dangerous to stand near either of them back in 2019.
he was at it again for counties against otago on the weekend, even got a ball throw in frustration
-
@Kiwiwomble said in Bledisloe Two: Auckland, October 18:
im going to ask a stupid question,
there was a ruck in the second half, aussie took it in, we tried to counter, pile of bodies with a halfback on either side, ball sitting on top dead centre...both half backs could reach it but when TJP went to pick it up the ref said no....if we have driven back and can now reach the ball...isn't is fair game?...i assume not
Back in the day if the ball wasn’t physically on the deck and just lying on top of a player that has no protection then it was seen as fair game to take.
