Brumbies v Crusaders
-
@Chris-B any ball playing props should be seriously being looked at with a view to improving thier scrummaging, this is a huge gap at the moment for us
-
@taniwharugby said in Brumbies v Crusaders:
@Chris-B any ball playing props should be seriously being looked at with a view to improving thier scrummaging, this is a huge gap at the moment for us
Is it easier to turn a ball playing prop into a better scrummager or get a scrummager to improve their ball playing? Judging by Moody, Franks etc I suspect not.
-
@taniwharugby Any new props who are going to RWC realistically need to be blooded this year. I think Fozzie needs to pick Newell somewhere along the line and get him into the environment, because he is really showing great promise.
On the other hand, I guess Fozzie has to strike a balance between his established group of players and the bright new things. You don't want the older guys getting the pip, disappearing north and then discovering your newbies aren't yet up to the job.
Seems to me that there's a few props about the place who've taken the ball-playing memo onboard. He's not a fern favourite, so I'll say it quietly, but I've been quite impressed with George Bower's ball-running. He's got some decent acceleration and takes the ball into contact hard.
-
@chimoaus said in Brumbies v Crusaders:
@taniwharugby said in Brumbies v Crusaders:
@Chris-B any ball playing props should be seriously being looked at with a view to improving thier scrummaging, this is a huge gap at the moment for us
Is it easier to turn a ball playing prop into a better scrummager or get a scrummager to improve their ball playing? Judging by Moody, Franks etc I suspect not.
Who knows - you'd imagine you can get some improvement out of people in both aspects, but everyone is going to reach their natural limits.
Ball running props seem a bit like improved ground-fielding in cricket. A great thing to have and can be a match-winner - but, you still need to be a good batsman or bowler.
No matter how crap the rest of their game is going - if my team is dominating the scrum, I've always got a fair bit of hope and expectation that we'll come out on the right side of the ledger.
I'd be picking guys who are strong scrummagers - first and foremost - and working on their mobility.
-
@Chris-B although if your props can't contribute much round the park it ties up and works your locks alot more, plus your loosies and hooker carry the extra load too.
-
@taniwharugby said in Brumbies v Crusaders:
@Chris-B although if your props can't contribute much round the park it ties up and works your locks alot more, plus your loosies and hooker carry the extra load too.
Newell carries well and at 21 that will improve I would think.His core work is very good for his age,Scrumaging,Clean outs and lifting in the lineouts,I noticed how high Barrett was getting in the line outs and kick off's thanks to his props.
He dominated Slipper and had the better of Sio in the brumbies game. -
-
@Chris-B said in Brumbies v Crusaders:
AB tighthead prop is kind of a congested position - Ofa,
Nepo, Tyrel andAngusin the queue - but it will be interesting to see how Newell finishes the Super season.Nepo's mobility is pathetic.
Angus can't scrum to save himself.
Tyrel's scrummaging at test level probably has a question mark over it. -
@Bovidae said in Brumbies v Crusaders:
Work rate around the park is more important than scrummaging ability, as often there aren't that many scrums. Obviously, you would prefer props who excel at both but the balance should be in favour of what you do outside of scrums.
Like any position vital you execute your main role really well first - not much point having a prop that's good around the field, but is poor at scrummaging... scrums are an attacking weapon, if you're going backwards there you're going to be under a lot of pressure throughout matches... anyway most props in NZ are very mobile & have good running/passing skills etc.
-
Just watched the highlights, glad the Crusaders beat the boring Brumbies... stunned that they awarded that try to the Brumbies when the player obviously dropped it cold on the goal line, they also got an intercept try, Crusaders could've easily won by 20 odd points.
-
@Frank said in Brumbies v Crusaders:
@Chris-B said in Brumbies v Crusaders:
AB tighthead prop is kind of a congested position - Ofa,
Nepo, Tyrel andAngusin the queue - but it will be interesting to see how Newell finishes the Super season.Nepo's mobility is pathetic.
Angus can't scrum to save himself.
Tyrel's scrummaging at test level probably has a question mark over it.A bit of exaggeration to make the point - but, I don't disagree with the general direction Frank.
But, there's the problem for Ireland - and to an extent Newell.
We can shed one guy (Angus, IMO), but not both, because you've got to have some known quantities - and you're also wanting to develop Lomax. I think Newell will get his chance later down the line - unless (and probably when) injuries force Fozzie's hand.
-
@Bovidae said in Brumbies v Crusaders:
Work rate around the park is more important than scrummaging ability, as often there aren't that many scrums. Obviously, you would prefer props who excel at both but the balance should be in favour of what you do outside of scrums.
Can't really agree on this.
You can survive without ball-running props, but if you've got a weak scrum that can be heavily exploited with endless penalties and cards.
-
@Chris-B said in Brumbies v Crusaders:
@Bovidae said in Brumbies v Crusaders:
Work rate around the park is more important than scrummaging ability, as often there aren't that many scrums. Obviously, you would prefer props who excel at both but the balance should be in favour of what you do outside of scrums.
Can't really agree on this.
You can survive without ball-running props, but if you've got a weak scrum that can be heavily exploited with endless penalties and cards.
There's a gap thuogh - between penalty conceding weak, and able to hold your own, and dominant. Dominant is nice, but not every ref whistles that appropriately (see RWC 2003 final).
I think the argument is to avoid 'weak' rather than have to be dominant. Frankly, our tight 5 is our weakness at the moment, and that's where we are going to get consistently found out by good teams. We are nowhere near where we were, and I think NH packs are ahead of us in quality on the ground and playing the ball.
-
@nzzp Yeah I know. There's shades of grey in everything.
But, I'm going to e.g. pick Nepo over Angus, because I value his stronger scrummaging over Angus' greater mobility.
But, I'd favour someone fractionally weaker in the scrum if they bring significantly more mobility.
-
@Chris-B said in Brumbies v Crusaders:
@nzzp Yeah I know. There's shades of grey in everything.
But, I'm going to e.g. pick Nepo over Angus, because I value his stronger scrummaging over Angus' greater mobility.
But, I'd favour someone fractionally weaker in the scrum if they bring significantly more mobility.
Like Hodgman?
-
@chimoaus Compared to Moody - maybe, but not yet.
Hodgman is largely untested at test level, so ideally he's still eased into it - though whomever we use vs Ireland isn't going to be experienced. But perhaps Hodgman over Big Karl.
Ofa over Nepo, though - if we were only using one of them.
-
@nzzp said in Brumbies v Crusaders:
@Chris-B said in Brumbies v Crusaders:
@Bovidae said in Brumbies v Crusaders:
Work rate around the park is more important than scrummaging ability, as often there aren't that many scrums. Obviously, you would prefer props who excel at both but the balance should be in favour of what you do outside of scrums.
Can't really agree on this.
You can survive without ball-running props, but if you've got a weak scrum that can be heavily exploited with endless penalties and cards.
There's a gap thuogh - between penalty conceding weak, and able to hold your own, and dominant. Dominant is nice, but not every ref whistles that appropriately (see RWC 2003 final).
I think the argument is to avoid 'weak' rather than have to be dominant. Frankly, our tight 5 is our weakness at the moment, and that's where we are going to get consistently found out by good teams. We are nowhere near where we were, and I think NH packs are ahead of us in quality on the ground and playing the ball.
NH sides are not doing anything special, just doing the basics well in the breakdown area, for some strange bloody reason we are not doing the work there enough ...as mentioned before the breakdown area is easily the most contested area in the game, so why are we not focusing a lot more in the breakdown stuff ???
-
@NZbloke and passing and carrying the ball more, and defending more aggressively
-
@nzzp said in Brumbies v Crusaders:
@NZbloke and passing and carrying the ball more, and defending more aggressively
True, but all starts with the tight-five.
-
@Chris-B said in Brumbies v Crusaders:
But, I'd favour someone fractionally weaker in the scrum if they bring significantly more mobility.
Which is the point I was making. If you have, for arguments sake, Fidow at one end of the spectrum and Laulala at the other end, I would lean towards Fidow's side of halfway.
