All Blacks vs Ireland - series decider
-
@nostrildamus said in All Blacks vs Ireland - series decider:
https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/all-blacks/129271632/all-blacks-new-cap-roger-tuivasasheck-gets-coachs-nod-for-confidence-and-calmness#comments
" What that tells Havili is that he will not play 80min. "I'd have thought Havili might need to be fb cover in case the backline needs shuffling, sure Jordan can replace JB but who would replace a winger? Don't tell me JB is wing as well as midfield cover!??
I'm not sure why that's in reply to a post about Taukieaho.
Anyway I've read the thread now and am fucking gobsmacked. Lost what little faith I had left in this coaching group, what a bunch of Fucktards.
-
@Crucial said in All Blacks vs Ireland - series decider:
@ARHS said in All Blacks vs Ireland - series decider:
@Dan54. Irish pretty much at full strength bar Ringrose. But Aki might me a bigger handful for Havili and RTS. Henshaw good enough for either Jersey.
Bundee will be off his game. I had a quick chat to him in the stands the other night and reminded him (gently) of his CM and Chiefs roots.
Are you guys going for breakfast ?
-
@MN5 said in All Blacks vs Ireland - series decider:
@Crucial said in All Blacks vs Ireland - series decider:
@ARHS said in All Blacks vs Ireland - series decider:
@Dan54. Irish pretty much at full strength bar Ringrose. But Aki might me a bigger handful for Havili and RTS. Henshaw good enough for either Jersey.
Bundee will be off his game. I had a quick chat to him in the stands the other night and reminded him (gently) of his CM and Chiefs roots.
Are you guys going for breakfast ?
@jegga ‘s reserved a table
-
Just when you think Foster couldn't surprise you anymore, he explains the omission of ST with "we wanted to give all 3 hookers a run".
It's quite staggering when you step back and read that explanation.
It's the sort of thing I'd expect from the coach of my U9 sons soccer team. To hear it as the reason for including a bloke who has played 80 tests for NZ , at the expense of the best #2 in the squad, in a series-deciding game at home, is truly astonishing.
Unbelievable
-
@voodoo said in All Blacks vs Ireland - series decider:
Just when you think Foster couldn't surprise you anymore, he explains the omission of ST with "we wanted to give all 3 hookers a run".
It's quite staggering when you step back and read that explanation.
It's the sort of thing I'd expect from the coach of my U9 sons soccer team. To hear it as the reason for including a bloke who has played 80 tests for NZ , at the expense of the best #2 in the squad, in a series-deciding game at home, is truly astonishing.
Unbelievable
If they want to give all 3 hookers a run, why is the worst one starting all 3 tests and playing far too many minutes when he does so? It's a staggeringly bullshit explanation.
-
@Dan54 said in All Blacks vs Ireland - series decider:
@reprobate said in All Blacks vs Ireland - series decider:
@Dan54 said in All Blacks vs Ireland - series decider:
I will add that last night it occured to me what I finding most disconcerting about the position we find ourselves in (or ABs) and the reaction on rugby forums. We are tied in a test series and 4th on the rankings in world rugby, and while being a bit disppointed, not as disappointed as maybe the reaction on forums by so called AB supporters, there seems almost no credit given to Ireland for winning 2nd test, only tearing clothes and screaming about how poor ABs were, want to know something Irish were bloody good and made us look poor, and we 4th on rankings, prehaps French (in my opinion clearly best team), Ireland , and Boks (though I feel some of theirs is residual points from year off) just deserve to be in the positions they are in. When I was thinking of it I was thinking how much as a rugby nation we used to enjoy and celebrate bloody good teams and players, 71 Lions tour the whole of NZ knew all the Lion's players, and while wanting ABs to win would seemingly enjoy the Edwards, Johns, Gibson ete, etc skils, same as Wallabies when they had the likes of Ella, Campese, Eales etc, why has it in internet days changed where we can't give the likes of Doris, Sexton etc credit for being good players? I an starting to understand why maybe AB supporters are disliked by others at times.
Ok my rant over, but I think it came to me when I wondered why I was disappointed to miss club rugby this weekend while going to test, and that's one thing that came to mind, we don't think it our right to win at the club etc.It's not about a 'right to win', it's frustration with no game plan, seeing talented players underperform, and weird selections not based on form.
As for not celebrating players from other countries - for me and many others on here, that is just bullshit. We're not talking about O'driscoll, Horan, Eales, Dusattoir, Burger etc - we're talking about James Lowe and JGP beating the ABs, a team they couldn't make.There is a proof, how do we know they wouldn't have made ABs? Hell look at Isaac Boss people said the same about him, and ignore the fact he turned down AB jersey when selected. I agree Lowe and JGP are better players than they appeared when they left country, and speaks to me of a very good club comp they are in, also shows what I mean in comparing the teams, you can only name NZ players in Irish team. I am disappointed as anyone , but reamain of the opinion we need to look at other teams and how good somw of their players are. All you did was rubbish Lowe and JGP and not actually given them credit for being good players.
Because Aaron Smith is far superior, and back when Lowe started becoming Irish it'd be Ben Smith and Rieko Ioane, give or take. I have no idea what your point is with Isaac Boss.
I can't only name the NZ players, I used them as an example. There's a difference. Nor did I rubbish them, I just said they couldn't make the ABs, which is an indication that Ireland do not have the better players, which supports the argument understood by most that our coaches are fucking things up.
How about you start arguing points rather than using your posts to make arrogant assumptions about why the people disagreeing with you must be wrong? -
-
-
@Chester-Draws said in All Blacks vs Ireland - series decider:
@stodders said in All Blacks vs Ireland - series decider:
I'll play devil's advocate here:
Foster's time as head coach with the Chiefs wasn't great. But people can develop and improve if they show that they can learn from past mistakes.
People defending Foster always say this, but it isn't true. Poor coaches never turn into good coaches.
By the time Foster left the Chiefs he had been coaching for well over a decade. If he wasn't good by then, he never was going to be. He showed no upward path then, yet we are meant to believe that he would start showing one twenty years into his career? That is the height of optimism.
While people do learn from past mistakes, they also carry over old ideas and ways from the past that rapidly get out of date. Once you get to a certain amount of experience, the new things you learn generally don't cancel out all the old baggage that you carry.
This has been studied in various fields. Teachers, for example, are best after eight years experience, regardless of how old they were when they started. After that time they generally get worse with added experience.
It's why one of the best things a person who is a bit jaded can do is do something else, even if only for a short while.
Foster is doing exactly what the nay-sayers predicted -- picking favourites he won't drop, having fantastic performances followed by inexplicably bad ones, fielding teams with game plans that are out of date. That's who he is, and more experience is not going to change that.
Can you persuade me by giving examples of coaches who got better after more than a dozen years on the job? They are few and far between. Even great coaches tend to fade with age, rather than get better, which is also contrary to the "you get better with experience" line.
NZ Rugby got cocky. Like the great Auckland run of the 90's, then the great Crusaders run when they persisted with Blackadder, they actually believed that their systems were more important than the people they hired. As long as the man involved knew the system, then he would get results, because the system was so awesome. Someone like Robertson who was obviously going to change the system was actively avoided.
Foster was hired not because he was the best coach, and they knew that, but because he would continue the system. Turns out that their system always depended on having the best coaches after all.
So, as we saw with Blackadder and the Crusaders, a slip in results did not lead to a change in coach. They simply knew the system would win out, so they persisted for eight years of mediocrity. Luckily for them the next coach was from the system too, but good, so they started winning again. They are going to be baffled in Crusader land when the system doesn't work when he goes. The Blues were less lucky. They could not get their heads around why their system didn't give them championships once Graham Henry left. It turns out their much vaunted system required having the best coach, after all. (They didn't even get it once Henry returned and gave them one more championship, they were that pig-headed about it.)
The Chiefs persisted with eight years of Foster. The Crusaders with eight years of Blackadder. The Blues decades of uselessness. That NZ Rugby will come to their senses and realise that the coach is the problem is still some four years away. If we are lucky.
Post of the Year
-
@Chris-B said in All Blacks vs Ireland - series decider:
As a footnote - this is presumably the last AB team Grant Fox has a hand in selecting?
Thanks for all your contributions Grant!
I blame Fox.
-
@Bones said in All Blacks vs Ireland - series decider:
I will not at all be surprised to see Papalii come on at 6 and Ioane come on at 8.
Akira played a chunk at seven with those experimental laws. So Akira to seven, Dalton to 8 and Cane to switch to 6.
-
@nostrildamus said in All Blacks vs Ireland - series decider:
https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/all-blacks/129271632/all-blacks-new-cap-roger-tuivasasheck-gets-coachs-nod-for-confidence-and-calmness#comments
" What that tells Havili is that he will not play 80min. "I'd have thought Havili might need to be fb cover in case the backline needs shuffling, sure Jordan can replace JB but who would replace a winger? Don't tell me JB is wing as well as midfield cover!??
Thats enough interwebbing for you pal...you are stuck in some kind of loop
-
@Bones said in All Blacks vs Ireland - series decider:
@nostrildamus said in All Blacks vs Ireland - series decider:
https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/all-blacks/129271632/all-blacks-new-cap-roger-tuivasasheck-gets-coachs-nod-for-confidence-and-calmness#comments
" What that tells Havili is that he will not play 80min. "I'd have thought Havili might need to be fb cover in case the backline needs shuffling, sure Jordan can replace JB but who would replace a winger? Don't tell me JB is wing as well as midfield cover!??
I'm not sure why that's in reply to a post about Taukieaho.
Anyway I've read the thread now and am fucking gobsmacked. Lost what little faith I had left in this coaching group, what a bunch of Fucktards.
my fault sorry Bones, was meant to be just to the thread.
-
@taniwharugby said in All Blacks vs Ireland - series decider:
Thats enough interwebbing for you pal...you are stuck in some kind of loop
yeah when I watch the ABs now I keep thinking I am watching the Chiefs 2004-2011...
-
@voodoo said in All Blacks vs Ireland - series decider:
Just when you think Foster couldn't surprise you anymore, he explains the omission of ST with "we wanted to give all 3 hookers a run".
It's quite staggering when you step back and read that explanation.
It's the sort of thing I'd expect from the coach of my U9 sons soccer team. To hear it as the reason for including a bloke who has played 80 tests for NZ , at the expense of the best #2 in the squad, in a series-deciding game at home, is truly astonishing.
Unbelievable
Disclaimer: haven't read all the thread.
When I saw the 23 I though Sami might have unfit or Foster wanted to go for experience - which would have made some sense along with DH at 12. But then he puts RTS with about a dozen games of top level RU in the 23 to cover midfield (good for him and hope he goes as well as people say he will). And now he comes up with "wanting to give all 3 hookers a run"?
Seriously? WTF does wanting to give a player a run have to do with picking the best 23?
-
@nostrildamus said in All Blacks vs Ireland - series decider:
https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/all-blacks/129271632/all-blacks-new-cap-roger-tuivasasheck-gets-coachs-nod-for-confidence-and-calmness#comments
" What that tells Havili is that he will not play 80min. "I'd have thought Havili might need to be fb cover in case the backline needs shuffling, sure Jordan can replace JB but who would replace a winger? Don't tell me JB is wing as well as midfield cover!??
Akira or Paps probably. I've reached the stage where nothing would surprise me.
-
@Kirwan said in All Blacks vs Ireland - series decider:
@Bones said in All Blacks vs Ireland - series decider:
I will not at all be surprised to see Papalii come on at 6 and Ioane come on at 8.
Akira played a chunk at seven with those experimental laws. So Akira to seven, Dalton to 8 and Cane to switch to 6.
Ardie to 12, Mounga to 15, Havili to 10 and RTS to 11/14.
