Most valuable player in WC to team
-
A Smith 100% we have no chance without him
-
I admit I was going to say Sam W, but then when I thought of how we went when BB was binned against Poms, noone seemed to get backs together and he does it a lot during games, ditto I think we just may of possibly still held on and beaten Irish in 2nd test if Ardie had been allowed back on, even one player down. Smith is someone who slipped past my brain that I wouldn't argue with, I was kind of thinking of Jordie covering uo for RMo, who I think needs a bit of help and thats even when Smith gives hin great ball
-
@Dan54 said in Most valuable player in WC to team:
thinking of Jordie covering uo for RMo, who I think needs a bit of help
absolutely damning
-
@mariner4life said in Most valuable player in WC to team:
@Dan54 said in Most valuable player in WC to team:
thinking of Jordie covering uo for RMo, who I think needs a bit of help
absolutely damning
Probably is a bit mate, just not real convinced he a top line 10 at test level, though probably best we got in NZ at moment. I believe BB needs help if he at 10 too.
-
no i 100% agree with you.
I'm not as sold that JB is this magic steadying influence at 12 that some think, but
RM is the best we've got, so we are going with him no matter what. And we are going to have to make the best of it.
BB is far worse than RM at 10, the ABs worst performances by far last year had BB starting.
It is damning of "Super" rugby that the standard of play at 10 in both NZ and Australia has fallen off a cliff.
-
@mariner4life said in Most valuable player in WC to team:
It is damning of "Super" rugby that the standard of play at 10 in both NZ and Australia has fallen off a cliff.
It's rapidly becoming the competition the Walrus said it was. Success at Super is no longer a good predictor of success at Test level
-
@nzzp said in Most valuable player in WC to team:
@mariner4life said in Most valuable player in WC to team:
It is damning of "Super" rugby that the standard of play at 10 in both NZ and Australia has fallen off a cliff.
It's rapidly becoming the competition the Walrus said it was. Success at Super is no longer a good predictor of success at Test level
Globetrotters rugby indeed
-
In terms of ABs we really need the following to be fit and healthy at the business end:
Samisoni
Whitelock
Ardie
Smith
Jordie
Rieko
JordanIf those guys are fit and firing we are a great shout of winning the thing. If any of them get injured, our chances take a serious hit.
In terms of positions, I think the most important are 2, 9, 10 and 15. As when blokes wearing those shirts have a shocker it really hurts their team. We obviously have a pretty big problem at 10.
-
@canefan said in Most valuable player in WC to team:
@nzzp said in Most valuable player in WC to team:
@mariner4life said in Most valuable player in WC to team:
It is damning of "Super" rugby that the standard of play at 10 in both NZ and Australia has fallen off a cliff.
It's rapidly becoming the competition the Walrus said it was. Success at Super is no longer a good predictor of success at Test level
Globetrotters rugby indeed
it's also seriously imbalanced. If you took what i would consider to be the 26 "elite" players in NZ, or those most likely penned in to an AB squad
The Blues and Crusaders have 8 each. The chiefs 4, Highlanders and Hurricanes 3 each. Throw in the general weakness of the Australian teams and you really only need to be good a couple of times a year to win the comp.
That's not breeding the right players. -
@nzzp said in Most valuable player in WC to team:
@mariner4life said in Most valuable player in WC to team:
It is damning of "Super" rugby that the standard of play at 10 in both NZ and Australia has fallen off a cliff.
It's rapidly becoming the competition the Walrus said it was. Success at Super is no longer a good predictor of success at Test level
Part of the problem these day is test rugby is centered around size and defense. A wet dream for the Walrus. You can't run teams off their feet like you used to be able to as the game is so stop-start now, and teams use their subs tactically so their big blokes are less likely to be exploited at the back end of the game. I think that's an area the ABs have struggled with the past couple of years, as we tend to try to weather the storm then run them ragged. I don't think any of that is good for rugby, and the officials should be seriously trying to speed the game up if only for player safety, but this is really a post for the 'State of the Game' thread.
-
@mariner4life Amen mate, geez we miss the Saffa teams!
-
@mariner4life said in Most valuable player in WC to team:
It is damning of "Super" rugby that the standard of play at 10 in both NZ and Australia has fallen off a cliff.
It starts way before Super Rugby. College Rugby and the effect of TV showings blowing smoke up young fellas is a big part. You can add to that the loss of any sort of apprenticeship for 10s and the desire of coaches at school/club levels to put big munters at 12 to get go forward and ask the 10 to just be a shoveller.
10s need to learn how to control a game. How to kick for territory and to break teams down. Cast doubt in the opposition defensive plans etc.
Just like how a young cricketer will struggle to get noticed with a good openers technique, a young 10 that doesn't feed the ball constantly to the backs won't last long.
-
@mariner4life said in Most valuable player in WC to team:
@canefan said in Most valuable player in WC to team:
@nzzp said in Most valuable player in WC to team:
@mariner4life said in Most valuable player in WC to team:
It is damning of "Super" rugby that the standard of play at 10 in both NZ and Australia has fallen off a cliff.
It's rapidly becoming the competition the Walrus said it was. Success at Super is no longer a good predictor of success at Test level
Globetrotters rugby indeed
it's also seriously imbalanced. If you took what i would consider to be the 26 "elite" players in NZ, or those most likely penned in to an AB squad
The Blues and Crusaders have 8 each. The chiefs 4, Highlanders and Hurricanes 3 each. Throw in the general weakness of the Australian teams and you really only need to be good a couple of times a year to win the comp.
That's not breeding the right players.So it's what one considers the 26 elite players? That's seems awfully subjective. For the record I think Chiefs have a squad that is very capable of winning 2023, the Hurricanes as well, both sides have a lot of young talent hitting their athletic peak years. When you look at the age profile of those two squads they have so many talented players hitting 23/24/25 this season. I think Chiefs squad is as good as Blues and Crusaders.
-
@kiwi_expat take your boring narrative back to the Derp thread please
-
This post is deleted!
-
@mariner4life I beg to disagree. In finals footie, all the 10s need a 12.
In 2003 England without Mike Catt at 12 outside Wilko in their quarter versus Wales would have lost. At the same cup, Mauger calling for the missed pass didn't help Carlos escape the firing line in '03 either! Then in 2011 Nonu looked after Donald and was largely unheralded. -
@reddog said in Most valuable player in WC to team:
I beg to disagree. In finals footie, all the 10s need a 12.
what? no shit. They need a halfback and an openside and a fullback and like, other players too
