Vaa'i is going to be on the bench for Wales and France so needs a decent hitout against the USA. I am expecting him to start with Whitelock and Lord to get 20 mins off the bench. It seems BBBR will be one of the players heading to Cardiff early.
There feels to me to be more angst at refereeing these days and more talk of unconscious bias leading to 50/50 calls going against teams. I seem to recall the Oz GAGR forum curating videos uncovering AB skulduggery in the past (lots of yellow circles), and I'm sure there was a NZ one (or two) after 2007. This mantle has been picked up by the South Africans (with a large dollop of help from Jaco Johan) who now seem to be making videos showing how the Boks are the victims of a global conspiracy by refs. I recall some Irish ref-bashing in the past, but this seems to have died down now that they've managed to beat NZ a couple of times.
So my questions are, do you feel your team is more penalised than other teams? And if so, do you think there is a reason why? Or is it more to do with your own team's inadequacies?
I think not all penalties given in a game have the same impact. Some can really change the momentum and a couple in a row can lead to crucial points that can change a game big time. People say it evens out in the end, but the fact is it doesn't within 80 minutes - often one team will benefit more from calls going their way at crucial moments in the match.
I don't for a second believe there is any conspiracy, or that any one team is more often unfairly penalised, but sometimes your team does get pretty screwed by refereeing mistakes, so fans feel aggrieved.
It's a fast dynamic sport though, I'd say the hardest sport in the world to officiate, and I've come to accept that refs are going to make a handful of mistakes every game. I used to get really riled up at the injustice of it all, but these days I tend to not be too fazed. It's part of the game, and the best teams need the mental toughness to overcome things that don't go their way - the ABs under Richie post 2007 were superb at not letting bad calls throw them off their game.
So Akira Ioane and Jordie Barrett are going to be the top two players on the Fern's MoM table after the Rugby Championship. Hats off to them on their hard work on developing themselves and delivering on their potential. Hoping that both can develop further into dominant world-class players and even all-time greats in the next few years.
1995 is more amazing given most of the incumbents were still available for selection.
Kronfeld, Mehrtens and Osbourne had a solitary test against Canada prior to the tournament and were the starting 7, 10 and 15.
The Baby Blacks was the 1986 side, which had a massive number of noobs due to the Cavaliers being stood down. Only four even had test experience -- and one of those was Arthur Stone.
While 1994 Lomu looked a bit out of sorts, it was pretty obvious right from the start that he was always going to be special. It was only three games into his AB career and he was the pretty close to the best player in the world. (
Christian Cullen only arrives fully formed if you don't count Sevens first.
There is also a premium article on Rugbypass, pointing out similar errors. In addition, the lack of growth in attacking plays, with the same plays that were used Vs Fiji& Oz, also used Vs boks. Not only that, they've been around since the Hansen era
The try mentioned is the Savea one, which was just saying beaudy brilliance, and not a set play
The try highlighted the possibilities for the All Blacks had they schemed deliberately for what they were facing, instead of rolling out Foster’s same old menu and trying to take on the Springboks in areas of strength like the maul.
Based on their two games against the Springboks, Rennie and his staff looked far superior to the All Blacks brains trust when it came to game planning for the world champions.
They tailored their game to the opposition to attack the weaknesses, whereas the All Blacks naively went brazenly forward trying to attack South Africa’s strengths and it backfired.
This should be a key lesson for Foster’s All Blacks moving forward. In the organised parts of the game, they cannot change the pieces performing the roles, run the same plays against everyone and expect them to work.
There needs to be some flexibility there and more thought into the process.
The fact that they were running the same starter play with McKenzie on the left wing showed a certain level of naivety that, to no surprise, blew up.
In tight test matches where counter-attacking opportunities dry up, the All Blacks will need to have a clinical set-piece attacking plan which, at times, needs to be adjusted for the opposition.
They might have the most attacking talent in the world, but they still need decent plans to be devised to help them get the match-ups and space they need to let their skills shine.
You cannot roll up and play the same against Fiji as you do against the Springboks and expect to win handsomely.
It could work, or it could just as easily blow up like it did twice in the Rugby Championship..
@crucial I like how he seems to make the gain line. Just one of those things he seems to do well. I think Foster would find it difficult to move away from Havilli though.
Some of those passes DH had to receive were excruciating. If they play BB and TJP again they should choose for 12 who ever can catch the ball despite how bad the pass is. I didn't actually see the one per game dud pass from Weber though, thought he was very good.
I'll have to rewatch it but Samsoni was attracting several defenders at a time, not going backwards and solid with ball security, given last week they gave Akira a lot of 2 tackler attention it would be rather mouthwatering to see them both on the field.
I know most of the Ferners prefer Mo'unga to BB but the latter launched his backline perfectly against the Argies last Sunday. It was smooth and direct. I can't remember Mo'unga doing the same with the black jersey. Of course, Mo'unga is a far better goalkicker but with Jordie taking the goalkicking duties, this could not be a problem anymore. Moreover, defensively, BB is superior to RM, IMO.
The jury on Mo'unga is still out for me, he struggles against a committed defense and tends to just shovel the ball on when they are getting up in his face. Loved what I saw from Beauden in this match, taking the line on despite the hard tackling from the Argies, created lots of space and time for those outside him. That said, Beauden hasn't exactly been very consistent, so he needs to string some performances together. I'm 50/50 on who starts and who is on the bench.
Very 50/50 indeed, in a healthy way though.
Gregor Paul just wrote a fanboi/fluffer piece after the first Pumas match about BB on the "RugbyXV" site but made a reasonable point that BB and Jordie look very comfortable together and had great understanding, no surprise. He kind of presented it as the Barrett brothers vs Mounga and McKenzie ... not sure I agree!
I'd rather they lock in a key moving part and make Jordie the #1 full-back, THEN decide 10. Richie Mounga at 10 and BB at 15 always seem to play like an unconscious "battle of the egos" for my eyes.
Under Shag, Cane got left out of the starting line-up of a WC semi-final.
Yeah, the one bloke who would have caused England serious problems from the word go.
That loss still rankles with me - and not just for the Cane omission. Some of the dumbest play I've seen from an AB team for years, mainly from the senior players
It’s taken me a long time to accept that Sam Whitelock might be a decent captain after his facepalm to Farrell late on, which effectively ended what little glimmer of hope we might have had of pinching that match
I don't blame him for that - it was a ridiculous intervention by the referee.
Farrell was being a prick. But he bit the bait
That's not in contention. It's the bullshit reversal from Owen that's the issue.
I agree. But in the current climate the retaliator almost always gets pinged. So we can argue but at the end of the day he needs to keep his discipline there
@mn5 Sorry fellas got distracted, but not sure why I cranky etc, I just wonder why I get shit because I asked if anyone knew of the ABs having a harder test schedule. Instead of answering I get called a Fozzie supporter (which I will be while he coaches ABs, because I an AB supposter) . So I tkae it noone really know of a heavier test schedule?
One should never get cranky on the fern, it’s all fun and bullshit on here anyway.
I agree wholeheartedly mate, I never take it too seriously, hell it's a forum on the Net!
well done to you both, some great points .
My biggest concern is at breakdown and at times not throwing enough numbers , it’s fair to say in these last 2 tests against the boks it’s been very uncomfortable in that facet and it’s fair to say we have had our arses handed to us but it also happened against the Fijians at times during both tests earlier this year and last year against the Pumas went we lost for the first time in our history and of course against England at the RWC 2019.
For me it’s been a red flag for a very long time , with inaccuracies to hold onto the ball for any period of time against quality opposition comes indiscipline when defending along with failure to deal with high kicks .
There are times we can slow the game down to reassess especially if the defence solid .
Personally I think South Africa , England or France can beat us on a given day , because in the last 2 weeks the Boks have highlighted all the short comings of this current All Black team..Whitelock will improve the lineout , but I want to see way more of our tight forwards , to me they have been the real disappointment.
May rewatch but they seemed to be the only ones without a glaring mistake.
Penalty in front of the ref, didn't see a mistake, unnecessary forward pass.. ah oops answered. Anyway, apart from mistakes, good selection although I thought Sam came more into the fore later on. Nugget was mostly excellent, again but I worry about our replacements..
I have another apology for the AB coaches, I thought in an earlier Bledisloe the coaches had the bench replacement timing all wrong. Maybe, but it is clear that a bigger issue is, the AB bench just isn't of the same calibre.
Having Matt Philip behind him helps. I've only just reached that point.
Having just rewatched it may be Ta'avao has been a bit hard done by. First scrum after Patty T on and Whitelock swaps sides. PT packed very high on Karl, and looks like Sam slipped off Ta'avao, who then has whole Wallaby pack driving through him.
Poor cohesion by Black pack, whereas Wallaby changes seem to have been upgrade.
Ta'avao did Ok at previous scrum with Codie and BBBR still on, although scrum did collapse on his side.
Oh ok yeah you're spot on. GCT and Boshier going overseas are the nails in Foster's coffin,
Wow. That''s not what I said, man. On the smelling salts again?
Are you jailbreak?
nope but you replied to me.
Because you weirdly replied to my reply to him, and I stand by my reply to him.
I thought this was a forum.
Happy for you to fill me in on how GCT and Boshier would have saved us from our catastrophic year this year though.
My point was it is not a fair comparision because there isn't the depth there this year (and actually Josh Blackie, if that is who you mean, was a gold medalist and Junior AB so could play a bit. GCT I'd argue, has been a solid player for the blues even if currently ineligible, I don't think that was a crazy suggestion, it is not as if Patty T suddenly became lethargic in tests when he started).
My second point is if you move the goalposts there won't be a fair discussion. I'm guessing @Jailbreak7 was saying other players should have been tried, and those going overseas were probably let down a tad early.
But you appear to be conflating and extrapolating wildly, focusing on just two of the points @Jailbreak7 made, not the entire post (application, muscle, inventiveness, succession plan, strategically unprepared for NH coaching/experience)...
Yup, you boiled all that down to GCT and Boshier. He/she said that but a helluva lot more.
Since you only want a personal to and fro with a "weird" fragment of @Jailbreak7 posts I'll leave you to your strawman solipsism.
My point, I see, was made by @MN5 but with more subtlety. Kudos.
I am not sure I have ever read the word 'solipsism' on the Fern before.
I’m even more surprised a point I made was described as “subtle”
I've got you on ignore so must have missed what that point was. Even more subtle.
Falealii and the Samoan loosies were also impressive in my view. Fomai superb throughout
The Samoan loosies were good. I think they were helped a bit by the Maori selection though. Four locks in the 23 and no specialist loose forward cover. The player they could least afford to get injured was Harmon.. so of course that's what happened
It's strange to think back 2-3 years ago when the Maori were struggling to find any locks. Now they don't know who to leave out
There was a Ba Bas match or a possible v probables in 91 , Jones was 7 playing against NZ top players and he in the first half played at a level of freakyness - I remember commentators saying they had never seen anything like it.
I watched many a 80's Auckland match and Jones was the man, he also was part of the most in sync loose forward trio with AJ and Zinny. Ahead of them a brutal front 5.
MJ was a freak - someone mentioned height but he was a main lineout target even before lifting due to his athleticism.
I agree with the ...I would pay to watch Jones but want McCaw in a WC final quote