Ireland v NZ - Chicago Showdown & Dublin Duel
-
@rotated said in Ireland v NZ - Chicago Showdown:
If you actually listened to Watson's rant it is far from bait. His key points were:
- The ABs will destroy Ireland in Dublin and learn from their mistakes.
- This loss will have a positive impact on the ABs performance against the Lions next year as they will learn from their mistakes.
- The winning streak title is dubious given many victories happened last season with a distinctly different side.
- If you factor in the Olympics (very important) - this was the worst year for the NZRU since 1998.
I would agree with all those statements except 2002 was clearly worse with the Smith resignation (and Mitchell/Deans appointment), woeful on field performance, Cantablacks caps and the subhosting debacle.
I don't find his opinion any more stupid than the "best of all time" nonsense that was getting thrown around earlier in the season by many pundits.
It's not the worse year since 1998. Not even close. I think most NZ rugby fans had clinical depression after that 1998 season. NZ rugby is on a high and is more and more well-viewed, helped by our gracious response to defeat. I'm glad we don't have a coach like Woodward, Cheika or Gatland who would be a PR disaster for NZ. I hope Gatland never coaches in NZ again at professional level - you can't come in and piss everywhere in the media, then expect the fans to open their arms. Wales were awful in the weekend, anyway.
-
@akan004 said in Ireland v NZ - Chicago Showdown:
@Rapido You are missing the point. I was having a go at Veitch for being ok about the loss. I honestly don't give a rats arse about whether or not it was a good result for world rugby. From a NZ rugby perspective, it was a bad result.
I think you're being awfully precious. I actually think it was a blessing in disguise, the coaches now have to earn their crust, and it will prepare us better for the Lions and the English tests. We will learn heaps from that loss, and I would rather it was Ireland, than a series lost to the Lions...or England stopping our winning run...
-
Comparisons with 1998? If TSF existed that year the Internet would have melted down.
And count me in as precious (and sour and bitter) for being as yet unwilling/unable to care about the supposed wider benefits to world rugby of the All Blacks losing to Ireland
-
@Donsteppa said in Ireland v NZ - Chicago Showdown:
Comparisons with 1998? If TSF existed that year the Internet would have melted down.
And count me in as precious (and sour and bitter) for being as yet unwilling/unable to care about the supposed wider benefits to world rugby of the All Blacks losing to Ireland
For a start I am now highly anticipating the return clash. Rather than (yawn) NZ running in a 45-10 scoreline in Chicago, we now have to make sure we don't lose twice in a row, which I definitely would not accept nor be happy about.
For once reason is actually ok imo
http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/opinion/86218037/mark-reason-holy-joe-guns-down-the-all-blacks
-
@Billy-Tell still refuse to click on that and read it, he, like his mate Twattue , most of the time they are such cock gobblers, that many people dont bother with them, and will miss the rare decent article they might write.
-
@taniwharugby said in Ireland v NZ - Chicago Showdown:
@rotated assuming you listen to Watson, did he also provide the equivalent 7's, age group and womens results from the corresponding years he is saying are making this year so poor?
While 7s is part of NZR, it is a totally different sport and short of telling players they had no choice on which version to play, I cant see things having been any different, so cant really include it as a comparitive measure, in fact it was more in line back in those days you probably could make valid comparisons.
His point seemed to be that this year they sacrificed the 7s program to benefit the All Blacks. So if you are making that sacrifice (i.e. Olympics) then you would want a better performance that the first loss to Ireland. We had that debate ages ago so not worth going over it again, but that was his point.
I don't make a habit of listening to Watson but if he says something noteworthy i'll listen on the RS website.
-
@rotated so thats 2016 covered off, what was the 7s program in 1998 like to give it the same context, afterall, if he is trying to use the whole NZR performance as his yardstick.
He isnt comparing apples with apples and is just on his soap box as usual, I liken him to the likes of Twattue, Treason and even Hone Harawaira, they talk so much BS, when they actually make valid points they are often simply dismissed, ignored or even simply missed because they talk so much shit they turn into white noise.
-
@rotated said in Ireland v NZ - Chicago Showdown:
@taniwharugby said in Ireland v NZ - Chicago Showdown:
@rotated assuming you listen to Watson, did he also provide the equivalent 7's, age group and womens results from the corresponding years he is saying are making this year so poor?
While 7s is part of NZR, it is a totally different sport and short of telling players they had no choice on which version to play, I cant see things having been any different, so cant really include it as a comparitive measure, in fact it was more in line back in those days you probably could make valid comparisons.
His point seemed to be that this year they sacrificed the 7s program to benefit the All Blacks. So if you are making that sacrifice (i.e. Olympics) then you would want a better performance that the first loss to Ireland. We had that debate ages ago so not worth going over it again, but that was his point.
I don't make a habit of listening to Watson but if he says something noteworthy i'll listen on the RS website.
Are you serious? Our average winning margin in TRC was 30 fucking points. You just cannot do any better then that. After losing the core of our team no less. It's been an incredible season.
-
@No-Quarter said in Ireland v NZ - Chicago Showdown:
@rotated said in Ireland v NZ - Chicago Showdown:
@taniwharugby said in Ireland v NZ - Chicago Showdown:
@rotated assuming you listen to Watson, did he also provide the equivalent 7's, age group and womens results from the corresponding years he is saying are making this year so poor?
While 7s is part of NZR, it is a totally different sport and short of telling players they had no choice on which version to play, I cant see things having been any different, so cant really include it as a comparitive measure, in fact it was more in line back in those days you probably could make valid comparisons.
His point seemed to be that this year they sacrificed the 7s program to benefit the All Blacks. So if you are making that sacrifice (i.e. Olympics) then you would want a better performance that the first loss to Ireland. We had that debate ages ago so not worth going over it again, but that was his point.
I don't make a habit of listening to Watson but if he says something noteworthy i'll listen on the RS website.
Are you serious? Our average winning margin in TRC was 30 fucking points. You just cannot do any better then that. After losing the core of our team no less. It's been an incredible season.
And losing a bunch of core players for this game, along with the coaching panel deciding to have a team wide re-shuffle at the same time. We were guilty of underestimating the Irish but it doesn't detract from the season as a whole. So far anyway, let's reassess in a month
-
@ACT-Crusader said in Ireland v NZ - Chicago Showdown:
@Donsteppa said in Ireland v NZ - Chicago Showdown:
"What does a pick and go achieve"? Done every now and then it will stop defenders from fanning out quite as quickly. It might even find out whether a defender, say Aaron Smith, is occassionally too quick to drift out and not watch the inside channel...
If you look at Ireland's defence it had plenty of players around the ruck.
They were one-on-one coverage out wide and that's why we tried to move it quickly there with the little ball we had. We got yards out wide on occasions because of it but then made errors or turned it over.
I was impressed with how well the Irish wingers scrambled.
I agree but I also don't think it's taking anything away from the Irish performance to note that the field was 5 metres narrower than they will be in Dublin
This helped not only the scrambling defence but also helped them pin us in the corners as their touch finders had greater range
-
@dogmeat said in Ireland v NZ - Chicago Showdown:
@ACT-Crusader said in Ireland v NZ - Chicago Showdown:
@Donsteppa said in Ireland v NZ - Chicago Showdown:
"What does a pick and go achieve"? Done every now and then it will stop defenders from fanning out quite as quickly. It might even find out whether a defender, say Aaron Smith, is occassionally too quick to drift out and not watch the inside channel...
If you look at Ireland's defence it had plenty of players around the ruck.
They were one-on-one coverage out wide and that's why we tried to move it quickly there with the little ball we had. We got yards out wide on occasions because of it but then made errors or turned it over.
I was impressed with how well the Irish wingers scrambled.
I agree but I also don't think it's taking anything away from the Irish performance to note that the field was 5 metres narrower than they will be in Dublin
This helped not only the scrambling defence but also helped them pin us in the corners as their touch finders had greater range
agree. And that's why the Irish were very clever to target this game. Looking back they kept a very low profile prior to the match but must have been planning and practicing these tactics for a while.
The narrow field gave them a prime opportunity and I bet Schmidt couldn't believe his luck when both BBBR and Whitelock weren't available -
5 metres narrower?
Well there's our out clause!
Ireland have yet to beat the Allblacks on a proper rugby field.
The record still stands!
-
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in Ireland v NZ - Chicago Showdown:
5 metres narrower?
Well there's our out clause!
Ireland have yet to beat the Allblacks on a proper rugby field.
The record still stands!
Win with an asterisk*
-
Loved the Irish approach to be honest. No crap talk before the game, no stupid niggle during the game. They just smashed the ABs in the tackle and the breakdown, took their chances and afterwards shook hands. What a difference to the Aussies, huh?
-
We have been like that for awhile to be honest.
We have been peaking for the RC (rightly so) but then away tour (always incl. arg &USA away) means we have something like 7 away tests in 9 weeks and that also includes a increase games in Super rugby.
We haven't been at our best in the Nh since the Henry days.
How many games has guys like Barrett played for example?
We like to think we are at the forefront of player welfare but we are puting some big workloads on ABs
-
http://www.theroar.com.au/2016/11/08/rugby-weekend-chicago/
Bloody good read. Don't like the stuff about kaino though
-
@Billy-Tell said in Ireland v NZ - Chicago Showdown:
http://www.theroar.com.au/2016/11/08/rugby-weekend-chicago/
Bloody good read. Don't like the stuff about kaino though
We need to find someone to fill his shoes but it is no surprise he is breaking down. He gave us a second RWC though (2015) after his Japan vacation so all's fair
-
@da_grubster said in Ireland v NZ - Chicago Showdown:
How many games has guys like Barrett played for example?
We like to think we are at the forefront of player welfare but we are puting some big workloads on ABs
They seem to track the player workload/output more than ever before.
On Barrett, he's played 11 tests this year and every super rugby game (18 matches). So 29 matches. He's been pretty injury free this year so available for selection. He's started pretty much all those matches bar a couple of early season tests against Wales. He played 80 almost every week for the Canes and has only been subbed off three times in test matches.
On the face of it, it does seem like a lot of rugby. Back in 2012 when the Chiefs won the title, Cruden played every super game (17 matches) and also played in 11 tests.
