All Blacks v Italy
-
Cruden was good, took the ball to the line well and there's a few comments about his cross field kicks and chips which got me thinking:
1) they're obviously a team plan. No doubt examined, practiced and spoken about in detail all week - so it's not really cruden deciding to do them-
on most occasions the cross field kicks (ALB did some too I think) were regathered and a gain over the advantage line and forward momentum was achieved. The alternative in those situations when the kicks took place is through the hands (Italians were rushing up well in a good formation) where the winger gets no space on the touchline and everyone (sic) wonders why he doesn't go all Jonah and beat 3 tacklers to score from 40 metres out. (insert finger circling mental smiley)
-
The kicks were all done in our half or on halfway so no prime attacking ball was really wasted
-
They're good tactics and, like all rugby plays rely on the execution which was fine. They are another way of turning a team around and sure you can't always score off them but they played a part in creating the momentum for tries to come a few phases after
Really? Are you saying they are a team plan for only when Cruden is at 1st 5? Because Barrett isn't playing from that plan and Sopoaga hasn't been either. I don't mind the tactic when used sparingly against a rushing defence but it is something Cruden has been over doing for a while now. The offensive bomb into the Italian 22 was particularly shit IMO.
Agree on the camera work being bad. Zoomed way too far out for rugby. Happens every time we play in Italy.
-
-
Cruden was good, took the ball to the line well and there's a few comments about his cross field kicks and chips which got me thinking:
1) they're obviously a team plan. No doubt examined, practiced and spoken about in detail all week - so it's not really cruden deciding to do them-
on most occasions the cross field kicks (ALB did some too I think) were regathered and a gain over the advantage line and forward momentum was achieved. The alternative in those situations when the kicks took place is through the hands (Italians were rushing up well in a good formation) where the winger gets no space on the touchline and everyone (sic) wonders why he doesn't go all Jonah and beat 3 tacklers to score from 40 metres out. (insert finger circling mental smiley)
-
The kicks were all done in our half or on halfway so no prime attacking ball was really wasted
-
They're good tactics and, like all rugby plays rely on the execution which was fine. They are another way of turning a team around and sure you can't always score off them but they played a part in creating the momentum for tries to come a few phases after
Really? Are you saying they are a team plan for only when Cruden is at 1st 5?
I'm saying it was a team plan against Italy on November 12 2016 - yes.
That's the game we're talking about isn't it?
-
-
I thought the camera work last week was poor too, but then I guess we are blessed with sky needing to be specialists in producing for rugby.
I noticed last week there was a camera man right by the Irish maul try, yet his footage was never looked at.
-
Cruden was good, took the ball to the line well and there's a few comments about his cross field kicks and chips which got me thinking:
1) they're obviously a team plan. No doubt examined, practiced and spoken about in detail all week - so it's not really cruden deciding to do them-
on most occasions the cross field kicks (ALB did some too I think) were regathered and a gain over the advantage line and forward momentum was achieved. The alternative in those situations when the kicks took place is through the hands (Italians were rushing up well in a good formation) where the winger gets no space on the touchline and everyone (sic) wonders why he doesn't go all Jonah and beat 3 tacklers to score from 40 metres out. (insert finger circling mental smiley)
-
The kicks were all done in our half or on halfway so no prime attacking ball was really wasted
-
They're good tactics and, like all rugby plays rely on the execution which was fine. They are another way of turning a team around and sure you can't always score off them but they played a part in creating the momentum for tries to come a few phases after
Really? Are you saying they are a team plan for only when Cruden is at 1st 5?
I'm saying it was a team plan against Italy on November 12 2016 - yes.
That's the game we're talking about isn't it?
Was it a team plan for all the other games where Cruden has over played it too?
I am disputing your point that this was "obviously" a team tactic and not just a play that Cruden likes to use by pointing out he has over done it in other games recently where our other 1st 5s haven't. So yes talking about this game and others. -
-
Cruden was good, took the ball to the line well and there's a few comments about his cross field kicks and chips which got me thinking:
1) they're obviously a team plan. No doubt examined, practiced and spoken about in detail all week - so it's not really cruden deciding to do them-
on most occasions the cross field kicks (ALB did some too I think) were regathered and a gain over the advantage line and forward momentum was achieved. The alternative in those situations when the kicks took place is through the hands (Italians were rushing up well in a good formation) where the winger gets no space on the touchline and everyone (sic) wonders why he doesn't go all Jonah and beat 3 tacklers to score from 40 metres out. (insert finger circling mental smiley)
-
The kicks were all done in our half or on halfway so no prime attacking ball was really wasted
-
They're good tactics and, like all rugby plays rely on the execution which was fine. They are another way of turning a team around and sure you can't always score off them but they played a part in creating the momentum for tries to come a few phases after
Really? Are you saying they are a team plan for only when Cruden is at 1st 5? Because Barrett isn't playing from that plan and Sopoaga hasn't been either. I don't mind the tactic when used sparingly against a rushing defence but it is something Cruden has been over doing for a while now. The offensive bomb into the Italian 22 was particularly shit IMO.
Agree on the camera work being bad. Zoomed way too far out for rugby. Happens every time we play in Italy.
All our 10s put in plenty of grubbers, chips and cross kicks. Whether Carter, Barrett, Cruden.
-
-
Cruden has the most accurate chip kick of our 10s so I don't doubt that it is part of the plan when he is on the field, especially if the defense is rushing up cutting down our ability to go wide. Pretty easy to implement.
-
Cruden was good, took the ball to the line well and there's a few comments about his cross field kicks and chips which got me thinking:
1) they're obviously a team plan. No doubt examined, practiced and spoken about in detail all week - so it's not really cruden deciding to do them-
on most occasions the cross field kicks (ALB did some too I think) were regathered and a gain over the advantage line and forward momentum was achieved. The alternative in those situations when the kicks took place is through the hands (Italians were rushing up well in a good formation) where the winger gets no space on the touchline and everyone (sic) wonders why he doesn't go all Jonah and beat 3 tacklers to score from 40 metres out. (insert finger circling mental smiley)
-
The kicks were all done in our half or on halfway so no prime attacking ball was really wasted
-
They're good tactics and, like all rugby plays rely on the execution which was fine. They are another way of turning a team around and sure you can't always score off them but they played a part in creating the momentum for tries to come a few phases after
Really? Are you saying they are a team plan for only when Cruden is at 1st 5?
I'm saying it was a team plan against Italy on November 12 2016 - yes.
That's the game we're talking about isn't it?
Was it a team plan for all the other games where Cruden has over played it too?
I am disputing your point that this was "obviously" a team tactic and not just a play that Cruden likes to use by pointing out he has over done it in other games recently where our other 1st 5s haven't. So yes talking about this game and others.Seriously. If he is doing it and he shouldn't his arse is dropped. ffs if you think he's doing it out of some sort of individual whim you ARE a moron.
-
-
Cruden was good, took the ball to the line well and there's a few comments about his cross field kicks and chips which got me thinking:
1) they're obviously a team plan. No doubt examined, practiced and spoken about in detail all week - so it's not really cruden deciding to do them-
on most occasions the cross field kicks (ALB did some too I think) were regathered and a gain over the advantage line and forward momentum was achieved. The alternative in those situations when the kicks took place is through the hands (Italians were rushing up well in a good formation) where the winger gets no space on the touchline and everyone (sic) wonders why he doesn't go all Jonah and beat 3 tacklers to score from 40 metres out. (insert finger circling mental smiley)
-
The kicks were all done in our half or on halfway so no prime attacking ball was really wasted
-
They're good tactics and, like all rugby plays rely on the execution which was fine. They are another way of turning a team around and sure you can't always score off them but they played a part in creating the momentum for tries to come a few phases after
Really? Are you saying they are a team plan for only when Cruden is at 1st 5?
I'm saying it was a team plan against Italy on November 12 2016 - yes.
That's the game we're talking about isn't it?
Was it a team plan for all the other games where Cruden has over played it too?
I am disputing your point that this was "obviously" a team tactic and not just a play that Cruden likes to use by pointing out he has over done it in other games recently where our other 1st 5s haven't. So yes talking about this game and others.Seriously. If he is doing it and he shouldn't his arse is dropped. ffs if you think he's doing it out of some sort of individual whim you ARE a moron.
Oh fuck off with your moron rubbish. So you want me to believe EVERY play is part of an exact gameplan and there is NO individual input from the players to play what is infront of them. I just don't buy the "when Cruden is on our gameplan is to do lots of chip kicks and shitty bombs into the 22 but not so much when BB/Lima are on"
Not saying other don't kick or that there isn't a general plan to use attacking kicks when it's on. Just think it's rubbish to suggest Cruden isn't the one choosing when he does it and how often.
-
-
@Rocky-Rockbottom I didn't think Naholo or Fekitoa played that badly at all.
Also interested in see posters' go for Luatua or Dixon. I thought both were mostly good, but they expect Dixon to be a superstar-not at this level. Also thought Luatua was seen more as a 8/6 and Dixon a 6/8 and that despite Luatua's height advantage Dixon is probably as good at lineout?
Interesting, neither are Kaino, but we still don't seem to have a suitable replacement for Read so maybe we don't have crazy depth in loosies.
6 and 7, yes. -
and I'd just like to add I thought Todd was a good player but not suitable for bench and I was wrong, he has been a great teamplayer.
It is almost tempting to have him/Savea on at 7 and move the hard tackling Cane to 6 or 8 but no doubt such heresy would melt down the forum. -
Cruden was good, took the ball to the line well and there's a few comments about his cross field kicks and chips which got me thinking:
1) they're obviously a team plan. No doubt examined, practiced and spoken about in detail all week - so it's not really cruden deciding to do them-
on most occasions the cross field kicks (ALB did some too I think) were regathered and a gain over the advantage line and forward momentum was achieved. The alternative in those situations when the kicks took place is through the hands (Italians were rushing up well in a good formation) where the winger gets no space on the touchline and everyone (sic) wonders why he doesn't go all Jonah and beat 3 tacklers to score from 40 metres out. (insert finger circling mental smiley)
-
The kicks were all done in our half or on halfway so no prime attacking ball was really wasted
-
They're good tactics and, like all rugby plays rely on the execution which was fine. They are another way of turning a team around and sure you can't always score off them but they played a part in creating the momentum for tries to come a few phases after
Really? Are you saying they are a team plan for only when Cruden is at 1st 5?
I'm saying it was a team plan against Italy on November 12 2016 - yes.
That's the game we're talking about isn't it?
Was it a team plan for all the other games where Cruden has over played it too?
I am disputing your point that this was "obviously" a team tactic and not just a play that Cruden likes to use by pointing out he has over done it in other games recently where our other 1st 5s haven't. So yes talking about this game and others.Seriously. If he is doing it and he shouldn't his arse is dropped. ffs if you think he's doing it out of some sort of individual whim you ARE a moron.
Oh fuck off with your moron rubbish. So you want me to believe EVERY play is part of an exact gameplan and there is NO individual input from the players to play what is infront of them. I just don't buy the "when Cruden is on our gameplan is to do lots of chip kicks and shitty bombs into the 22 but not so much when BB/Lima are on"
Not saying other don't kick or that there isn't a general plan to use attacking kicks when it's on. Just think it's rubbish to suggest Cruden isn't the one choosing when he does it and how often.
Apologies for "moron". A touch harsh.
However Cruden was NOT unilaterally deciding to employ those tactics. If he's deviating from the game plan he gets his arse kicked and dragged.
-
-
@nostrildamus said in v Italy:
and I'd just like to add I thought Todd was a good player but not suitable for bench and I was wrong, he has been a great teamplayer.
It is almost tempting to have him/Savea on at 7 and move the hard tackling Cane to 6 or 8 but no doubt such heresy would melt down the forum.i reckon todd has played the best game in black 7 this year, he's done well. big motor, best support runner of the 3 options.
-
@nostrildamus said in v Italy:
@Rocky-Rockbottom I didn't think Naholo or Fekitoa played that badly at all.
Also interested in see posters' go for Luatua or Dixon. I thought both were mostly good, but they expect Dixon to be a superstar-not at this level. Also thought Luatua was seen more as a 8/6 and Dixon a 6/8 and that despite Luatua's height advantage Dixon is probably as good at lineout?
Interesting, neither are Kaino, but we still don't seem to have a suitable replacement for Read so maybe we don't have crazy depth in loosies.
6 and 7, yes.hindsight and all that, but i hope serious thought was given to dixon playing in chicago. he is one of the best lineout forwards in the country and with our limitations at lock that could have helped things. highlanders use him more than anyone else, and far far more than squire. cane was also underdone, and dixon can play 7 so there were a few options there.
-
-
@reprobate said in v Italy:
@nostrildamus said in v Italy:
and I'd just like to add I thought Todd was a good player but not suitable for bench and I was wrong, he has been a great teamplayer.
It is almost tempting to have him/Savea on at 7 and move the hard tackling Cane to 6 or 8 but no doubt such heresy would melt down the forum.i reckon todd has played the best game in black 7 this year, he's done well. big motor, best support runner of the 3 options.
Better than Cane in the first two Bledisloe's? Nah.
