AB's v Samoa
-
Savea, at least recently, doesn't seem to play that well in poor team performances. I suppose that is somewhat understandable for a winger. I do, however, remember being very frustrated that when we were getting shut out versus the Crusaders, he never went looking for the ball. Savea is probably the best finisher in the world but Naholo is a good finisher too and I think he offers more in other aspects of his game.
Savea in 2013-14 was making a lot of progress and was MotM a lot. He seems to have regressed a bit in his core skills since that point.
-
@Chester-Draws said in AB's v Samoa:
It's never that he has been bad. It's that he creates nothing these days. Put into space he can finish, but really he was no better than James Lowe or George Moala would have been, and I don't rate those two as starting ABs.
He's on the wing, not playing five-eighth ffs. His work rate last night was perfectly good and he had a brilliant touch coming in off the wing to fix the defenders and put wrapping players into space on the outside. He was also instrumental coming off his wing to create an overlap.
-
If Savea is cack, why does Hansen keep selecting him?
He was fine last night, other than missing a couple of the high balls.
If he gets dropped it'll be because someone else consistently plays out of their skin.
-
-
I think the fact he was involved in alot of plays in that 2nd spell, carting it up, cleaning rucks, playing 9, just getting his hands on the ball showed he does have the range, but often he appears to just stand (bit simplistic I know) on the wing waiting for the ball to come out...I thought he was excellent in that 2nd 40, probably the best 40 mins form him in over 2 years.
-
@booboo said in AB's v Samoa:
There are some players who no matter how well they play are just not rated. If he's not "creating" (I'm taking that as breaking every tackle and running in 80m tries every time he touches it) he's "useless".
And there are people who will take no criticism of a favourite player, to the extent of deliberately taking any comment and twisting it.
I specifically said Savea wasn't bad. I also said that no-one else is clearly better.
Just not without faults.
-
-
@Bones maybe it is showing thier hand in order to get the Lions to second guess thier approach given that seems thier only trick (am sure it isnt, but has been so far)
-
@taniwharugby said in AB's v Samoa:
@Bones maybe it is showing their hand in order to get the Lions to second guess thier approach given that seems their only trick (am sure it isnt, but has been so far)
I thought the same thing. Might even keep them onside a bit
Plenty of other ways to deal with a rush defence and both teams will be aware of them.
-
@Chester-Draws said in AB's v Samoa:
@ACT-Crusader said in AB's v Samoa:
For all the talk of Ioane, I just can't see them not selecting Savea. Hansen and co will give Savea who has been a pretty important player for them over many years, this once in a career opportunity.
I too think they will pick Savea, because the others haven't shown the absolutely demanding form that makes them first pick.
However not for "once in a career ..." because that sets an appalling precedent.
Precedent? Haha, are you kidding? You only have to look back to 05 and 93 and see a number of players that made the team that were past it, out of form or what some would say were coaches favourite.
So there will be no precedent with Savea.
-
Finished watching the second half and yep, as previously noted, interesting to see the ABs running lots of unders lines and narrow supporting lines both inside and out to pin defenders and create that space in behind, perfect for that rush defence.
Great to see everyone was perfectly into it with the tactic and didn't miss a beat, bodes well.
-
@ACT-Crusader said in AB's v Samoa:
Precedent? Haha, are you kidding? You only have to look back to 05 and 93 and see a number of players that made the team that were past it, out of form or what some would say were coaches favourite.
So there will be no precedent with Savea.
Yeah, that 2005 team was shit. Full of complete no-names and has-beens.
