Bledisloe II
-
Provided the ABs actually have a plan that centres around Laumape punching holes in close on a regular basis (unlike the bloody Canes), I can understand the selection with ALB coming on around the 55 minute mark to wreck some havoc against a tired defense.
-
-
@bovidae I thought they always viewed that from the other side of the coin, in that what if Laumape or Goodhue go down in minute 1, can he play 79 mins.
-
@taniwharugby Injury was not a factor according to the Stuff article.
"We wanted a specialist second five," explained Hansen. "Alby (Lienert-Brown) has been playing a lot of his rugby at 13. Whilst we're very happy with his performance [in Sydney], we love what he does for us off the bench.
"He brings a security, a sense of understanding of what's needed in that area and Ngani is more of a starting-type player. It just made sense."
-
@infidel said in Bledisloe II:
ALL BLACKS: Jordie Barrett, Ben Smith, Jack Goodhue, Ngani Laumape, Waisake Naholo,, Beauden Barrett, Aaron Smith; Kieran Read (capt), Sam Cane, Liam Squire, Sam Whitelock, Brodie Retallick, Owen Franks, Codie Taylor, Joe Moody. Reserves: Nathan Harris, Karl Tu'inukuake, Ofa Tu'ungafasi, Scott Barrett, Ardie Savea, TJ Perenara, Damian McKenzie, Anton Lienert-Brown
Another remarkably predictable team, for a predictable outcome.
-
@mariner4life totally agree,I really don’t think Laumape is a long term fit for 2nd five,let’s face it,if Crotty or SBW we’re available and If they are available for RWC 2019,they would be selected ahead of Laumape,where I believe Goodhue is a lock in centre moving forward,ABL is also proven..I still don’t think outside the Laumapes running game,I don’t believe there’s many more strings to his bow..
-
@taniwharugby said in Bledisloe II:
@rancid-schnitzel is he though? Granted he comes across as a bit of a dick, but is he that bad?
Am sure there has been analysis done elsewhere, but what are his results like vs anyone but NZ compared to previous coaches?
Thier super rugby teams are a bit shit, how is he supposed to magically turn those same players into a team to beat the best in the world? Would any other coach do any better?
Yeah - I think Chieka is doing OK. His problem is that, while he's got lots of lots of pretty decent cattle, they're not quite as good as the ABs - and that "not quite" translates to usually losing. He also doesn't have the same depth of resources (as the Super rugby results show) so he's forced into shoehorning his best players into the team and injuries hurt the Wallabies worse than the ABs.
That being said - the Wallabies can win, if Hansen runs out a less than full strength team, if we concede stupid cards, or if the ABs play poorly.
I don't think they can beat a full strength AB team that plays well.
-
-
@machpants Maybe a World XV coached by Schmidt that played a similar lead up programme as the Lions?
Be mainly the Lions with a few reinforcements from Oz, France and SA.
-
@chris-b said in Bledisloe II:
@machpants Maybe a World XV coached by Schmidt that played a similar lead up as the Lions?
Be mainly the Lions with a few reinforcements from Oz, France and SA.
Do they get to bring their own crazy refs? If so, yes I agree.
-
@bovidae said in Bledisloe II:
@taniwharugby Injury was not a factor according to the Stuff article.
"We wanted a specialist second five," explained Hansen. "Alby (Lienert-Brown) has been playing a lot of his rugby at 13. Whilst we're very happy with his performance [in Sydney], we love what he does for us off the bench.
"He brings a security, a sense of understanding of what's needed in that area and Ngani is more of a starting-type player. It just made sense."
Yep nice one Shag. You may as well put the NH contact under ALB's fucken nose yourself. You could have equally said: "We didn't pick Ngani in the initial squad and wanted him instead to go away and work on his communication, which he's done for an entire game. Alby was outstanding for us at 12 in Bledisloe 1 in what was virtually a starting role but despite that we've brought Ngani straight back in ahead of him".
-
@shark said in Bledisloe II:
@bovidae said in Bledisloe II:
@taniwharugby Injury was not a factor according to the Stuff article.
"We wanted a specialist second five," explained Hansen. "Alby (Lienert-Brown) has been playing a lot of his rugby at 13. Whilst we're very happy with his performance [in Sydney], we love what he does for us off the bench.
"He brings a security, a sense of understanding of what's needed in that area and Ngani is more of a starting-type player. It just made sense."
Yep nice one Shag. You may as well put the NH contact under ALB's fucken nose yourself. You could have equally said: "We didn't pick Ngani in the initial squad and wanted him instead to go away and work on his communication, which he's done for an entire game. Alby was outstanding for us at 12 in Bledisloe 1 in what was virtually a starting role but despite that we've brought Ngani straight back in ahead of him".
testify brother!!!
What the actual fuck? You arrogant dickheads. A player of his quality is not going to be happy sitting behind sicknote 1 & 2, and now a ring-in. None of the shit they say makes any fucking sense.
And to the back, where we have our best 15 playing 14, where his last runs there were a bit ordinary. And the nation's most overhyped player gets a start.
Way to select a squad there guys. Nothing adds steel to a team like picking a bunch of Hurricanes.
-
I don't really see the big problem. The specialist 12 starts at 12 whilst the very effective bench player who covers 12-13 is on the bench covering 12 and 13?
In modern rugby the bench is very important and ALB made a very strong case last weekend that he is perfectly suited to the 23 shirt for the big AB games moving forward.
With SBW due back next game the pressure is on Laumape to perform. And if he does, the pressure will be on SBW.
-
@mariner4life said in Bledisloe II:
@shark said in Bledisloe II:
@bovidae said in Bledisloe II:
@taniwharugby Injury was not a factor according to the Stuff article.
"We wanted a specialist second five," explained Hansen. "Alby (Lienert-Brown) has been playing a lot of his rugby at 13. Whilst we're very happy with his performance [in Sydney], we love what he does for us off the bench.
"He brings a security, a sense of understanding of what's needed in that area and Ngani is more of a starting-type player. It just made sense."
Yep nice one Shag. You may as well put the NH contact under ALB's fucken nose yourself. You could have equally said: "We didn't pick Ngani in the initial squad and wanted him instead to go away and work on his communication, which he's done for an entire game. Alby was outstanding for us at 12 in Bledisloe 1 in what was virtually a starting role but despite that we've brought Ngani straight back in ahead of him".
testify brother!!!
What the actual fuck? You arrogant dickheads. A player of his quality is not going to be happy sitting behind sicknote 1 & 2, and now a ring-in. None of the shit they say makes any fucking sense.
And to the back, where we have our best 15 playing 14, where his last runs there were a bit ordinary. And the nation's most overhyped player gets a start.
Way to select a squad there guys. Nothing adds steel to a team like picking a bunch of Hurricanes.
GFYs
-
Not that I agree with the decision, but, I think that ALB is a lock for the RWC (no matter what) and Laumape is only there if one of the others is out injured. Hmmm, so basically what I'm saying is both ALB and Laumape are a lock for the RWC.
DMac and ALB seem to be in the same boat - in the team but utilised from the bench, if Crotty and Ioane aren't injured then DMac and ALB are still in the team and Laumape and Barrett watch from the stands.
-
@kiwimurph said in Bledisloe II:
I don't really see the big problem. The specialist 12 starts at 12 whilst the very effective bench player who covers 12-13 is on the bench covering 12 and 13?
In modern rugby the bench is very important and ALB made a very strong case last weekend that he is perfectly suited to the 23 shirt for the big AB games moving forward.
With SBW due back next game the pressure is on Laumape to perform. And if he does, the pressure will be on SBW.
This is some bullshit right there "the bench is important" is the biggest fallacy. Having your best players play most of the game is more important. If the bench was so important we wouldn't stock it with deadshits like TJP and Savea. And One of Retallic or Whitelock would be there to be awesome in the last 20.
The best players start, ALB is better than Laumape. Players who spend their international career starting against Argentina, Scotland and Italy, and benching the actual good sides end up in France a lot quicker.
-
@mariner4life said in Bledisloe II:
@kiwimurph said in Bledisloe II:
I don't really see the big problem. The specialist 12 starts at 12 whilst the very effective bench player who covers 12-13 is on the bench covering 12 and 13?
In modern rugby the bench is very important and ALB made a very strong case last weekend that he is perfectly suited to the 23 shirt for the big AB games moving forward.
With SBW due back next game the pressure is on Laumape to perform. And if he does, the pressure will be on SBW.
This is some bullshit right there "the bench is important" is the biggest fallacy. Having your best players play most of the game is more important. If the bench was so important we wouldn't stock it with deadshits like TJP and Savea. And One of Retallic or Whitelock would be there to be awesome in the last 20.
The best players start, ALB is better than Laumape. Players who spend their international career starting against Argentina, Scotland and Italy, and benching the actual good sides end up in France a lot quicker.
Agree, doesn’t matter if ALB covers multiple positions or not. He’s a more rounded player and better 12 than Laumape and should start.
-
I basically agree, but I don't think he defends that well at 12. I'm sure he missed at least two last week as the inside defender. Having said that, Laumape is probably worse, so...
Long term, ALB may have to consider moving to 12 (i.e., at the Chiefs), because Goodhue looks a solid gold long term 13 to me. I think he makes better decisions on defence than ALB, and does the basics well. I loved his straight run and draw and pass last week in the lead up to his try, that created the space for Ioane to exploit and could easily have been cut out if he hadn't kept his line correctly.
Goodhue may not be as good at pulling out offloads that lead to try assists, which ALB has consistently done in the black shirt. However, from memory, many of those have been in the last 20, often as a replacement...
-
@gt12 said in Bledisloe II:
I basically agree, but I don't think he defends that well at 12. I'm sure he missed at least two last week as the inside defender. Having said that, Laumape is probably worse, so...
Long term, ALB may have to consider moving to 12 (i.e., at the Chiefs), because Goodhue looks a solid gold long term 13 to me. I think he makes better decisions on defence than ALB, and does the basics well. I loved his straight run and draw and pass last week in the lead up to his try, that created the space for Ioane to exploit and could easily have been cut out if he hadn't kept his line correctly.
Goodhue may not be as good at pulling out offloads that lead to try assists, which ALB has consistently done in the black shirt. However, from memory, many of those have been in the last 20, often as a replacement...
this post is pretty fucking light on detail, and pretty long on complete guess work.
Goodhue was good, and should be there for a while (lets see what season 2 brings first though aye?) but a hallmark of ALB in Black for me is the way he straightens and links with his outsides. It's not like these attributes are only there in one player.
Doesn't defend well at 12? Based on? All those linebreaks last week? All players miss tackles occassionally, but does anyone really see ALB as this defensive weakness?
It's like people are scratching around for ways to agree with the selectors. Laumape is straight up not as good a player as ALB, at 12 or anywhere else. This selection will not be the winning or losing of the game, so in the end it doesn't matter. But there have been some fucking strange selection decisions this year, with some equally strange public explanations given.
-
Isn't Hansen's selection of Laumape really about player development ? (and getting mariner's tits in a tangle)
Don't want to jinx us but we have the wood on Oz and its Eden Park. Hansen can afford to try this out. I think ALB is actually ahead of Laumape in the real pecking order, i.e., if we were playing for the World Cup.
