Springboks V All Blacks
-
@bones I think lack of game sense probably had more impact on that game.
-
@taniwharugby said in Springboks V All Blacks:
@bones I think lack of game sense probably had more impact on that game.
No one would have dared to be senseless if Brodie was there.
-
@bones said in Springboks V All Blacks:
@nzzp we lost to SA.
With a very distinct lack of cohesion, accuracy, effectiveness and mongrel.
I'm not so convinced it was as big a disaster as people say. We scored 6 tries, and should have scored a couple more. We threw them 14 points from muppet decisions, missed 6/8 kicks, and still only lost by two. All that said, we still had a chance to win in teh last minute where anything but a tip on the pass probably leads to a try.
Particularly, I don't think the forwards played particularly poorly. A few dropped balls, but would love to see the stats on drops per hundred carries - not sure it would be that different.
Put it another way, you play that game 20 times, I'd expect us to win 19 of them with that outfit playing the way they did that night. I do not think it was a disaster.
That said, we should still have had more composure and won the damn thing. That doesn't mean we played poorly though.
-
-
@bones said in Springboks V All Blacks:
@nzzp all well and good, but to say we hardly miss him at all, while noting we should have been better? Hmmm...
I think we have been playing well without him. Karl, Owen and Scott are all taking on a distribution role. Don't get me wrong - he's an incredible player, and I think the best in teh world before he got injured, but I do think we are playing well without him. These two things are not incompatible
Edit: Close loss notwithstanding - I don't think the forwards played badly in that game
-
-
@bones said in Springboks V All Blacks:
@nzzp ahh see I think there's a difference between playing well and not missing a beat.
I think if he plays we probably win that game. But as I said - I think we played pretty well in that game, and certainly did enough to win the game. Just poor game management, and some ropey brain farts, combined with a Bokke team that really stepped up.
Flip it around - if you're the Boks, is that your gameplan? Hope our kicker misses, score some great tries, and expect to burgle some intercepts? It's not a high percentage plan
-
@nzzp said in Springboks V All Blacks:
@bones said in Springboks V All Blacks:
@nzzp all well and good, but to say we hardly miss him at all, while noting we should have been better? Hmmm...
I think we have been playing well without him. Karl, Owen and Scott are all taking on a distribution role. Don't get me wrong - he's an incredible player, and I think the best in teh world before he got injured, but I do think we are playing well without him. These two things are not incompatible
The 1014 analysis of that match focused on Owen Franks taking on the dedicated first receiver distribution role, they said the first time he has been in that role.
Those guys are incredibly 'polite' in their player assessment, they depicted that as Hansen experimenting and putting individual players under pressure in different roles. Let's just say it wasn't a success. The distribution was more laboured and hesitant than usual and further behind the line than the more natural ball handlers Retallick and S Barrett operate - and NZ with 70% possession were constantly tackled behind the advantage line.
My own expansion on the 1014 analysis:
Retallick whether in role of pod distributor, or pod runner who can bend the line, was missed big time. The All Blacks resembled the Blues playing the Highlanders. All possession, no punch, playing too much rugby in the wrong parts of the field off back foot ball. -
@rapido said in Springboks V All Blacks:
My own expansion on the 1014 analysis:
Retallick whether in role of pod distributor, or pod runner who can bend the line, was missed big time. The All Blacks resembled the Blues playing the Highlanders. All possession, no punch, playing too much rugby in the wrong parts of the field off back foot ball.... and scoring six tries. Playing poorly.
-
@nzzp said in Springboks V All Blacks:
@rapido said in Springboks V All Blacks:
My own expansion on the 1014 analysis:
Retallick whether in role of pod distributor, or pod runner who can bend the line, was missed big time. The All Blacks resembled the Blues playing the Highlanders. All possession, no punch, playing too much rugby in the wrong parts of the field off back foot ball.... and scoring six tries. Playing poorly.
and 2 of the 5 they let in could be written off as brain farts, or linked to frustration at having to play back-foot rugby leading players to try and make something out of nothing in the wrong part of the field ( a bit of an anacrhonism).
Don't get wrong. I'm reasonably comfortable with how most of the team played, and it's an easy fix. Even without Retallick there are still at least 2 good pod distributors they can use who aren't Franks (was Whitelock v Argentina), and S Barrett is almost as good a double threat as Brodie.
-
-
@pakman I'm following you around and agreeing with you. But everyone in world rugby is terrified of the ABs having a good day against them.
Erasmus and Schmidt are, perhaps uniquely in world rugby, faced with the pressure of asking themselves realistically: how do we stop these bastards from having a good day.
-
Scrum should be interesting this week.
I've been impressed with the Boks scrum this year, after a few indifferent years for them considering their traditional strength in that area.
I was very interested in ABs v Boks 1 at Wellington, as it was the first time Karl T started a test and so I watched closely to how he would go in the starting role.
I have to cast my memory back 2 weeks now.
The scrums with starting front rows were pretty much parity, with, I thought, Tuinukuafe having a very, very slight edge on Malherbe on that side of the scrum, and Kitshoff and Franks cancelled each other out. When Mtarawira cam on as second half sub he had the edge on Ofa T. I would say Mtarawira must be the best scrummaging prop Ofa T has come up against in the fellow sub role.
I also watched the Boks v Wallabies scrums as I was very interested to see how Tupou would go in the starting role. Again it was pretty much parity until subs came on.
I'm probably placing too much importance on 2 test greenhorns in Tongan Thor and Karl T, and rating opposites against them. But I've been so impressed with both that it has got me looking more closely.
Boks hammered the English scrum in June (including a pushover penalty try). But that comes with a caveat that I'm not very impressed with current British scrummaging after their performances on the Lions tour. But they dominatedat to escape, not just edged them. (Incidentally, Joe Marler was a British prop of whom my opinion grew after that tour, but he has announced his retirement last week aged 28.)
-
@rapido said in Springboks V All Blacks:
Scrum should be interesting this week.
I've been impressed with the Boks scrum this year, after a few indifferent years for them considering their traditional strength in that area.
I was very interested in ABs v Boks 1 at Wellington, as it was the first time Karl T started a test and so I watched closely to how he would go in the starting role.
I have to cast my memory back 2 weeks now.
The scrums with starting front rows were pretty much parity, with, I thought, Tuinukuafe having a very, very slight edge on Malherbe on that side of the scrum, and Kitshoff and Franks cancelled each other out. When Mtarawira cam on as second half sub he had the edge on Ofa T. I would say Mtarawira must be the best scrummaging prop Ofa T has come up against in the fellow sub role.
I also watched the Boks v Wallabies scrums as I was very interested to see how Tupou would go in the starting role. Again it was pretty much parity until subs came on.
I'm probably placing too much importance on 2 test greenhorns in Tongan Thor and Karl T, and rating opposites against them. But I've been so impressed with both that it has got me looking more closely.
Boks hammered the English scrum in June (including a pushover penalty try). But that comes with a caveat that I'm not very impressed with current British scrummaging after their performances on the Lions tour. But they dominatedat to escape, not just edged them. (Incidentally, Joe Marler was a British prop of whom my opinion grew after that tour, but he has announced his retirement last week aged 28.)
Fair points, although curious that at home and with Figallo at TH Pumas handled Boks scrum?
-
Brendon Venter:
I know for a fact that the All Black coaches didn't disrespect the Springboks because they rate them and would never have picked their best side if they didn't. Sometimes what you say as a coach off the field doesn't necessarily translate to what happens on the field. The All Black coaching staff would have told the players to respect the Springboks, but deep down they didn't.
Wonder if he has dis-respected and under-estimated mixed up?
-
@taniwharugby So everry time the ABs lose to a team, they disrespect (or underestimate) them according to this author? What a bullshit. They just made too many mistakes and the Boks played wel; nothing to do with disrespecting (or underestimating) the opposition.
-
That Venter article was a good read, actually. I'd encourage readers to actually click that link and read the whole thing, some interesting stuff also on Boks defence. Rather than skip it based on negative comments on here. Well done Stuff for actually commissioning some original journalism of an opposing view of the up-coming match.
Disrespect, underestimate, take too lightly, whatever. It's semantics. He expects players won't make similar decisions in Pretoria due to a change in their mental approach of risk v reward.
I agree the All Blacks approach will be different in Pretoria, tighter, more 'traditional test match like' and we already saw that in Buenos Aires
Stuff
