TRC: The All Blacks against the Springboks (version 98)
-
@KiwiMurph so he needs more rugby, lets send him down to a comp we dont rate and and let him run around there for 2 weeks.
That confirms the 1 midfield change I thought was coming.
-
-
-
@KiwiMurph so how would that benefit us (or I guess who)
-
@KiwiMurph said in TRC: The All Blacks against the Springboks (version 98):
@Frank said in TRC: The All Blacks against the Springboks (version 98):
Small point - having RM and BB both starting gives us an extra space on the subs bench.
As would starting Cane and Savea...
Indeed. Allows us to stack the bench with real impact players rather than worrying so much about utility value.
I think Hansen is hoping Frizell magically starts killing it so he doesn't have to deal with the drama of moving Read to 6.
I'd like to see Jacobsen at 6 again.
On a very positive note, we might get to see the ALB-Goodhue combo play a whole test match.
-
@Chris-B said in TRC: The All Blacks against the Springboks (version 98):
@taniwharugby Don't think we should worry in the slightest about the lack of cohesion - someone like Rieko probably hasn't played a game since the Blues got knocked out - maybe some club rugby? Even the Crusaders boys hadn't played for three weeks and were playing in new systems and new combinations.
The Boks had even less game time though, since few played last week, and they didn't make the semi-finals at all.
Nor was their team any less short in systems and combinations.
I think it's barely worth questioning people like Read (especially), Franks and Ben Smith - if they're fit, they'll be playing - they're McCaw, Woodcock and Conrad Smith from 2015. Hansen loves experience and he's shown it over and over. When push comes to shove, he'll probably revert to Beauden at 10, even if he perhaps shouldn't (and we may all be on the Mo'unga bandwagon again a few weeks from now).
That is exactly what was said in 1991. The old guys would see us through, even though some younger ones were in much better form. Except that was a lesson in why you can't just rely on experience. If the players are too slow, then they are too slow, no matter how experienced they are. It's not like we have been let down by young players when they have made the various Cup squads.
McCaw, Woodcock and Conrad Smith were all playing well enough in 2015. There was no-one sufficiently better, all around the field, to be clearly superior, and the edge in experience was useful -- more so, since on that occasion we were going to be defeated by the pressure, not ability. But this year ALB is clearly superior to SBW, Ardie is streets ahead of Read and I didn't even know Franks was playing last night, so invisible is he in general play.
-
@Chester-Draws said in TRC: The All Blacks against the Springboks (version 98):
@Chris-B said in TRC: The All Blacks against the Springboks (version 98):
@taniwharugby Don't think we should worry in the slightest about the lack of cohesion - someone like Rieko probably hasn't played a game since the Blues got knocked out - maybe some club rugby? Even the Crusaders boys hadn't played for three weeks and were playing in new systems and new combinations.
The Boks had even less game time though, since few played last week, and they didn't make the semi-finals at all.
Nor was their team any less short in systems and combinations.
I think it's barely worth questioning people like Read (especially), Franks and Ben Smith - if they're fit, they'll be playing - they're McCaw, Woodcock and Conrad Smith from 2015. Hansen loves experience and he's shown it over and over. When push comes to shove, he'll probably revert to Beauden at 10, even if he perhaps shouldn't (and we may all be on the Mo'unga bandwagon again a few weeks from now).
That is exactly what was said in 1991. The old guys would see us through, even though some younger ones were in much better form. Except that was a lesson in why you can't just rely on experience. If the players are too slow, then they are too slow, no matter how experienced they are. It's not like we have been let down by young players when they have made the various Cup squads.
McCaw, Woodcock and Conrad Smith were all playing well enough in 2015. There was no-one sufficiently better, all around the field, to be clearly superior, and the edge in experience was useful -- more so, since on that occasion we were going to be defeated by the pressure, not ability. But this year ALB is clearly superior to SBW, Ardie is streets ahead of Read and I didn't even know Franks was playing last night, so invisible is he in general play.
Who could have been better in that 91 team? I just think they weren't good enough and that coaching bullshit didn't help.
Tight 5 was solid enough. M Jones absent because he didn't play on Sunday so nothing to be done there. Maybe AJ Whetton could have been replaced, but Zinzan was there over Buck.
Backline was best 9, best 10 (albeit injured and no proper backup - Mannix lol), Bernie M was ordinary at 12 but Johnny the Shoe had gone to league (bastard), best 13 (Innes), best wingers (Kirwan and Timu - maybe Inga but he was still raw as f) and best available FB due to Gallagher and Ridge pissing off to League and Wright being injured.
The biggest problem now imho is not old players but tactics and combinations. Foster's backline has been pants for ages (when did they last execute a decent set piece move) and the error rate and discipline have been terrible. I think the team that went out last night is good enough to win the RWC (and of course adding Cane, Ardie and Laumape) but not if they play like that.
-
@Chester-Draws We see every year that the ABs start with rust; we didn't lose to the Boks who will be among our fiercest competitors in Japan - at 16-9 we were looking good for the win; and best of all - we looked a lot more cohesive in the second half - plus not surprisingly, our best players in the game were pretty much the guys who had a game last week. There is simply no doubt we will get better.
On the age thing - the same things also got said in 2015 - and pretty much every year about every player once they turn 30 (or younger in the outside backs). Sometimes we're right, they've reached their use-by date - sometimes we're wrong - they've still got some gas in the tank.
Ben Smith still looked OK to me in Super rugby and Owen Franks is pretty much doing the same as he has for years. He's not old for a prop.
Read's good games are fewer and further between, I'm a bit more concerned about him, but hopefully he's still got three or four big games left in him because he won't be dropped.
-
I honestly do think we are holding stuff back for the WC , under shags reign, he has history of doing that and I don’t suspect it will be any different this time.
Remember dc in 15 , all he did was pass and kick from hand ,there were concerns he was passed it, then in the quarter final he would back the clock and we saw his running game.
It doesn’t mean all will be fine, but there is that element where you can’t necessarily read too much into it.
-
@98blueandgold hopefully we see some of the tight forwards used against Australia, running at Pocock if he is back.
-
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in TRC: The All Blacks against the Springboks (version 98):
Who could have been better in that 91 team? I just think they weren't good enough and that coaching bullshit didn't help.
Tight 5 was solid enough. M Jones absent because he didn't play on Sunday so nothing to be done there. Maybe AJ Whetton could have been replaced, but Zinzan was there over Buck.
Backline was best 9, best 10 (albeit injured and no proper backup - Mannix lol), Bernie M was ordinary at 12 but Johnny the Shoe had gone to league (bastard), best 13 (Innes), best wingers (Kirwan and Timu - maybe Inga but he was still raw as f) and best available FB due to Gallagher and Ridge pissing off to League and Wright being injured.
The biggest problem now imho is not old players but tactics and combinations. Foster's backline has been pants for ages (when did they last execute a decent set piece move) and the error rate and discipline have been terrible. I think the team that went out last night is good enough to win the RWC (and of course adding Cane, Ardie and Laumape) but not if they play like that.
I'm not going to argue who was better in 1991, because it will just bog down into an argument over individuals. What we heard at the time was their experience was irreplaceable. So we played a game plan to suit them, and it didn't work. We could have played an different game plan, but we would have had to have had different players selected from well before the Cup squad came round. The next year things when the irreplaceable old ones were replaced, the replacements were noticeably better.
We're hearing exactly the same things again. Have faith. Experience is key. Player X will come right. They've got something up their sleeves.
I think the ABs are still the most likely side to win the Cup, but my faith that they will do it is down to about 40% chance. Last time I rated it about 80%. To a large extent it will depend on injuries -- we get better if SBW breaks, for example, but worse if Coles does.
-
The ABs have been together as a group (that's including all Crusaders who played the SR Final) only for a week. One day in the week leading up to the trip to Argentina, and then after their return to NZ. That week will have included one rest day, as well. I would have been highly surprised if all combinations had worked well in this first test with all players available (except Scott Barrett and Ryan Crotty), esp if they had several new structures to learn.
-
@Chester-Draws said in TRC: The All Blacks against the Springboks (version 98):
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in TRC: The All Blacks against the Springboks (version 98):
Who could have been better in that 91 team? I just think they weren't good enough and that coaching bullshit didn't help.
Tight 5 was solid enough. M Jones absent because he didn't play on Sunday so nothing to be done there. Maybe AJ Whetton could have been replaced, but Zinzan was there over Buck.
Backline was best 9, best 10 (albeit injured and no proper backup - Mannix lol), Bernie M was ordinary at 12 but Johnny the Shoe had gone to league (bastard), best 13 (Innes), best wingers (Kirwan and Timu - maybe Inga but he was still raw as f) and best available FB due to Gallagher and Ridge pissing off to League and Wright being injured.
The biggest problem now imho is not old players but tactics and combinations. Foster's backline has been pants for ages (when did they last execute a decent set piece move) and the error rate and discipline have been terrible. I think the team that went out last night is good enough to win the RWC (and of course adding Cane, Ardie and Laumape) but not if they play like that.
I'm not going to argue who was better in 1991, because it will just bog down into an argument over individuals. What we heard at the time was their experience was irreplaceable. So we played a game plan to suit them, and it didn't work. We could have played an different game plan, but we would have had to have had different players selected from well before the Cup squad came round. The next year things when the irreplaceable old ones were replaced, the replacements were noticeably better.
We're hearing exactly the same things again. Have faith. Experience is key. Player X will come right. They've got something up their sleeves.
I think the ABs are still the most likely side to win the Cup, but my faith that they will do it is down to about 40% chance. Last time I rated it about 80%. To a large extent it will depend on injuries -- we get better if SBW breaks, for example, but worse if Coles does.
I just don't think the cattle was available and we probably would have lost to Aus regardless. The following year involved a lot of chopping and changing until the side for the Aus tour was settled. Even then I'm not sure the guys selected in 92 would have made a big difference or even been good enough in 91. Walter Little is perhaps one who should have been there, but we would have still lost. Ironically, if Ireland had held on in that QF we probably would have won the thing.
-
@Rancid-Schnitzel I think we could have won against Oz if the game was on a Saturday and MJ was playing ... Kirwan was making breaks all the time in that match but didn’t have the support inside from MJ or outside at fullback ... Timu being played there might have helped. Anyway, that Sunday was the day I knew that god doesn’t exist.
Not taking Brewer on a technicality was stupid, as good as AJ was in 87, Brewer was better by 1991.
But yeah, crazy to think we probably would have won if the Irish had held out.
-
@Nepia said in TRC: The All Blacks against the Springboks (version 98):
@Rancid-Schnitzel I think we could have won against Oz if the game was on a Saturday and MJ was playing ... Kirwan was making breaks all the time in that match but didn’t have the support inside from MJ or outside at fullback ... Timu being played there might have helped. Anyway, that Sunday was the day I knew that god doesn’t exist.
Not taking Brewer on a technicality was stupid, as good as AJ was in 87, Brewer was better by 1991.
But yeah, crazy to think we probably would have won if the Irish had held out.
Botica, Schuster and Ridge/Gallagher would have made a huge difference as well.
-
@nzzp said in TRC: The All Blacks against the Springboks (version 98):
@No-Quarter said in TRC: The All Blacks against the Springboks (version 98):
Right now Beauden is clearly our best 10 and 15.
If we play him at 15, we have to start a rookie at 10.
If we play him at 10, we start one of our most experienced players at 15.
... and our experienced 15 isc oming back from a leg injury. Fitness and pace will come back as he gets mroe training time.
Also a comment for the Read/Cane/Savea combo. Great aroudn the park, but leaves us only three lineout options. Three is probably not enough against a top side, they'll read it too easily. Our defensive lineout steals have become a weapon over the last fwe years, and that by itself will take a step down if BBBR isn't there.
Four. Two x locks, Read, Savea. And that's not a tall joke.
-
@booboo said in TRC: The All Blacks against the Springboks (version 98):
@nzzp said in TRC: The All Blacks against the Springboks (version 98):
@No-Quarter said in TRC: The All Blacks against the Springboks (version 98):
Right now Beauden is clearly our best 10 and 15.
If we play him at 15, we have to start a rookie at 10.
If we play him at 10, we start one of our most experienced players at 15.
... and our experienced 15 isc oming back from a leg injury. Fitness and pace will come back as he gets mroe training time.
Also a comment for the Read/Cane/Savea combo. Great aroudn the park, but leaves us only three lineout options. Three is probably not enough against a top side, they'll read it too easily. Our defensive lineout steals have become a weapon over the last fwe years, and that by itself will take a step down if BBBR isn't there.
Four. Two x locks, Read, Savea. And that's not a tall joke.
Yep, Ardie is often used by the Canes in the lineout.
-
Stuff
