The Mystery of Josh Ioane’s Omission
-
@ACT-Crusader said in The Mystery of Josh Ioane’s Omission:
@nzzp said in The Mystery of Josh Ioane’s Omission:
@antipodean said in The Mystery of Josh Ioane’s Omission:
@Chris-B said in The Mystery of Josh Ioane’s Omission:
@ACT-Crusader I'll be surprised if Jordie is in the 23.
I reckon Ben Smith will be ahead of him - probably starting, but otherwise with the 23 jersey. And if Ben is starting, they can put a specialist wing on the bench, with two fullbacks already in the team.
If BFA starts it will be at fullback (games against minnows don't count). Which means the coaches have abandoned the two playmaker approach (unlikely) or one of Beaudy/ Richie are injured.
Regarding the 2-playmaker thing, am I missing something where we have identified that as our preferred option now? To me, I think they are just trying it out as an option, but we won't see it unless it's for a specific opponent. If it were preferred, surely we'd ahve seen it earlier in the year (ie Argentina onwards).
Like I said, maybe I missed something ... but I don't expect it to be a nailed down starting configuration
We started Mo’unga and Barrett against the Boks earlier this year.
Wouldn't call it a huge success against them myself.
-
@Snowy said in The Mystery of Josh Ioane’s Omission:
@ACT-Crusader said in The Mystery of Josh Ioane’s Omission:
@nzzp said in The Mystery of Josh Ioane’s Omission:
@antipodean said in The Mystery of Josh Ioane’s Omission:
@Chris-B said in The Mystery of Josh Ioane’s Omission:
@ACT-Crusader I'll be surprised if Jordie is in the 23.
I reckon Ben Smith will be ahead of him - probably starting, but otherwise with the 23 jersey. And if Ben is starting, they can put a specialist wing on the bench, with two fullbacks already in the team.
If BFA starts it will be at fullback (games against minnows don't count). Which means the coaches have abandoned the two playmaker approach (unlikely) or one of Beaudy/ Richie are injured.
Regarding the 2-playmaker thing, am I missing something where we have identified that as our preferred option now? To me, I think they are just trying it out as an option, but we won't see it unless it's for a specific opponent. If it were preferred, surely we'd ahve seen it earlier in the year (ie Argentina onwards).
Like I said, maybe I missed something ... but I don't expect it to be a nailed down starting configuration
We started Mo’unga and Barrett against the Boks earlier this year.
Wouldn't call it a huge success against them myself.
I was at that game in Wellington. It actually looked pretty good in the second half, but a lack of accuracy in finishing let us down
-
-
@shark said in The Mystery of Josh Ioane’s Omission:
Mo'unga and Barrett played all three of our big tests this year so to think the selectors are just toying with this combination is at best baffling.
Toying isn't right the word, but there could be a horses for courses element. The 2PM gameplanwas pretty clearly a big part of the plan going forward last year with Barrett and McKenize; and it probably still is going forward. But I reckon they definately want to hold it back as much as possible against rush defences to avoid other teams getting tape; which is why it was rolled out twice against Aus and they'll keep it up their sleeves against the Boks for the second half if required.
-
@rotated said in The Mystery of Josh Ioane’s Omission:
@shark said in The Mystery of Josh Ioane’s Omission:
Mo'unga and Barrett played all three of our big tests this year so to think the selectors are just toying with this combination is at best baffling.
Toying isn't right the word, but there could be a horses for courses element. The 2PM gameplanwas pretty clearly a big part of the plan going forward last year with Barrett and McKenize; and it probably still is going forward. But I reckon they definately want to hold it back as much as possible against rush defences to avoid other teams getting tape; which is why it was rolled out twice against Aus and they'll keep it up their sleeves against the Boks for the second half if required.
The time for dry powder is past. The World Cup is actually here
-
@ACT-Crusader said in The Mystery of Josh Ioane’s Omission:
@rotated said in The Mystery of Josh Ioane’s Omission:
@shark said in The Mystery of Josh Ioane’s Omission:
Mo'unga and Barrett played all three of our big tests this year so to think the selectors are just toying with this combination is at best baffling.
Toying isn't right the word, but there could be a horses for courses element. The 2PM gameplanwas pretty clearly a big part of the plan going forward last year with Barrett and McKenize; and it probably still is going forward. But I reckon they definately want to hold it back as much as possible against rush defences to avoid other teams getting tape; which is why it was rolled out twice against Aus and they'll keep it up their sleeves against the Boks for the second half if required.
The time for dry powder is past. The World Cup is actually here
Yep, lose the opening game and you get a daye with the world number 1 in the Quarter final.
-
-
@Crucial said in The Mystery of Josh Ioane’s Omission:
I'm sure that the smarter coaches will have already worked out what we are doing, it is a matter of whether they have the players and time to adjust to a system to combat it.
I'm sure we know that they know as well.But do they know we know they know?
-
@Machpants said in The Mystery of Josh Ioane’s Omission:
@Crucial said in The Mystery of Josh Ioane’s Omission:
I'm sure that the smarter coaches will have already worked out what we are doing, it is a matter of whether they have the players and time to adjust to a system to combat it.
I'm sure we know that they know as well.But do they know we know they know?
Unknown unknowns
-
@mariner4life said in The Mystery of Josh Ioane’s Omission:
see, this is the problem on here. Rancid was big on it to.
If you say a player isn't really to standard right now, his fans immediately take that as writing him off for all time. You Hurricanes boys seem especially taken with this. It is quite possible to think a player needs to do a bit more, and maybe in a year will be good enough. The options aren't "in now" or "out for all time".
It was the same with A Savea, who never quite got test rugby, until he absolutely did, and now is one of the first on the team sheet you would imagine.
I believe JB will have a pretty decent AB career, but right now, in 2019, i don't think he's so good that we need to take him, given the options we have, and the hole elsewhere.
Some of the criticism has been over the top, with more than a few posts stating he should not wear black again as he's clearly not good enough. I believe they were made in the heat of the game, so be taken with a grain of salt, but Jordie has definitely attracted more ire than most players.
Some of the criticism has also been fair and on point. He was wildly inconsistent last season in black, mixing sublime with ridiculous (the SA test a great example of that - outstanding try followed by that ridiculous quick throw). This year they've done what they should have done from the start given his age; eased him into games off the bench, and he's actually been bloody good. He may not be in our top 23, but he's well worth his spot in the squad.
I think his insanely good debut against the Lions has counted against him longer term; the coaches decided he was ready to start most tests when I don't think, mentally, he was up to it.
-
@No-Quarter said in The Mystery of Josh Ioane’s Omission:
@mariner4life said in The Mystery of Josh Ioane’s Omission:
see, this is the problem on here. Rancid was big on it to.
If you say a player isn't really to standard right now, his fans immediately take that as writing him off for all time. You Hurricanes boys seem especially taken with this. It is quite possible to think a player needs to do a bit more, and maybe in a year will be good enough. The options aren't "in now" or "out for all time".
It was the same with A Savea, who never quite got test rugby, until he absolutely did, and now is one of the first on the team sheet you would imagine.
I believe JB will have a pretty decent AB career, but right now, in 2019, i don't think he's so good that we need to take him, given the options we have, and the hole elsewhere.
Some of the criticism has been over the top, with more than a few posts stating he should not wear black again as he's clearly not good enough. I believe they were made in the heat of the game, so be taken with a grain of salt, but Jordie has definitely attracted more ire than most players.
Some of the criticism has also been fair and on point. He was wildly inconsistent last season in black, mixing sublime with ridiculous (the SA test a great example of that - outstanding try followed by that ridiculous quick throw). This year they've done what they should have done from the start given his age; eased him into games off the bench, and he's actually been bloody good. He may not be in our top 23, but he's well worth his spot in the squad.
I think his insanely good debut against the Lions has counted against him longer term; the coaches decided he was ready to start most tests when I don't think, mentally, he was up to it.
the Fern is built on hyperbole.
-
@mariner4life said in The Mystery of Josh Ioane’s Omission:
the Fern is built on hyperbole.
THAT should be in the banner.
'we're built on hyperbole'
'we've got no farking clue' -
@nzzp said in The Mystery of Josh Ioane’s Omission:
@mariner4life said in The Mystery of Josh Ioane’s Omission:
the Fern is built on hyperbole.
THAT should be in the banner.
'we're built on hyperbole'
'we've got no farking clue'It used to be something like that. One of the old heads will remember what the slogan was back in 2007 when I started. Basically that we talk shit and have no idea
-
@canefan said in The Mystery of Josh Ioane’s Omission:
@nzzp said in The Mystery of Josh Ioane’s Omission:
@mariner4life said in The Mystery of Josh Ioane’s Omission:
the Fern is built on hyperbole.
THAT should be in the banner.
'we're built on hyperbole'
'we've got no farking clue'It used to be something like that. One of the old heads will remember what the slogan was back in 2007 when I started. Basically that we talk shit and have no idea
Inaccurate analysis, poor opinions, no research, etc. est 1999.
Whatever it was, should be back.
-
-
-
@Snowy said in The Mystery of Josh Ioane’s Omission:
@Duluth Could you put it back?
It is the most astute comment ever made on here.
Yup, it was already on the the list of changes I wanted to make.
-
Just a thought, but if both Mo'unga and Barrett were injured the game before a QF, but both were deemed to be likely to be fit for a semi final if we qualified, what would stop the selectors from replacing an outside back for Josh Ioane, so he could play 10 in the QF but the other two would still be eligible for games after that?
