Depth at 10
-
@crazy-horse said in Depth at 10:
That Highlanders 10 whose name I can't recall at the moment was a very good back up at the Crusaders, but has no outstanding features to suggest he will make it at Test Level. Black is average - OK at most aspects but nothing in his game stands out that will be an asset at test level. And my nightwork fuzz brain can't even think who the Chiefs 10 is, so I would hazard a guess they don't throw up a viable option either.
Hunt
Black has left (Barrett/Plummer/Perofeta/Sullivan)
Chiefs ten will be J Ioane (Trask looks like more of a fullback)
So yes, not many options forcing their way in yet
-
@mn5 said in Depth at 10:
@canefan said in Depth at 10:
@crazy-horse said in Depth at 10:
@gt12 who? Instead of saying we need to see if others can make the step up name some players and say why you think they may have what it takes. 10 is the position I watch the closest and I did not see anyone remotely close to test level last year apart from RM and BB.
Ioane has had a couple of seasons to flush down the dunny. He may come right but now is not his time. JGB struggles at Super Level. That Highlanders 10 whose name I can't recall at the moment was a very good back up at the Crusaders, but has no outstanding features to suggest he will make it at Test Level. Black is average - OK at most aspects but nothing in his game stands out that will be an asset at test level. And my nightwork fuzz brain can't even think who the Chiefs 10 is, so I would hazard a guess they don't throw up a viable option either.
I think 10 is a position where the AB have picked the two players who are clearly the best 10s in the country at the moment. The problem is both are having issues. I don't think it's because they are shit players.
Does it come back to the way we play the game at super level? Too fancy schmancy, not enough controlling play?
Too much Los not enough Merhts
We have lost the art of controlling and managing a game. I love BB but even he can't play that way. Or coaches never ask him to play that way.
We never saw it coming but we are officially in a trough now. Current players not up to snuff and our rivals especially in the NH beating us at our own old game
-
@duluth said in Depth at 10:
@crazy-horse said in Depth at 10:
That Highlanders 10 whose name I can't recall at the moment was a very good back up at the Crusaders, but has no outstanding features to suggest he will make it at Test Level. Black is average - OK at most aspects but nothing in his game stands out that will be an asset at test level. And my nightwork fuzz brain can't even think who the Chiefs 10 is, so I would hazard a guess they don't throw up a viable option either.
Hunt
Black has left (Barrett/Plummer/Perofeta/Sullivan)
Chiefs ten will be J Ioane (Trask looks like more of a fullback)
So yes, not many options forcing their way in yet
Cheers, forgot Black has left and buggered if I could remember Hunt's name!
Sullivan intrigues me. I have never seen him play 10 but all accounts suggest he came through the ranks there. The little I have seen him play he seems to have some qualities that may make him a class 10. Time on the ball, a good pass and a big punt come to mind. Haven't seen enough to have an opinion on his decision making or defence. Hope he gets some game time at 10 next year.
-
Honestly, don't think our first choice 10's are the problem. BB looked more than adequate in 2016-17 - he's clearly kept working on elements of his game. Every single other 10 in the world would like poop behind our pack right now, the problems are exasperated when we don't have Aaron Smith at 9 (although I don't think Weber or Christie are that bad) - its just time for TJ to go.
Josh Ioane isn't the answer, he does some good stuff in the NPC, but even there he doesn't look world class.Fix the forwards.
Get Gilbert on the job.
Fix the AB's. -
While it would be easy to sink the boot in against those who claimed RM was the second coming and that BB was the problem etc etc, I don't think it's fair to shit on RM. The problem has always been the tactics and structure. Even Dan Carter would struggle in this environment, and even more so without Nonu outside him. It's been obvious for a few years, but at least now it appears the RM fluffers have now realised this.
-
@rancid-schnitzel said in Depth at 10:
While it would be easy to sink the boot in against those who claimed RM was the second coming and that BB was the problem etc etc, I don't think it's fair to shit on RM. The problem has always been the tactics and structure. Even Dan Carter would struggle in this environment, and even more so without Nonu outside him. It's been obvious for a few years, but at least now it appears the RM fluffers have now realised this.
Trust you to get a Nonu mention in there
-
@westcoastie said in Depth at 10:
Honestly, don't think our first choice 10's are the problem. BB looked more than adequate in 2016-17 - he's clearly kept working on elements of his game. Every single other 10 in the world would like poop behind our pack right now, the problems are exasperated when we don't have Aaron Smith at 9 (although I don't think Weber or Christie are that bad) - its just time for TJ to go.
Josh Ioane isn't the answer, he does some good stuff in the NPC, but even there he doesn't look world class.Fix the forwards.
Get Gilbert on the job.
Fix the AB's.While I understand what you're saying, I do think both our 10's ARE a problem when our pack isn't dominant. Plenty of 10's around who look a million bucks behind a dominant pack, but there are a precious few that can boss a game when you're going backwards. The ability to rake a monster clearance to relieve pressure, the ability to kick off both feet when scrambling (I'm not sure RM has a left at all BTW), the cool head to know when to spin it to the backs or to keep it in tight and run inside channels.
I don't watch enough Super rugby anymore (let alone NPC or club stuff) to have any answers for this thread, but I do agree we need to look beyond BB and RM.
BB has never been a natural 10, but his athleticism and eye for a gap meant it didn't matter - you just wanted the ball in his hands as much as possible, RM to me has never been of that quality, he looks mint when everything else goes his way, but that's so rarely the case.
-
I haven't read the match thread yet but I take it RM has come in for plenty of criticism.
The wider problem to me is that the way we play in SR isn't the best for developing how a 1st 5 needs to play in test rugby. Mo'unga, especially, always has much more time and space behind the Crusaders forward pack than he will ever get at international level. It's no surprise that he has looked best for the ABs against Aust, who play a similar style to NZ.
None of the NZ SR teams employ the same aggressive rush defence that the NH teams and SA do. We really need to start using this defensive system ourselves so our players can adapt to playing against it.
Having a larger, more robust 1st 5 can be an advantage so Sullivan could be an option. He needs a couple of years playing there for the Blues to answer that question.
-
@bovidae said in Depth at 10:
Having a larger, more robust 1st 5 can be an advantage so Sullivan could be an option. He needs a couple of years playing there for the Blues to answer that question.
Were you the one that saw him play 10 for the Blues Dev side and struggle? What was wrong?
-
@bovidae said in Depth at 10:
None of the NZ SR teams employ the same aggressive rush defence that the NH teams and SA do. We really need to start using this defensive system ourselves so our players can adapt to playing against it.
hopefully that will change with Gats and Schmidt involved next year, or at least employ ways to better deal with it, cos its clear the last 2 coaching regimes have struggled.
-
@duluth said in Depth at 10:
@bovidae said in Depth at 10:
Having a larger, more robust 1st 5 can be an advantage so Sullivan could be an option. He needs a couple of years playing there for the Blues to answer that question.
Were you the one that saw him play 10 for the Blues Dev side and struggle? What was wrong?
IIRC he didn't really control the game, and his passing was poor. Or maybe Gatland played well.
Sullivan is a better player now but seems to be like Love, i.e., a schoolboy 1st 5 who then plays more at fullback once he leaves school.
-
@bovidae said in Depth at 10:
I haven't read the match thread yet but I take it RM has come in for plenty of criticism.
The wider problem to me is that the way we play in SR isn't the best for developing how a 1st 5 needs to play in test rugby. Mo'unga, especially, always has much more time and space behind the Crusaders forward pack than he will ever get at international level. It's no surprise that he has looked best for the ABs against Aust, who play a similar style to NZ.
None of the NZ SR teams employ the same aggressive rush defence that the NH teams and SA do. We really need to start using this defensive system ourselves so our players can adapt to playing against it.
Having a larger, more robust 1st 5 can be an advantage so Sullivan could be an option. He needs a couple of years playing there for the Blues to answer that question.
So, Jordie then....
-
@voodoo said in Depth at 10:
@bovidae said in Depth at 10:
I haven't read the match thread yet but I take it RM has come in for plenty of criticism.
The wider problem to me is that the way we play in SR isn't the best for developing how a 1st 5 needs to play in test rugby. Mo'unga, especially, always has much more time and space behind the Crusaders forward pack than he will ever get at international level. It's no surprise that he has looked best for the ABs against Aust, who play a similar style to NZ.
None of the NZ SR teams employ the same aggressive rush defence that the NH teams and SA do. We really need to start using this defensive system ourselves so our players can adapt to playing against it.
Having a larger, more robust 1st 5 can be an advantage so Sullivan could be an option. He needs a couple of years playing there for the Blues to answer that question.
So, Jordie then....
Or Havili?
-
@gt12 or TJ could re-invent himself at 10...
but gee the cupboard is bare.
I think both RM & BB have the ability, but our forwards arent giving them the platform they need, plus they dont have a plan b when the platform isnt there, which is a coaching issue, but tbf, both struggle at super when the heat is on too, so yeah.
-
@taniwharugby said in Depth at 10:
@gt12 or TJ could re-invent himself at 10...
but gee the cupboard is bare.
I think both RM & BB have the ability, but our forwards arent giving them the platform they need, plus they dont have a plan b when the platform isnt there, which is a coaching issue, but tbf, both struggle at super when the heat is on too, so yeah.
I actually quite liked him at 10 the couple of times I saw him there for the Hurricanes. Incredible short-passing game (as one would expect)
-
I hope Dmac concentrates on 10 in Japan as insurance for NZ. He has the best vision and skill set. Zarn Sullivan Harry Plummer and Campbell Parata from Ta$man look to be the ones with most upward potential for me.
Richie M is still gaining test experience and may improve markedly. He just needs to develop his vision and organise those around him to exploit gaps and create opportunities. Currently he let's the game come to him until he sees a gap he can run into himself. -
@arhs said in Depth at 10:
I hope Dmac concentrates on 10 in Japan as insurance for NZ. He has the best vision and skill set. Zarn Sullivan Harry Plummer and Campbell Parata from Ta$man look to be the ones with most upward potential for me.
Richie M is still gaining test experience and may improve markedly. He just needs to develop his vision and organise those around him to exploit gaps and create opportunities. Currently he let's the game come to him until he sees a gap he can run into himself.This is the best explanation of my problem with Mo'unga, although honestly it seems to be a problem with the whole team of 'drivers'.
They react to what is in front of them rather than creating.
-
I'm of the view that Mo'unga is actually a pretty bloody good player. I've seen him play a lot of good games, including against decent opposition, including when the Crusaders haven't been super dominant up front. I've also seen the Crusaders go very rapidly to shit against teams they would normally beat comfortably, when RM doesn't play through injury.
He played very poorly tonight.
I think some of that is pressure and getting up to speed with the higher level, and I think a bigger part of it is being part of a dysfunctional team, who doesn't know who there first choice line-up is, or what is expected of each of them, or who is in charge. The dual playmakers with BB and RM was shit as both were used to being the lead voice, and sharing it just confused the issue. It worked better with DM at fullback, but then they went for JB (after playing him on the fucking wing for christ's sake), and then chopped and changed between RM and BB. It's been a mess.
And the midfield is musical chairs.
And we've been using multiple halfbacks and #8s.Frankly it reminds me of Pat Lam coaching the Blues.
