All Blacks v Pumas 1
-
@MiketheSnow said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@Bones said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@No-Quarter said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@ACT-Crusader said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@broughie said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@ACT-Crusader The primary reason why the backs played so much better is that we had a competitive forward pack on Saturday which has been the problem all along. I might even accept Havilli at 2nd five if he is not on the back foot all the time.
I'd say a primary reason was we played with depth so we could better attack from too. It enabled us to better manage the rush defence which the Boks centre their defence and attack off. Plus having a 1st 5 that has an intent to attack and set his outsides (and the odd Bok
) up was integral to that.I thought the depth in our attack was a big factor in Rieko looking so dangerous all game. Do you think that was down to RM starting at 10 or a different game plan? It just seems so silly for BB to always play so flat when it's his running game that is his biggest strength. When he's able to get a head of steam up before getting to the defensive line he puts the opposition in two minds and becomes so much more effective.
Pretty hard to say off the one game, but the difference was RM actually feeding those in space, rather than a panicked shovel or hold.
Beauds used to rely on pace off the mark a lot, I haven't seen evidence he's still got it, almost looks injured. That break he made in the first test looked like he was running in treacle, very unlike him.
The video poster's premise is incorrect IMHO
This was posted to demonstrate that it wasn't all sunshine & lollipops for RM
You probably should watch that video the whole way through. It was highlighting PSDT's illegal action that allowed Marx the opportunity to win the turnover.
-
@Frye said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@MiketheSnow said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@Bones said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@No-Quarter said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@ACT-Crusader said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@broughie said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@ACT-Crusader The primary reason why the backs played so much better is that we had a competitive forward pack on Saturday which has been the problem all along. I might even accept Havilli at 2nd five if he is not on the back foot all the time.
I'd say a primary reason was we played with depth so we could better attack from too. It enabled us to better manage the rush defence which the Boks centre their defence and attack off. Plus having a 1st 5 that has an intent to attack and set his outsides (and the odd Bok
) up was integral to that.I thought the depth in our attack was a big factor in Rieko looking so dangerous all game. Do you think that was down to RM starting at 10 or a different game plan? It just seems so silly for BB to always play so flat when it's his running game that is his biggest strength. When he's able to get a head of steam up before getting to the defensive line he puts the opposition in two minds and becomes so much more effective.
Pretty hard to say off the one game, but the difference was RM actually feeding those in space, rather than a panicked shovel or hold.
Beauds used to rely on pace off the mark a lot, I haven't seen evidence he's still got it, almost looks injured. That break he made in the first test looked like he was running in treacle, very unlike him.
The video poster's premise is incorrect IMHO
This was posted to demonstrate that it wasn't all sunshine & lollipops for RM
You probably should watch that video the whole way through. It was highlighting PSDT's illegal action that allowed Marx the opportunity to win the turnover.
I watched it
PSDT completed the tackle
Marx turned the ball over
Correct reffing IMHO
-
@MiketheSnow said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@Frye said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@MiketheSnow said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@Bones said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@No-Quarter said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@ACT-Crusader said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@broughie said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@ACT-Crusader The primary reason why the backs played so much better is that we had a competitive forward pack on Saturday which has been the problem all along. I might even accept Havilli at 2nd five if he is not on the back foot all the time.
I'd say a primary reason was we played with depth so we could better attack from too. It enabled us to better manage the rush defence which the Boks centre their defence and attack off. Plus having a 1st 5 that has an intent to attack and set his outsides (and the odd Bok
) up was integral to that.I thought the depth in our attack was a big factor in Rieko looking so dangerous all game. Do you think that was down to RM starting at 10 or a different game plan? It just seems so silly for BB to always play so flat when it's his running game that is his biggest strength. When he's able to get a head of steam up before getting to the defensive line he puts the opposition in two minds and becomes so much more effective.
Pretty hard to say off the one game, but the difference was RM actually feeding those in space, rather than a panicked shovel or hold.
Beauds used to rely on pace off the mark a lot, I haven't seen evidence he's still got it, almost looks injured. That break he made in the first test looked like he was running in treacle, very unlike him.
The video poster's premise is incorrect IMHO
This was posted to demonstrate that it wasn't all sunshine & lollipops for RM
You probably should watch that video the whole way through. It was highlighting PSDT's illegal action that allowed Marx the opportunity to win the turnover.
I watched it
PSDT completed the tackle
Marx turned the ball over
Correct reffing IMHO
Pick up your game buddy!
-
@MiketheSnow said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@Bones said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@No-Quarter said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@ACT-Crusader said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@broughie said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@ACT-Crusader The primary reason why the backs played so much better is that we had a competitive forward pack on Saturday which has been the problem all along. I might even accept Havilli at 2nd five if he is not on the back foot all the time.
I'd say a primary reason was we played with depth so we could better attack from too. It enabled us to better manage the rush defence which the Boks centre their defence and attack off. Plus having a 1st 5 that has an intent to attack and set his outsides (and the odd Bok
) up was integral to that.I thought the depth in our attack was a big factor in Rieko looking so dangerous all game. Do you think that was down to RM starting at 10 or a different game plan? It just seems so silly for BB to always play so flat when it's his running game that is his biggest strength. When he's able to get a head of steam up before getting to the defensive line he puts the opposition in two minds and becomes so much more effective.
Pretty hard to say off the one game, but the difference was RM actually feeding those in space, rather than a panicked shovel or hold.
Beauds used to rely on pace off the mark a lot, I haven't seen evidence he's still got it, almost looks injured. That break he made in the first test looked like he was running in treacle, very unlike him.
The video poster's premise is incorrect IMHO
This was posted to demonstrate that it wasn't all sunshine & lollipops for RM
That PSDT non-release MM pilfer combo is same idea as key incorrect AG penalty against Ta'avao in Bok1, which BTW was a gimme 3 for Jordie.
-
@Nepia said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@Crazy-Horse said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
I think the biggest issue facing The Fern around Frizell's selection is working out if Frizzel is spelt with two Zs and one L, or one Z and two Ls or two Zs and two Ls. However, we can probably be certain Frizel is not spelt with one Z and one L.
When has the Fern ever cared about how to spell names? I doubt Messam and Weber have ever had their names spelt correctly for two posts in a row.
Anyway just as easy to call him Shannon, the shittiest town in one of the shittiest province, it's very apt.
Hey hey Nepia, thems fighting words!! The mighty Nua cannot be called a shitty province in my hearing (or reading) without some comeback
, and funnily enough I have even considered looking at buying a house in Shannon when I head back down that way, I personally wouldn't of considered it 20 years ago, but place is not bad at all now! -
-
-
@Nepia said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@Crucial said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@Dan54 funny, I always thought of Shannon as being in the Poo.
So did I, hence my comment ... if it's in the Nua then I apologise @Dan54.
Whew ,I don't have to go looking for my club, and come hunting (while making sure I never found you lol)..
-
@Nepia said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@Crucial said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@Dan54 funny, I always thought of Shannon as being in the Poo.
So did I, hence my comment ... if it's in the Nua then I apologise @Dan54.
It's still in the flax swamp though.
-
@Crucial said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@Nepia said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@Crucial said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@Dan54 funny, I always thought of Shannon as being in the Poo.
So did I, hence my comment ... if it's in the Nua then I apologise @Dan54.
It's still in the flax swamp though.
Wiki list it as in the Poo-Wanganui region so close enough.
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@No-Quarter said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
I thought the depth in our attack was a big factor in Rieko looking so dangerous all game. Do you think that was down to RM starting at 10 or a different game plan?
I noticed passes from the ruck to a forward standing a metre or two back who went forward or passed backwards and wider to either Ritchie or DH. It seemed put uncertainty into the Bokke defence and gave options for attack from deeper.
I can't help but feel that's always what they've been supposed to do, but instead of putting doubt into the minds of the defence, they've stayed stationary and passed the ball, totally negating the point.
-
@MiketheSnow said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@Frye said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@MiketheSnow said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@Bones said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@No-Quarter said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@ACT-Crusader said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@broughie said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@ACT-Crusader The primary reason why the backs played so much better is that we had a competitive forward pack on Saturday which has been the problem all along. I might even accept Havilli at 2nd five if he is not on the back foot all the time.
I'd say a primary reason was we played with depth so we could better attack from too. It enabled us to better manage the rush defence which the Boks centre their defence and attack off. Plus having a 1st 5 that has an intent to attack and set his outsides (and the odd Bok
) up was integral to that.I thought the depth in our attack was a big factor in Rieko looking so dangerous all game. Do you think that was down to RM starting at 10 or a different game plan? It just seems so silly for BB to always play so flat when it's his running game that is his biggest strength. When he's able to get a head of steam up before getting to the defensive line he puts the opposition in two minds and becomes so much more effective.
Pretty hard to say off the one game, but the difference was RM actually feeding those in space, rather than a panicked shovel or hold.
Beauds used to rely on pace off the mark a lot, I haven't seen evidence he's still got it, almost looks injured. That break he made in the first test looked like he was running in treacle, very unlike him.
The video poster's premise is incorrect IMHO
This was posted to demonstrate that it wasn't all sunshine & lollipops for RM
You probably should watch that video the whole way through. It was highlighting PSDT's illegal action that allowed Marx the opportunity to win the turnover.
I watched it
PSDT completed the tackle
Marx turned the ball over
Correct reffing IMHO
Nah. Easy penalty to Black. Every other ref will say to Marx "you're fine, but you're only there because PSDT didn't roll away first".
-
@antipodean said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@Victor-Meldrew said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@No-Quarter said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
I thought the depth in our attack was a big factor in Rieko looking so dangerous all game. Do you think that was down to RM starting at 10 or a different game plan?
I noticed passes from the ruck to a forward standing a metre or two back who went forward or passed backwards and wider to either Ritchie or DH. It seemed put uncertainty into the Bokke defence and gave options for attack from deeper.
I can't help but feel that's always what they've been supposed to do, but instead of putting doubt into the minds of the defence, they've stayed stationary and passed the ball, totally negating the point.
And/or the passes have been of similar width.
-
Do the ABs do public training runs? If so, anyone know where and when they are training this week in Christchurch? I am guessing Rugby Park?
-
@Crazy-Horse said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
Do the ABs do public training runs? If so, anyone know where and when they are training this week in Christchurch? I am guessing Rugby Park?
Ohhh suuuuure, like we're going to give you the whereabouts of Foster. Want to know good grassy knoll hiding spots too?
-
@Bones said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@Crazy-Horse said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
Do the ABs do public training runs? If so, anyone know where and when they are training this week in Christchurch? I am guessing Rugby Park?
Ohhh suuuuure, like we're going to give you the whereabouts of Foster. Want to know good grassy knoll hiding spots too?
Fuck, I didn't think anyone on here was smart enough to work out my plan.
-
@Crazy-Horse said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@Bones said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@Crazy-Horse said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
Do the ABs do public training runs? If so, anyone know where and when they are training this week in Christchurch? I am guessing Rugby Park?
Ohhh suuuuure, like we're going to give you the whereabouts of Foster. Want to know good grassy knoll hiding spots too?
Fuck, I didn't think anyone on here was smart enough to work out my plan.
Fuck off and find your own spot, you're knocking my rifle cradle.
-
@Bones said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@Crazy-Horse said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@Bones said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@Crazy-Horse said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
Do the ABs do public training runs? If so, anyone know where and when they are training this week in Christchurch? I am guessing Rugby Park?
Ohhh suuuuure, like we're going to give you the whereabouts of Foster. Want to know good grassy knoll hiding spots too?
Fuck, I didn't think anyone on here was smart enough to work out my plan.
Fuck off and find your own spot, you're knocking my rifle cradle.
you boys are no @Snowy
-
@Bones said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@Crazy-Horse said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@Bones said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@Crazy-Horse said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
Do the ABs do public training runs? If so, anyone know where and when they are training this week in Christchurch? I am guessing Rugby Park?
Ohhh suuuuure, like we're going to give you the whereabouts of Foster. Want to know good grassy knoll hiding spots too?
Fuck, I didn't think anyone on here was smart enough to work out my plan.
Fuck off and find your own spot, you're knocking my rifle cradle.
Wouldn't want to cramp your style, so it's plan b then. Spike the pies at the dairy down the road from Rugby Park.
-
@nzzp said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@Bones said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@Crazy-Horse said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@Bones said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
@Crazy-Horse said in All Blacks v Pumas 1:
Do the ABs do public training runs? If so, anyone know where and when they are training this week in Christchurch? I am guessing Rugby Park?
Ohhh suuuuure, like we're going to give you the whereabouts of Foster. Want to know good grassy knoll hiding spots too?
Fuck, I didn't think anyone on here was smart enough to work out my plan.
Fuck off and find your own spot, you're knocking my rifle cradle.
you boys are no @Snowy
@Snowy is helping with the clean up and disposal.
