Chiefs v Blues
-
@nostrildamus said in Chiefs v Blues:
Even as an AB FB would BB now be in the top 3 in the country?
How would you know he doesn't play there.
-
@mariner4life said in Chiefs v Blues:
@nostrildamus said in Chiefs v Blues:
Even as an AB FB would BB now be in the top 3 in the country?
How would you know he doesn't play there.
?? BB has played 15 for the ABs recently, even if off the bench, and it goes into the calculations as to whether he is selected for the ABs as backup 10/15....
-
@KiwiMurph said in Chiefs v Blues:
@Stargazer said in Chiefs v Blues:
This was supposed to be the best game of the weekend ...
Sums up the competition this year.
That’s being very generous to describe it that way…
As for this game there just isn’t the flow between forwards and backs with the Blues. 9 and 10 are a big issue, but not the only problem. I wonder if Rangi has lost the dressing room. All the speculation and 11th hour machinations last year that he was going to the ABs wouldn’t have helped with certainty and ‘getting on with the job’. Just a hunch.
-
@antipodean said in Chiefs v Blues:
Does DMac run further sideways than he does down the field?
This old chestnut.
Don't get it confused with him looking to do something for himself. These days when he does it you should notice that it is because he has recieved the ball with a swarming defence and his forwards in front of him. Buying time until they can get behind and then trying to set up a recycle is a good move. Better than getting taken with no cleaners.
Doesn't always come off (as when Jacobsen stayed flat when DMac was trying to get to him to secure the ball), and it can certainly look headless but he knows what he is doing and it is way better than shovelling to ball to someone in a worse position (ala Mounga) -
@Cantab79 said in Chiefs v Blues:
That was the worst performance I've seen from Barrett in a long time. Maybe ever? It wasn't just his fluffed try or his poor goal kicking, his general game management was poor as well. All players have a use-by date, and I wonder if we are seeing BB reach his in a rather public and inglorious way? I thought the Blues still had enough ball and territory to win this game, but poor decision making and finishing cost them. Well done to the Chiefs though, they thoroughly deserved their win. They look like a team that knows their structure and enjoys playing together. This Chiefs team reminds me of the vintage Rennie-era great Chiefs teams, perhaps without the physicality and roughness that defined those teams. It looks well coached and is playing above the sum of its parts,
I think they said on the breakdown that this was the Blues being coach killers once again and I tend to agree. Some individual miss-steps aside (BB) the coaching fundamentals and plans had them in a position to win this game. Coaches don't drop balls or step on dead ball lines.
The top two inches always seem to let the Blues down and numerous coaches have tried to fix that and failed over the years. There has been hardline approaches, soft 'matey' approaches, attempts to connect better with the PI influences etc etc but in the end the Blues manage to find ways to fuck up. -
Some perspective is missing in this thread. This 7 point victory at home is the first win in 4 attempts by the Chiefs against the Blues. It's only the Chiefs 2nd win in the last 7 meetings
The Blues have won plenty of close matches against the Chiefs in recent times as well. Plus there is the shutout in the previous match just last year (25-0)
All of that is a massive improvement over the Umaga/Kirwan years where the Blues couldn't win a match in 10 attempts
-
@Duluth said in Chiefs v Blues:
Some perspective is missing in this thread. This 7 point victory at home is the first win in 4 attempts by the Chiefs against the Blues. It's only the Chiefs 2nd win in the last 7 meetings
The Blues have won plenty of close matches against the Chiefs in recent times as well. Plus there is the shutout in the previous match just last year (25-0)
All of that is a massive improvement over the Umaga/Kirwan years where the Blues couldn't win a match in 10 attempts
Can't disagree with those stats but I place this game firmly in a must win category and Blues seem to struggle to get the W in those must win situations (Chiefs, Blues, Saders this year, final last year).
Yes, it is an improvement that they are in a position that these games become chances to stake success but there still seems to be an oversized hurdle before the finish line for them.I say this only as a currently feeling smug Chiefs fan
-
Moving Perefeta to 10 and Zarn Sullivan starting at 15 would make a Hugh difference in game management for the Blues.
The forwards are doing enough to come out on top of other forward packs.
But the backs are wasting the ball.
Sad to to see Barrett where he is at, but the Blues and Foster need to make the right calls and not keep selecting him on his past ability. -
@antipodean said in Chiefs v Blues:
Individual match ups:
- Webber clearly better than Christie.
- Sotutu over Jacobson.
- Finau over Segner.
- DMac over a horrid Beauden.
Cane over Papalii doing the dirty work.
-
@Duluth said in Chiefs v Blues:
All of that is a massive improvement over the Umaga/Kirwan years where the Blues couldn't win a match in 10 attempts
While I liked the post for everything pre this sentence, surely we're past the point of comparing everything with those years now? The Blues have been a good team for a good while now.
-
@Nepia said in Chiefs v Blues:
@Duluth said in Chiefs v Blues:
All of that is a massive improvement over the Umaga/Kirwan years where the Blues couldn't win a match in 10 attempts
While I liked the post for everything pre this sentence, surely we're past the point of comparing everything with those years now? The Blues have been a good team for a good while now.
It was in response to another post making claims about coach after coach not fixing things. There has been an enormous, undeniable, improvement
-
@Crucial said in Chiefs v Blues:
@antipodean said in Chiefs v Blues:
Does DMac run further sideways than he does down the field?
This old chestnut.
Don't get it confused with him looking to do something for himself. These days when he does it you should notice that it is because he has recieved the ball with a swarming defence and his forwards in front of him. Buying time until they can get behind and then trying to set up a recycle is a good move. Better than getting taken with no cleaners.
Doesn't always come off (as when Jacobsen stayed flat when DMac was trying to get to him to secure the ball), and it can certainly look headless but he knows what he is doing and it is way better than shovelling to ball to someone in a worse position (ala Mounga)Yeah I've read this defence of him before Mrs McKenzie. Other players manage to not lose ground and run away from support when they've called for the ball in inopportune circumstances. As was mentioned by someone else, and you acknowledge, against better teams that's a recipe for disaster because it makes it even more likely he'll be isolated and lose the ball. It's an aspect of his game that needs to be tempered at worst and removed at best if his supporters are to make a serious case he should be the AB #10 over Beaudy and Mo'unga.
-
@Bovidae said in Chiefs v Blues:
@antipodean said in Chiefs v Blues:
Individual match ups:
- Webber clearly better than Christie.
- Sotutu over Jacobson.
- Finau over Segner.
- DMac over a horrid Beauden.
Cane over Papalii doing the dirty work.
Stats had Paps attending a lot more rucks but Cane making 100% of tackles.
Maybe it is a bit more smarts or maybe that was the Chiefs gameplan to, not commit as many to the breakdown but keep the gaps covered. It certainly seemed to be the gameplan to keep the ball in front of the forwards and the long kicks (that looked aimless at times) kept BB and SP hanging back and unable to set up plays. The Chiefs were happy to stay on defence if required. Paps had to do a lot of chasing around to secure ball at breakdowns -
@antipodean said in Chiefs v Blues:
@Crucial said in Chiefs v Blues:
@antipodean said in Chiefs v Blues:
Does DMac run further sideways than he does down the field?
This old chestnut.
Don't get it confused with him looking to do something for himself. These days when he does it you should notice that it is because he has recieved the ball with a swarming defence and his forwards in front of him. Buying time until they can get behind and then trying to set up a recycle is a good move. Better than getting taken with no cleaners.
Doesn't always come off (as when Jacobsen stayed flat when DMac was trying to get to him to secure the ball), and it can certainly look headless but he knows what he is doing and it is way better than shovelling to ball to someone in a worse position (ala Mounga)Yeah I've read this defence of him before Mrs McKenzie. Other players manage to not lose ground and run away from support when they've called for the ball in inopportune circumstances. As was mentioned by someone else, and you acknowledge, against better teams that's a recipe for disaster because it makes it even more likely he'll be isolated and lose the ball. It's an aspect of his game that needs to be tempered at worst and removed at best if his supporters are to make a serious case he should be the AB #10 over Beaudy and Mo'unga.
My point was that he wasn't looking to break the line and get isolated. He was buying time for his support to get behind him and negate that possibility. Other 10s might just feed onto the 12 as a bail out option which IMO carries as much risk unless they are running a line to take a tackle and set in front.
-
@Crucial said in Chiefs v Blues:
@antipodean said in Chiefs v Blues:
@Crucial said in Chiefs v Blues:
@antipodean said in Chiefs v Blues:
Does DMac run further sideways than he does down the field?
This old chestnut.
Don't get it confused with him looking to do something for himself. These days when he does it you should notice that it is because he has recieved the ball with a swarming defence and his forwards in front of him. Buying time until they can get behind and then trying to set up a recycle is a good move. Better than getting taken with no cleaners.
Doesn't always come off (as when Jacobsen stayed flat when DMac was trying to get to him to secure the ball), and it can certainly look headless but he knows what he is doing and it is way better than shovelling to ball to someone in a worse position (ala Mounga)Yeah I've read this defence of him before Mrs McKenzie. Other players manage to not lose ground and run away from support when they've called for the ball in inopportune circumstances. As was mentioned by someone else, and you acknowledge, against better teams that's a recipe for disaster because it makes it even more likely he'll be isolated and lose the ball. It's an aspect of his game that needs to be tempered at worst and removed at best if his supporters are to make a serious case he should be the AB #10 over Beaudy and Mo'unga.
My point was that he wasn't looking to break the line and get isolated. He was buying time for his support to get behind him and negate that possibility.
I read your previous post and responded to it. There's no requirement to restate the argument already dealt with.
Other 10s might just feed onto the 12 as a bail out option which IMO carries as much risk unless they are running a line to take a tackle and set in front.
Disagree. For reasons I've already explained: Against better sides losing ground and running sideways makes it even more difficult for your support to do anything and conversely easier for the defence to isolate and swamp you.
-
for all DMac has been killing it, if you step back his strengths and weaknesses are not too dissimilar to our other 10 options. I don't trust him any more than i trust the others when we get in to a grind against the better international defences.
-
@antipodean said in Chiefs v Blues:
@Crucial said in Chiefs v Blues:
@antipodean said in Chiefs v Blues:
@Crucial said in Chiefs v Blues:
@antipodean said in Chiefs v Blues:
Does DMac run further sideways than he does down the field?
This old chestnut.
Don't get it confused with him looking to do something for himself. These days when he does it you should notice that it is because he has recieved the ball with a swarming defence and his forwards in front of him. Buying time until they can get behind and then trying to set up a recycle is a good move. Better than getting taken with no cleaners.
Doesn't always come off (as when Jacobsen stayed flat when DMac was trying to get to him to secure the ball), and it can certainly look headless but he knows what he is doing and it is way better than shovelling to ball to someone in a worse position (ala Mounga)Yeah I've read this defence of him before Mrs McKenzie. Other players manage to not lose ground and run away from support when they've called for the ball in inopportune circumstances. As was mentioned by someone else, and you acknowledge, against better teams that's a recipe for disaster because it makes it even more likely he'll be isolated and lose the ball. It's an aspect of his game that needs to be tempered at worst and removed at best if his supporters are to make a serious case he should be the AB #10 over Beaudy and Mo'unga.
My point was that he wasn't looking to break the line and get isolated. He was buying time for his support to get behind him and negate that possibility.
I read your previous post and responded to it. There's no requirement to restate the argument already dealt with.
Other 10s might just feed onto the 12 as a bail out option which IMO carries as much risk unless they are running a line to take a tackle and set in front.
Disagree. For reasons I've already explained: Against better sides losing ground and running sideways makes it even more difficult for your support to do anything and conversely easier for the defence to isolate and swamp you.
I restated as you didn't (and still don't) seem to understand.
There were occasions when it didn't come off (I mentioned an example) but most of the time ground wasn't lost and the ball wasn't turned over because of what he did not in spite of it. He would look to get a cleaner behind him then take the tackle and secure the phase. -
@Crucial said in Chiefs v Blues:
@antipodean said in Chiefs v Blues:
@Crucial said in Chiefs v Blues:
@antipodean said in Chiefs v Blues:
@Crucial said in Chiefs v Blues:
@antipodean said in Chiefs v Blues:
Does DMac run further sideways than he does down the field?
This old chestnut.
Don't get it confused with him looking to do something for himself. These days when he does it you should notice that it is because he has recieved the ball with a swarming defence and his forwards in front of him. Buying time until they can get behind and then trying to set up a recycle is a good move. Better than getting taken with no cleaners.
Doesn't always come off (as when Jacobsen stayed flat when DMac was trying to get to him to secure the ball), and it can certainly look headless but he knows what he is doing and it is way better than shovelling to ball to someone in a worse position (ala Mounga)Yeah I've read this defence of him before Mrs McKenzie. Other players manage to not lose ground and run away from support when they've called for the ball in inopportune circumstances. As was mentioned by someone else, and you acknowledge, against better teams that's a recipe for disaster because it makes it even more likely he'll be isolated and lose the ball. It's an aspect of his game that needs to be tempered at worst and removed at best if his supporters are to make a serious case he should be the AB #10 over Beaudy and Mo'unga.
My point was that he wasn't looking to break the line and get isolated. He was buying time for his support to get behind him and negate that possibility.
I read your previous post and responded to it. There's no requirement to restate the argument already dealt with.
Other 10s might just feed onto the 12 as a bail out option which IMO carries as much risk unless they are running a line to take a tackle and set in front.
Disagree. For reasons I've already explained: Against better sides losing ground and running sideways makes it even more difficult for your support to do anything and conversely easier for the defence to isolate and swamp you.
I restated as you didn't (and still don't) seem to understand.
I do understand because I CLEARLY addressed it.
There were occasions when it didn't come off (I mentioned an example) but most of the time ground wasn't lost and the ball wasn't turned over because of what he did not in spite of it. He would look to get a cleaner behind him then take the tackle and secure the phase.
And the success rate against Test teams that can defend will be increased or diminished in your mind?
You are what you do and the more he attempts this in SR, the more likely he'll try it in Tests, with disastrous results.
-
@antipodean said in Chiefs v Blues:
@Crucial said in Chiefs v Blues:
@antipodean said in Chiefs v Blues:
@Crucial said in Chiefs v Blues:
@antipodean said in Chiefs v Blues:
@Crucial said in Chiefs v Blues:
@antipodean said in Chiefs v Blues:
Does DMac run further sideways than he does down the field?
This old chestnut.
Don't get it confused with him looking to do something for himself. These days when he does it you should notice that it is because he has recieved the ball with a swarming defence and his forwards in front of him. Buying time until they can get behind and then trying to set up a recycle is a good move. Better than getting taken with no cleaners.
Doesn't always come off (as when Jacobsen stayed flat when DMac was trying to get to him to secure the ball), and it can certainly look headless but he knows what he is doing and it is way better than shovelling to ball to someone in a worse position (ala Mounga)Yeah I've read this defence of him before Mrs McKenzie. Other players manage to not lose ground and run away from support when they've called for the ball in inopportune circumstances. As was mentioned by someone else, and you acknowledge, against better teams that's a recipe for disaster because it makes it even more likely he'll be isolated and lose the ball. It's an aspect of his game that needs to be tempered at worst and removed at best if his supporters are to make a serious case he should be the AB #10 over Beaudy and Mo'unga.
My point was that he wasn't looking to break the line and get isolated. He was buying time for his support to get behind him and negate that possibility.
I read your previous post and responded to it. There's no requirement to restate the argument already dealt with.
Other 10s might just feed onto the 12 as a bail out option which IMO carries as much risk unless they are running a line to take a tackle and set in front.
Disagree. For reasons I've already explained: Against better sides losing ground and running sideways makes it even more difficult for your support to do anything and conversely easier for the defence to isolate and swamp you.
I restated as you didn't (and still don't) seem to understand.
I do understand because I CLEARLY addressed it.
There were occasions when it didn't come off (I mentioned an example) but most of the time ground wasn't lost and the ball wasn't turned over because of what he did not in spite of it. He would look to get a cleaner behind him then take the tackle and secure the phase.
And the success rate against Test teams that can defend will be increased or diminished in your mind?
You are what you do and the more he attempts this in SR, the more likely he'll try it in Tests, with disastrous results.
How many times did he get caught and lose the ball against a defence that was solid enough that there were no kicking or passing options the other night? I recall once and that was when the forward he was looking to link with didn't read the situation.
Were there 'disastrous results' against a quality defence full of test players? Nope.
It is just a way of playing that he chooses . It works most of the times, just like other options. Comes from untidy, often spilled ball and cleans the situation up. I would far rather see that than a panicked back pass to an unprepared team mate.
You are stuck in thnking or early days DMac that would do it looking for a hole that wasn't there.
Scoreboards and overall performances tell me that he has beaten the two AB incumbents in head to head battles so far. He must be doing something right. -
@Crucial said in Chiefs v Blues:
@antipodean said in Chiefs v Blues:
@Crucial said in Chiefs v Blues:
@antipodean said in Chiefs v Blues:
@Crucial said in Chiefs v Blues:
@antipodean said in Chiefs v Blues:
@Crucial said in Chiefs v Blues:
@antipodean said in Chiefs v Blues:
Does DMac run further sideways than he does down the field?
This old chestnut.
Don't get it confused with him looking to do something for himself. These days when he does it you should notice that it is because he has recieved the ball with a swarming defence and his forwards in front of him. Buying time until they can get behind and then trying to set up a recycle is a good move. Better than getting taken with no cleaners.
Doesn't always come off (as when Jacobsen stayed flat when DMac was trying to get to him to secure the ball), and it can certainly look headless but he knows what he is doing and it is way better than shovelling to ball to someone in a worse position (ala Mounga)Yeah I've read this defence of him before Mrs McKenzie. Other players manage to not lose ground and run away from support when they've called for the ball in inopportune circumstances. As was mentioned by someone else, and you acknowledge, against better teams that's a recipe for disaster because it makes it even more likely he'll be isolated and lose the ball. It's an aspect of his game that needs to be tempered at worst and removed at best if his supporters are to make a serious case he should be the AB #10 over Beaudy and Mo'unga.
My point was that he wasn't looking to break the line and get isolated. He was buying time for his support to get behind him and negate that possibility.
I read your previous post and responded to it. There's no requirement to restate the argument already dealt with.
Other 10s might just feed onto the 12 as a bail out option which IMO carries as much risk unless they are running a line to take a tackle and set in front.
Disagree. For reasons I've already explained: Against better sides losing ground and running sideways makes it even more difficult for your support to do anything and conversely easier for the defence to isolate and swamp you.
I restated as you didn't (and still don't) seem to understand.
I do understand because I CLEARLY addressed it.
There were occasions when it didn't come off (I mentioned an example) but most of the time ground wasn't lost and the ball wasn't turned over because of what he did not in spite of it. He would look to get a cleaner behind him then take the tackle and secure the phase.
And the success rate against Test teams that can defend will be increased or diminished in your mind?
You are what you do and the more he attempts this in SR, the more likely he'll try it in Tests, with disastrous results.
How many times did he get caught and lose the ball against a defence that was solid enough that there were no kicking or passing options the other night? I recall once and that was when the forward he was looking to link with didn't read the situation.
This is becoming farcical - DMac can do no wrong in your eyes and when things do go badly it's someone else's fault.
Were there 'disastrous results' against a quality defence full of test players? Nope.
I give up if you think that SR is analogous to Test rugby against tier one sides.
You are stuck in thnking or early days DMac that would do it looking for a hole that wasn't there.
Don't tell me what I'm thinking.
Scoreboards and overall performances tell me that he has beaten the two AB incumbents in head to head battles so far. He must be doing something right.
Sure. Did I disparage his game or one aspect?
