QF: Brumbies v Hurricanes
-
@canefan said in QF: Brumbies Vs Hurricanes:
I'm assuming the game is being played at night? It's so cold there we will need to play with greater precision with ball in hand, better tactical awareness from 10, and some serious discipline in all facets
all hallmarks of Canes play over the years
-
@nzzp said in QF: Brumbies Vs Hurricanes:
@canefan said in QF: Brumbies Vs Hurricanes:
I'm assuming the game is being played at night? It's so cold there we will need to play with greater precision with ball in hand, better tactical awareness from 10, and some serious discipline in all facets
all hallmarks of Canes play over the years
Especially in Canberra.... We definitely claim underdog status
-
@canefan said in QF: Brumbies Vs Hurricanes:
@nzzp said in QF: Brumbies Vs Hurricanes:
@canefan said in QF: Brumbies Vs Hurricanes:
I'm assuming the game is being played at night? It's so cold there we will need to play with greater precision with ball in hand, better tactical awareness from 10, and some serious discipline in all facets
all hallmarks of Canes play over the years
Especially in Canberra.... We definitely claim underdog status
you own that!
-
Stuff underdog status, I getting onto a positive wagon for week, we have got this!
Ardie back in proper position at 8, and I happy if Blackwell starts, feel he scrums bloody well, and never reckoned he as bad as some say, just a good super level player!
Would also be keen on Love starting and Moorby on wing , and if not even Sullivan on wing will do!I also refuse to get into CIO is a graveyard for Canes, it's a rugby field same basic size as any other field, may get a bit cold, but both teams on same bit of grass, and in same temperature! So we got this!!
-
I'd say the forward packs are reasonably matched. It's the back thee (if fit) for the Brumbies that could be the difference. Key is to not give them easy access into your own half. The team that makes fewer mistakes/ gives away idiotic penalties will win.
For more bleedingly obvious platitudes, subscribe.
-
I'm a lot more confident going over to Canberra with Love and Cameron back in the 23. If we were going over there with Morgan running the cutter I'd say our season would be done.
The reason I selected Sullivan as my starter over Love was purely because of minutes played. Sullivan played more than Love on Saturday and he's also had a club game under his belt. I just don't think Love has played enough rugby to start even though tactically it would probably make more sense with his kicking game in those cold conditions over in Canberra.
-
@Canes4life If love was fit enough for a replacement vs the crusaders ... I would start him with Moorby on the wing. Give him game time to get match hardened for the semi and final if we get this far
Moorby plays with a running wing mindset. Love reads the game much better and either runs, passes or kicks as appropriate. He's a much better FB
-
@Number-10 is that a good thing? I haven’t watched him in a while.
-
@Canes4life Berry is all over the shop but then he's not alone on that front. All the QF refs have their issues. Pick your poison
-
@foobaNZ said in QF: Brumbies v Hurricanes:
Is it too much to ask to drop Blackwell? Just once please Holland.
I'd love an IWL & Sangster second row.
Canberra is a graveyard for us but this group should surely be up for it after exiting there twice in recent history as you say.
He won't. As the coaches just have a blind spot and don't understand the importance of a good lineout. It's easy to blame Holland but Gibbes must also agree. We were just lucky last WE that Whitelock went at HT as our lineout was struggling up until then. Otherwise their selection are good. I don't agree 100% but have no WTF is going on reaction. But having a short lineout is a disaster against the top sides. They need a lot of luck to win. Like Whitelock going off. Or 3 tries in the last 15 vs the Blues.
Wellington selected Blackwell at lock. But the coaches were smart enough to select a tall lock with him (Bird 2.04) and another good lineout option at 6 (Delany 1.95) So the Wellington lineout was a strength not a weakness.
But the Canes ignore Bird. He should be selected to start if Blackwell is the other lock. I would also start Delany at 6 but only if Blackwell starts. My preference would be Bird and IWL to start. Flanders at 6 and Delany and Sangster as replacements so we would always have a strong lineout. Savea cover 7 and Flanders 8.
-
@Winger said in QF: Brumbies v Hurricanes:
@foobaNZ said in QF: Brumbies v Hurricanes:
Is it too much to ask to drop Blackwell? Just once please Holland.
I'd love an IWL & Sangster second row.
Canberra is a graveyard for us but this group should surely be up for it after exiting there twice in recent history as you say.
He won't. As the coaches just have a blind spot and don't understand the importance of a good lineout. It's easy to blame Holland but Gibbes must also agree. We were just lucky last WE that Whitelock went at HT as our lineout was struggling up until then. Otherwise their selection are good. I don't agree 100% but have no WTF is going on reaction. But having a short lineout is a disaster against the top sides. They need a lot of luck to win. Like Whitelock going off. Or 3 tries in the last 15 vs the Blues.
Wellington selected Blackwell at lock. But the coaches were smart enough to select a tall lock with him (Bird 2.04) and another good lineout option at 6 (Delany 1.95) So the Wellington lineout was a strength not a weakness.
But the Canes ignore Bird. He should be selected to start if Blackwell is the other lock. I would also start Delany at 6 but only if Blackwell starts. My preference would be Bird and IWL to start. Flanders at 6 and Delany and Sangster as replacements so we would always have a strong lineout. Savea cover 7 and Flanders 8.
I am sure the coaches realise the importance of lineout, I quite sure is us keyboard warriors do , they know a lot more than us. They also will no doubt way up general play, scrumming ability and everything else that is involved in a game of rugby. They just don't watch game on tv, but whole thing.
-
@Dan54 said in QF: Brumbies v Hurricanes:
@Winger said in QF: Brumbies v Hurricanes:
@foobaNZ said in QF: Brumbies v Hurricanes:
Is it too much to ask to drop Blackwell? Just once please Holland.
I'd love an IWL & Sangster second row.
Canberra is a graveyard for us but this group should surely be up for it after exiting there twice in recent history as you say.
He won't. As the coaches just have a blind spot and don't understand the importance of a good lineout. It's easy to blame Holland but Gibbes must also agree. We were just lucky last WE that Whitelock went at HT as our lineout was struggling up until then. Otherwise their selection are good. I don't agree 100% but have no WTF is going on reaction. But having a short lineout is a disaster against the top sides. They need a lot of luck to win. Like Whitelock going off. Or 3 tries in the last 15 vs the Blues.
Wellington selected Blackwell at lock. But the coaches were smart enough to select a tall lock with him (Bird 2.04) and another good lineout option at 6 (Delany 1.95) So the Wellington lineout was a strength not a weakness.
But the Canes ignore Bird. He should be selected to start if Blackwell is the other lock. I would also start Delany at 6 but only if Blackwell starts. My preference would be Bird and IWL to start. Flanders at 6 and Delany and Sangster as replacements so we would always have a strong lineout. Savea cover 7 and Flanders 8.
I am sure the coaches realise the importance of lineout, I quite sure is us keyboard warriors do , they know a lot more than us. They also will no doubt way up general play, scrumming ability and everything else that is involved in a game of rugby. They just don't watch game on tv, but whole thing.
I dunno. Our lineout has been dreadful.
Blackwell not all to blame but a bigger body would no doubt help in the air. We won't win anything with a 50/50 line out.
-
