QF - Canterbury v Auckland
-
@Stargazer you hadn’t updated your comment when I posted but yes, correct.
-
@Duluth said in QF - Canterbury v Auckland:
I think you’ll find a few of the crap players were on multi year contracts. Should be some deadwood moving on now
Worth noting some of the best players this year were the inexperienced tight 5, Clark, XTH etc.
Been impressed with how he’s developed. From what I’ve seen this season he’s looked really solid. Has good athleticism around the park and at the lineout.
-
@ACT-Crusader said in QF - Canterbury v Auckland:
@KiwiMurph said in QF - Canterbury v Auckland:
Thought Grace played pretty well
Ran the ball with a bit of purpose (and didn’t break)
I have a feeling he did break. Just prior to going off the medics were looking at his shoulder, then a few moments later he had a short run down the sideline and looked weird in the way he took the contact with his shoulder. He wasn't seen on camera again.
-
@Crazy-Horse said in QF - Canterbury v Auckland:
@ACT-Crusader said in QF - Canterbury v Auckland:
@KiwiMurph said in QF - Canterbury v Auckland:
Thought Grace played pretty well
Ran the ball with a bit of purpose (and didn’t break)
I have a feeling he did break. Just prior to going off the medics were looking at his shoulder, then a few moments later he had a short run down the sideline and looked weird in the way he took the contact with his shoulder. He wasn't seen on camera again.
I said the same thing to me Dad, I’m sure he was hurt.
-
A sad indictment on NZ rugby that two of the biggest provinces in the country finished the game with a 12 playing at 10. Scary the lack of depth.
In good news, I thought Burke has really improved this season, seems the most composed 10 in the comp. Hopefully the injury isn't as bad as it looked.
-
@TJ said in QF - Canterbury v Auckland:
A sad indictment on NZ rugby that two of the biggest provinces in the country finished the game with a 12 playing at 10. Scary the lack of depth.
Maybe that was a selection decision as Harford played at 1st 5 the week before. Poihipi played 1st 5 a lot at 1st XV level, and even had a game there for the Chiefs this year (vs Force).
-
-
-
@TJ said in QF - Canterbury v Auckland:
it probably was a selection decision, but that suggests there are no 10s they trust enough for a Quarterfinal.
Plummer was injured. I would've started Evans in the midfield and had McKenzie on the bench (with Tele'a or XTH). McKenzie is good enough.
So it was just a selection risk they took (or perhaps McKenzie was injured too? There's been no injury list published)
-
They have signed Rivez Reihana,But they will need another First Five as cover for Burke by the looks of that injury.
Harford didn't play against Auckland they dropped him out of the 23 after he had a shocker against Waikato the previous week.
I doubt the Crusaders will sign him he has not had a great NPC when he has been given game time. -
@Duluth it just strikes me as wild that the 3rd best 10 in Auckland and the 3rd best 10 in Canterbury (incl Mounga) are players who predominantly play midfield and most likely won't play 10 regularly at a higher level.
I have been thinking for a while that NZ is extremely poor in the development of 10s, would love to know if the talent just isn't coming through or if there just isn't trust in young 10s, they so often seem to get pushed to fullback to develop.
-
@TJ said in QF - Canterbury v Auckland:
@Duluth it just strikes me as wild that the 3rd best 10 in Auckland and the 3rd best 10 in Canterbury (incl Mounga) are players who predominantly play midfield and most likely won't play 10 regularly at a higher level.
I have been thinking for a while that NZ is extremely poor in the development of 10s, would love to know if the talent just isn't coming through or if there just isn't trust in young 10s, they so often seem to get pushed to fullback to develop.
I think this is a tad overreaction. It goes in cycles. We’ve had periods where there were more 1st 5s than you could poke a stick at. Then there have been lean periods.
Given how the game is these days and the use of bench players, versatility is more important so I don’t think the Canterbury selections were that risky really.
-
@Duluth said in QF - Canterbury v Auckland:
Plummer was injured. I would've started Evans in the midfield and had McKenzie on the bench (with Tele'a or XTH). McKenzie is good enough.
Evans got exposed badly in midfield vs Waikato.
Would have been nice to see that standout Rovers 12 make the squad and get some game time though....
-
He should've been called up when Plummer first got injured.
The contract situation is genuinely retarded though. The system does not work
We know Evans was on year three of a three year deal. Tele'a when he came back from Counties probably signed on for at least two years? The SR players were already contracted. So they had 4/5 midfielders before club rugby kicked off
Even sides without large number of SR players are forced to contract earlier and earlier
By my count ~28 players would've been contract before the club season kicked off. Then there was 4-5 spots that went to age group players (Clark, Spencer, XTH etc) leaving a dribble for players in club rugby
The Canterbury squad would be even worse. I think they would've had in the low 30's contracted from SR not club rugby
It's completely broken
-
@Duluth said in QF - Canterbury v Auckland:
The contract situation is genuinely retarded though. The system does not work
100%.
Then it feeds through to the next level. At best if a player has a standout NPC and is not already contracted to Super the best they can hope for is a Wider Training Squad spot unless they are super lucky and a franchise has a spot free in their position.
