All Blacks vs Argentina I
-
@Chester-Draws said in All Blacks vs Argentina I - 10 August:
We entered this year super thin in a few positions because the last two years every game was a must win and the same old side rolled out.
We have to start playing some new guys, or we will enter the next RWC with some broken old men and lots of barely-played newbs.
Edit: and by "playing" I mean playing under red hot conditions, like in South Africa. Merely giving the next tier of players a spell or two in lighter games simply is not preparing them, or the team, properly.
Whose to say that the new guys aren't better? We'll never know if we never give them a chance.
You realise we have something like 45 tests before the next WC right?
-
@No-Quarter said in All Blacks vs Argentina I - 10 August:
People forget that we cracked open the dry powder under Fozzie for the last RWC. We were outstanding in the quarter, semi and final. Really direct, low risk rugby. But for a red card that should have been negated by a red to SA we would have won the whole thing. It was a far cry from the rugby we'd seen in the leadup.
Don't forget that ridiculous YC where SF was smacked in the face by Kitsoff's elbow. In fact, Kitsoff was using his forearm a lot in that final.
-
@No-Quarter said in All Blacks vs Argentina I - 10 August:
People forget that we cracked open the dry powder under Fozzie for the last RWC. We were outstanding in the quarter, semi and final. Really direct, low risk rugby. But for a red card that should have been negated by a red to SA we would have won the whole thing. It was a far cry from the rugby we'd seen in the leadup.
One thing that's been good under Razor is that we've gone three matches without a card. I don't think we've even had an incident reviewed, have we?
It might just be coincidence - but, it seems it would be a long time ago that we last went three consecutive tests without a card.
Edit: A quick scan and looks like we did it at the start of last year! Unfortunately, we couldn't keep it up!
-
@LatsToTheMax said in All Blacks vs Argentina I - 10 August:
@Chester-Draws said in All Blacks vs Argentina I - 10 August:
We entered this year super thin in a few positions because the last two years every game was a must win and the same old side rolled out.
We have to start playing some new guys, or we will enter the next RWC with some broken old men and lots of barely-played newbs.
Edit: and by "playing" I mean playing under red hot conditions, like in South Africa. Merely giving the next tier of players a spell or two in lighter games simply is not preparing them, or the team, properly.
Whose to say that the new guys aren't better? We'll never know if we never give them a chance.
You realise we have something like 45 tests before the next WC right?
There are players that will make the 2027 RWC squad that haven’t even been picked for the ABs yet.
Think about players like Sam Whitelock, Dagg and Cruden, they played their first tests in 2010 and were starters in the RWC final in 2011. Vito was in the same class too, just didn’t play in the final but played other RWC11 matches.
Joe Moody played his first test in 2014 and was starting at loosehead in the RWC15 final.
-
@ACT-Crusader you forgot Milner-Skudder, debuted in a RWC year
-
@taniwharugby said in All Blacks vs Argentina I - 10 August:
@ACT-Crusader you forgot Milner-Skudder, debuted in a RWC year
Yeah but he’s a winger so barely a rugby player….
-
@ACT-Crusader fair point, still got a jersey and medal though
-
@taniwharugby said in All Blacks vs Argentina I - 10 August:
@ACT-Crusader fair point, still got a jersey and medal though
NMS's timing was impeccable. He caught fire just at the right time. Sadly he was blighted by injuries
-
@ACT-Crusader said in All Blacks vs Argentina I - 10 August:
Yeah but he’s a winger so barely a rugby player….
how positionist!
-
@nostrildamus said in All Blacks vs Argentina I - 10 August:
@ACT-Crusader said in All Blacks vs Argentina I - 10 August:
Yeah but he’s a winger so barely a rugby player….
how positionist!
Back Lives Matter!
-
The All Blacks squad is named at 3pm on Sunday.
-
@nzzp said in All Blacks vs Argentina I - 10 August:
@canefan said in All Blacks vs Argentina I - 10 August:
@Bones said in All Blacks vs Argentina I - 10 August:
I'm gonna be sick a little but look at Ireland when they were good, they had JGP with quick service in close, not just passing but movement too - and then forward runners at pace and angled. Not forward runners standing still running straight with supporting runners hesitating whilst also running straight.
When they beat us in the series at home they totally schooled us
Did they though?
We beat them first up. I argued Foster got dudded as with decent refereeing we don't see the imbalance in red cards.
They sneaked over the top of us with 14 in test 2, then beat us fair and square in 3 ... Although we got to learn about soaking tackles that break cheek bones
They were slightly better over three tests.i don't think that's schooled.
They schooled us first half of Test 3. Other than that, spot on.
-
@LatsToTheMax said in All Blacks vs Argentina I - 10 August:
@Chester-Draws said in All Blacks vs Argentina I - 10 August:
We entered this year super thin in a few positions because the last two years every game was a must win and the same old side rolled out.
We have to start playing some new guys, or we will enter the next RWC with some broken old men and lots of barely-played newbs.
Edit: and by "playing" I mean playing under red hot conditions, like in South Africa. Merely giving the next tier of players a spell or two in lighter games simply is not preparing them, or the team, properly.
Whose to say that the new guys aren't better? We'll never know if we never give them a chance.
You realise we have something like 45 tests before the next WC right?
Yeah, and I also know we won a RWC with our fourth-string 1st-5 who had played 24 tests by that point. We may not even get our reserve 1st-5 to that many tests at this rate by the next RWC, given that it won't be Beauden Barrett and even Mo'unga will be 33.
At some point we have to stop being conservative. It's not Razor's fault that Foster didn't want to try any new players, but it is his responsibility to deal with the problem.
-
With the use of subs any player can have a decent showing now.
-
@Chester-Draws said in All Blacks vs Argentina I - 10 August:
At some point we have to stop being conservative. It's not Razor's fault that Foster didn't want to try any new players, but it is his responsibility to deal with the problem.
At some point we have to stop using Foster as an excuse.
Why is he being expected to try new players for Razor?
Who are these new players he should have tried for Razor?
-
@Nepia said in All Blacks vs Argentina I - 10 August:
@Chester-Draws said in All Blacks vs Argentina I - 10 August:
At some point we have to stop being conservative. It's not Razor's fault that Foster didn't want to try any new players, but it is his responsibility to deal with the problem.
At some point we have to stop using Foster as an excuse.
Why is he being expected to try new players for Razor?
Who are these new players he should have tried for Razor?
When Razor loses his first test it will be 100% Fosters fault, that’s just common knowledge.
The three wins so far are all Razor though.
-
@Nepia said in All Blacks vs Argentina I - 10 August:
@Chester-Draws said in All Blacks vs Argentina I - 10 August:
At some point we have to stop being conservative. It's not Razor's fault that Foster didn't want to try any new players, but it is his responsibility to deal with the problem.
At some point we have to stop using Foster as an excuse.
Why is he being expected to try new players for Razor?
Who are these new players he should have tried for Razor?
I'm not using Foster as an excuse, because there is a very simple solution -- blood some new players. If he doesn't do that, it is on him, and him only.
He has been given a decent squad -- right up until injury strikes. He isn't responsible for that, it's the deal he got given.
But if we go the route of the original post that started this, that situation will get worse and worse.
As for who might have been tried, well I don't really want to get into that to specifically, because it opens a whole can of worms about provincial favourites, and derails my argument. If I name anyone, it will just go off on a tangent about that person. We could frame the question the other way -- if Foster did select and play lots of players, why are we so thin in experienced centres? (Chosen because, unlike lock, there have been no retirements).
-
Midfield? There are shiploads!
The two first choice. ALB is basically a veteran. Havili played the while world cup cycle. That's two very experienced players in each spot.
Then the next guy they chose had his knee wrecked. Ennor got a few games as well. And the other Crusaders guy who kept getting hurt. That's 6-8 guys getting tests in 2 spots.
The fucking revisionism on here needs to be seen to be believed at times.
-
Are we really saying that Havili is an option at centre? He's a pretty marginal choice at 2nd-5.
Ennor got a eight games under Foster, most of them minor nations or as reserve. McLeod got one game. One.
Tupea I'll grant might have got a few more games, but for his injury. Although that's not necessarily a given as Foster got more conservative over time.
In reality we have at centre two experienced players, and then only very much noobs and one guy (Ennor) who has a bit of experience.
It's a little bit better at 2nd-5, but only a little bit, because our play got significantly better when the third of the experienced players was replaced.
So I don't get where you think we have lots of experience in the centres. Currently t's Ioane, Barrett, ALB and noobs, with the possible addition of Ennor if he gets back into form.
