All Blacks v Argentina II
-
-
@brodean said in All Blacks v Argentina II:
As I mentioned "at times".
Particularly arriving late at rucks at times but also in support. For example the Darry try - Taylor passes Blackadder halfway up the field in support then burns Blackadder off.
Blackadder seems to be going full pace but is just kind of lumbering along.
I'd be interested to see the ruck stats, if anyone has them.
A one-off example of support isn't particularly meaningful. Nobody can go 80 minutes flat out, and I think his work rate is excellent, as supported by the tackle stats. I find those interesting because in general I've thought EB is the least tackler of the options (vs Cane/DP/LJ), but a far better support/link player. -
@KiwiMurph said in All Blacks v Argentina II:
Blackadder reminds me of an NBA player who puts up huge stats but isn't overly impactful in the overall game.
Tom Christie racking up a heap of tackles for the Crusaders is another similar.
That's not to say Blackadder is alone in this - busy but ineffective I think can summarise a lot of the ABs play in recent times.
I think the Christie comparison applies more to Cane and Dalton and LJ: lots of tackles, but that's about it.
One side of the ball, I think Hoskins calls it. -
Yeah don't agree. The Blues had the best defense in Super Rugby this year by some distance and Papali'i was their leading defender. He's an accurate effective defender.
-
There's no doubt Ethan has a massive motor which is a huge benefit for loose forwards. I just get the feeling watching him that he'd be better off picking a few more of his moments and trying to make them really count.
And perhaps that McCaw level of knowing what the next play will be and picking that to have a game changing impact only comes with playing more.
-
Reminds me a bit of Adam Thomson
-
@kiwiinmelb good call.
-
@brodean said in All Blacks v Argentina II:
Yeah don't agree. The Blues had the best defense in Super Rugby this year by some distance and Papali'i was their leading defender. He's an accurate effective defender.
Ī 100% agree with this, so I'm not sure what you're disagreeing with.
-
@dogmeat said in All Blacks v Argentina II:
@darylmitchell said in All Blacks v Argentina II:
I get the point, it doesn't seem a relevant criticism for Razor, he is after all the most successful coach in the history of NZ domestic rugby.
Maurice Trapp's Auckland won 95% of the games he coached them in. Fred Allen's record given the competitiveness of other sides is at least as good and Razor's already lost more tests than the Needle did as a coach.
Comparisons with 60 years ago are of course pointless but Razor and his supporters are learning very quickly that domestic success is only one indicator of future test coaching ability.
How he responds to this setback will quickly determine if he is First Class or Economy
Maurice Trapp won 91% of his games with Auckland, John Hart won 87% and Graham Henry 80% - according to this:
Razor is NZ's most successful domestic coach of the professional era, as he's won 3 titles at NPC level and 7 titles at Super Rugby level, the amateur game obviously shouldn't count for much in this discussion, if it did that would open up another can of worms wouldn't it?
-
Blackadder supports far better than he links IMO. They use Ardie a lot to link in the forwards, Aumua against England. The real problem with the loosies is they are more reactive than proactive IMO. They hang back, only a few are opportunistic and easily isolated by the oppositon, hmm, is a problem a lack of enforcing?
-
Also, I think goalkicking per se has not been a weakness. With exits it is as much accuracy as distance that is the issue IMO.
-
@brodean said in All Blacks v Argentina II:
Yeah don't agree. The Blues had the best defense in Super Rugby this year by some distance and Papali'i was their leading defender. He's an accurate effective defender.
Sure but is that form relating to Test match rugby is the question.
As a lot people have said on this forum SR form doesn't always convert to Test match form when discussing some players. -
@brodean said in All Blacks v Argentina II:
Because Ethan played 80 and Papali'i played 60 and a lot of the Pumas possession came in the last quarter.
The ABs still had 55% possession over the game which means less tackling but the Pumas had 80% possession in the last 10 minutes.
You and your so called "facts".
-
Yes and in test rugby I don't see Papali'i being the issue.
He does exactly what he's been doing for the Blues except there's no big 6 roughing people up at 6 for the ABs.
They need to stick with Finau who has shown he can rough people up. Something Blackadder has never done.
-
@brodean said in All Blacks v Argentina II:
Yes and in test rugby I don't see Papali'i being the issue.
He does exactly what he's been doing for the Blues except there's no big 6 roughing people up at 6 for the ABs.
They need to stick with Finau who has shown he can rough people up. Something Blackadder has never done.
again Finau has been given chances and was non existent in the games he has played I don't see an upgrade there.
And pointing the finger elsewhere to protect Dalton is not really answering the question is Daltons SR form being converted to Test match Form no it hasn't yet.
Which is true for a number of players atm. -
-
@KiwiMurph said in All Blacks v Argentina II:
Does Cane get a start this weekend?
Blackadder - Cane - Savea
-
@Windows97 said in All Blacks v Argentina II:
@Mr-Fish said in All Blacks v Argentina II:
It's interesting that Ethan de Groot's place hasn't been questioned at all.
He's an excellent scrummager - there's no question about that - but he still offers very little around the field. He's not one of the 'new breed' of props and without any scrums during his time on the field (which is admittedly a rare occurrence), he offered little on the park.
This is the major problem with our tight 5 - we either have technically proficent set piece players that are hopeless at carrying the ball, or good ball carrying players that are technically deficient in the set piece.
In our tight 5 on Saturday all good set piece players, useless at carrying the ball.
We then bring on our "impact bench" of guys who can carry the ball (excluding Newell who just does like for like) and our set piece goes to kak.
We seem to be stuck with a lot of one dimensional forwards atm.
I actually don’t think it’s our carriers so much. I think it’s more our attack that's the problem - we’re not putting any deception into how we attack. If you look at SA on the weekend - their attack often changed during a move - the outside support runner drifted off a number of times and then became an option once the ball was transferred out the back. The deception meant that the SA runners (already massive) were hitting weak shoulders, and engaging the defense on their terms. Contrast that with when NZ do it - and there is literally no deception at all and the Argentinian defenders were simply lapping it up. If you look at the Crusaders as a potential example of how Robertson likes to structure the attack - Mounga was always a threat - off the back of every pod and also linking with the outside pods/runners. I don’t see the same thing with McKenzie - at least it is completely obvious when the ball is going to him - the NZ unders/hard line runners don’t attract any defenders. In order for our carries to start getting over the gain line I think we need to re-align the attack so all runners are possible carriers, and get McKenzie (or Beaudie) as a genuine option in the support role of the forward pods. Right now the AB’s are easy to read and are getting double teamed on the tackle (or chopped and jackaled)
-
@mariner4life said in All Blacks v Argentina II:
@KiwiMurph said in All Blacks v Argentina II:
Does Cane get a start this weekend?
Blackadder - Cane - Savea
Still a but dynamic for my liking.
Luke Jacobsen a better bet at number eight I reckon.
Auckland Coaches | Past & Current | Stats | Rugby Database
