NZ First Five Crisis
-
@BerniesCorner said in NZ First Five Crisis:
@Nepia Fox had massive mental fortitude and intelligence, could land the ball on a dime.
Only thing missing top end speed.and um tackling. And physicality. And elusiveness. And agility. But apart from that, all good!
-
@Nepia haha nah nah, I was just using them as examples, I guess Ruben Love would be another as he could have gone 10 instead of 15 in another team. But had Godfrey had playing time in a B team his only game in the top level may not have been bad.
We just need them as a pocket 10 not Fullback 10. -
@frugby said in NZ First Five Crisis:
RE-OPENS THREAD
I can't believe I'm saying this but Plummer just has to have a crack. DMac is not the one.
If Plummer, at 26, is "the one", I'll eat my hat. I'm not unhappy that Plummer is in the squad, because he would be the next best, but that's it. There's no upward path from where he is now. We've all seen him play, and it's solid.
Every good first-five (or halfback for that matter) gets to their peak young. Usually very young. I remember watching Dan Carter, Aaron Cruden and DMc all standing out at age 21.
So when we get a decent replacement for DMc, it will be some tyro, barely out of the Under 20s. Like all the other decent first-fives (and halfbacks) we've had. Mo'unga took a long time to crack the ABs, relatively, and he was in the squad at 23.
The idea that we are going to spend a couple of years displacing DMc so a guy who is never going to be close to as good as him can get game time is risible.
The guy Plummer reminds me of is Stephen Donald. Who looked really good at SR level, but also took a long time to get international duty, because that was his level -- and really only played when multiple injuries struck.
-
@Chester-Draws said in NZ First Five Crisis:
@frugby said in NZ First Five Crisis:
RE-OPENS THREAD
I can't believe I'm saying this but Plummer just has to have a crack. DMac is not the one.
If Plummer, at 26, is "the one", I'll eat my hat. I'm not unhappy that Plummer is in the squad, because he would be the next best, but that's it. There's no upward path from where he is now. We've all seen him play, and it's solid.
Every good first-five (or halfback for that matter) gets to their peak young. Usually very young. I remember watching Dan Carter, Aaron Cruden and DMc all standing out at age 21.
So when we get a decent replacement for DMc, it will be some tyro, barely out of the Under 20s. Like all the other decent first-fives (and halfbacks) we've had. Mo'unga took a long time to crack the ABs, relatively, and he was in the squad at 23.
The idea that we are going to spend a couple of years displacing DMc so a guy who is never going to be any better than him can get game time is risible.
The guy Plummer reminds me of is Stephen Donald. Who looked really good at SR level, but also took a long time to get international duty, because that was his level -- and really only played when multiple injuries struck.
You may be right about Plummer. But wouldn't you take the chance just in case he can be good, and start him for a half in a dead rubber vs Aussie on Saturday?
-
@canefan said in NZ First Five Crisis:
@Chester-Draws said in NZ First Five Crisis:
@frugby said in NZ First Five Crisis:
RE-OPENS THREAD
I can't believe I'm saying this but Plummer just has to have a crack. DMac is not the one.
If Plummer, at 26, is "the one", I'll eat my hat. I'm not unhappy that Plummer is in the squad, because he would be the next best, but that's it. There's no upward path from where he is now. We've all seen him play, and it's solid.
Every good first-five (or halfback for that matter) gets to their peak young. Usually very young. I remember watching Dan Carter, Aaron Cruden and DMc all standing out at age 21.
So when we get a decent replacement for DMc, it will be some tyro, barely out of the Under 20s. Like all the other decent first-fives (and halfbacks) we've had. Mo'unga took a long time to crack the ABs, relatively, and he was in the squad at 23.
The idea that we are going to spend a couple of years displacing DMc so a guy who is never going to be any better than him can get game time is risible.
The guy Plummer reminds me of is Stephen Donald. Who looked really good at SR level, but also took a long time to get international duty, because that was his level -- and really only played when multiple injuries struck.
You may be right about Plummer. But wouldn't you take the chance just in case he can be good, and start him for a half in a dead rubber vs Aussie on Saturday?
I don't think this is a dead rubber at all. The ABs need to fix their end of game issues, and they can only do that by taking games seriously. Aussie also desperately need a win, so will go in all fired up.
I've no issues if Plummer starts in a minor game on the end of year tour. We can't leave him on ice forever.
But the idea that he has any chance of being substantially better than DMc is rather wishful thinking.
-
@Chester-Draws said in NZ First Five Crisis:
@frugby said in NZ First Five Crisis:
RE-OPENS THREAD
I can't believe I'm saying this but Plummer just has to have a crack. DMac is not the one.
If Plummer, at 26, is "the one", I'll eat my hat. I'm not unhappy that Plummer is in the squad, because he would be the next best, but that's it. There's no upward path from where he is now. We've all seen him play, and it's solid.
Every good first-five (or halfback for that matter) gets to their peak young. Usually very young. I remember watching Dan Carter, Aaron Cruden and DMc all standing out at age 21.
So when we get a decent replacement for DMc, it will be some tyro, barely out of the Under 20s. Like all the other decent first-fives (and halfbacks) we've had. Mo'unga took a long time to crack the ABs, relatively, and he was in the squad at 23.
The idea that we are going to spend a couple of years displacing DMc so a guy who is never going to be close to as good as him can get game time is risible.
The guy Plummer reminds me of is Stephen Donald. Who looked really good at SR level, but also took a long time to get international duty, because that was his level -- and really only played when multiple injuries struck.
Hold on.
So he’s only as good as the guy who kicked the winning goal to win a WC?
No running down beaver, those days are gone.
If that is your argument, he needs to be trialled and gently rissoled so he is in peak ‘make a shitty movie about this’ form come 2027 when he saves our bacon.
-
-
@KiwiMurph said in NZ First Five Crisis:
I'd be happy with Plummer just getting a decent crack from the bench to see if he can help our second half woes.
Distributes well and kicks well from hand, and we can move Dmac out to FB to take advantage of his running game late in the game.
If we aren't starting BB, it is the logical choise as then at least our 4-3 bench starts to make sense as well.
I'm not worried about first five - if you look back to 2004 we had Carlos (who was on the way out) and Aaron Mauger as the two first fives at the AB trial.
Carter was still at 2nd five (at AB level, anyway) until the end of year tour.
I think we'll turn up a youngster in the next two-three years who will play behind Dmac or Mo'unga (I'm sure not both), while we still have Perofeta and Plummer. BB hasn't retired yet either. We may not have a DC but we have plenty of talent - our problems are elsewhere.
-
@gt12 said in NZ First Five Crisis:
move Dmac out to FB to take advantage of his running game late in the game.
i am not so sure in our current set up that does anything.
Our pattern has him taking the ball on a loop and running a heap. And then when the opposition has the ball he's back for counter-attacking opportunities. As i said elsewhere, we have him doing fucking everything at the moment it's crazy. We're trying to use his running on every second phase, and we have loops created to get him in wide channels as well.
A "game manager" 10 is going to change the entire team, there is no way that is happening in a week
-
-
That's fair, but I see it from the other side.
We agree that he's doing plenty right now (likely too much). I think criticism of him is missing that.
For that reason I'd like a bit more from our starting 15 (or 12, hello Jordie!) and whoever we bring on late.
My feeling is that this focus on the run needs balance, especially late in the game. What's interesting to me is that in the first half of the last game, we didn't play in our own half, we got down their end then built phases.
That went missing later. To be honest, I'd like Weepu on the bench - he was excellent at helpin to drive change in approach off the bench, despite limitations. Barrett might be able to do that as well.
-
@canefan said in NZ First Five Crisis:
@Nepia said in NZ First Five Crisis:
@BorderJB said in NZ First Five Crisis:
Godfrey
Are you a @Canes4life multi?
Godfrey looked bloody average at 10 when he played there this year, fullback is his current best position. The Canes need to put him in their development team as a 10 to get him more experience.
@Trig None of those 10s have looked AB level, even Ioane who played for the ABs. Of the 3 only Burke appears a real loss outside of depth as someone who could develop into a test 10. Morgan was dross and since making the ABs Ioane has just got shitter and shitter.
I'm more concerned about the development of the 10s that stay. No one apart from Plummer could be considered an orthodox 10. Unorthodox is the NZ orthodoxy right now
its like we afraid....we're afraid everyone will get injured and so we would rather have second string people who can play multiple positions than first string specialists
-
-
-
@Mr-Fish said in NZ First Five Crisis:
McKenzie is so far away from the problem the All Blacks have at the moment.
Toggle with the loosies, lock down the first choice fullback and give the guys a few games together and the results will come. The team isn't far away from clicking at all.
I completely agree regarding how close they are to clicking.
Really feels extremely similar to EOYT 2004/2009.
We were trying to adopt a new game plan, not doing it very well but getting closer and closer, and then once it finally clicked it's like the floodgates opened and we never looked back. Each of those wins led to the next decade and a half of complete dominance.
Also interesting is that for both of those iconic games on those tours where it finally 'clicked', it happened against France.
Who we have coming up this tour 👀
-
@kpkanz said in NZ First Five Crisis:
Really feels extremely similar to EOYT 2004/2009.
We were trying to adopt a new game plan, not doing it very well but getting closer and closer, and then once it finally clicked it's like the floodgates opened and we never looked back. Each of those wins led to the next decade and a half of complete dominance.
Love the optimism. To me it feels more like 1998, where we lost some games badly, some to terrible decisions and our weaknesses got exposed over and over. And that led to 1999 where the same thing ahppened; we were well up in the SF vs France and shat the bed in the second half.
I really hope you're right and I'm wrong!
-
I’m just sitting here waiting to see the reaction if Razors son gets close to super rugby. He plays 10 and has just secured a spot in crusaders academy. Some would say inevitable, but he’s actually a decent player. Big boy with a good skill set.
