McKenzie, Mo'unga etc
-
@reprobate problem is, he has gone from having the ability to make some bold selections and if we had any losses, not really shrugged off, but begrudgingly accepted looking at the big picture, to the same boat as Fozzie was where he had suffered losses and was always in damage limitation needing to win but not really pushing the boat out.
-
@reprobate Razor will obviously know more than us, but it seems like far from a done deal that Mo'unga really will be back next year. I don't imagine Toyota are just going to let him go without a bit of a fight.
In the meantime, I've been quite pleased with how DMac's gone - and a bit surprised with this selection, though obviously it was telegraphed.
What I do wonder is whether DMac is a bit jaded. It's his first year in 10 hotseat - and that's a pretty searing seat to sit in. There's no doubt that his last couple of starts (vs Oz and Japan) have had a lot more little errors than earlier in the season. Maybe they're nursing him a bit to the end of the year?
Don't think you'd willingly start any of Perofeta, Plummer or Jacomb in these tests. Have any of them had even a minute at 10 for the ABs yet?
Danny Boy had a season and a half playing 12 before they gave him a start at 10. Got to ease people in there - off the bench, vs minnows, and via playing in less pressured positions.
-
-
-
@JayCee said in McKenzie, Mo'unga etc:
Is RM a done deal, do we know when he's back?
Edit: 2026 his contract expires. Yikes.
jeez....so unlikely to have a truly experience new 10 before the next RWC
-
@reprobate said in McKenzie, Mo'unga etc:
@Chris-B I'd love to believe that, but if he were jaded then you would rest him vs Japan.
Maybe - but, maybe they wanted to give him a game in a lower pressure game. It's just a theory.
Seems pretty evident that the plan was that BB would start this England game.
Sir Ted used to have a theory that you couldn't play well in three hard tests in a row, so maybe they'll start DMac vs Ireland and France.
One thing I'm pretty sure about is that the coaches want to win. They didn't have any qualms about picking Ardie, Beaudy and Sam Cane after a season in Japan, and I don't reckon they'd have any qualms about picking RM next year if he's back - without needing to play silly games now.
-
@JayCee said in McKenzie, Mo'unga etc:
Is RM a done deal, do we know when he's back?
Edit: 2026 his contract expires. Yikes.
There's an expectation that he has an out-clause in his contract with Toyota, so could be back at the end of Japan's next season - July 2025.
I think he only needs to be signed with an NPC/Super team to become available for the ABs - similar deal to Ardie, Sam and Beaudy this year.
-
I can't be bothered reading through the entire thread, so what I am about to say might have already been said. I read comments from some (Chris is the only one that springs to mind) that try to say Razor is in a tough spot and that justifies BBs inclusion at 10 due to a dearth of options. I call bullshit on that. Razor has fucked around with all of his selections, everything lacks direction. He had Plummer, who offers something different but along with other players in the squad Razor has shown no appetite to at least try them out in a proper game situation. Giving guys like Proctor, Plummer and others a serious audition, for example a start in the final Bledisloe test, would have been easy enough to do. He has done much the same as what Foster did, wasting valuable reps on known quantities that aren't going to provide a realistic answer to his problems, instead of rolling the dice and trying to find out exactly what he has
-
@canefan said in McKenzie, Mo'unga etc:
I can't be bothered reading through the entire thread, so what I am about to say might have already been said. I read comments from some (Chris is the only one that springs to mind) that try to say Razor is in a tough spot and that justifies BBs inclusion at 10 due to a dearth of options. I call bullshit on that. Razor has fucked around with all of his selections, everything lacks direction. He had Plummer, who offers something different but along with other players in the squad Razor has shown no appetite to at least try them out in a proper game situation. Giving guys like Proctor, Plummer and others a serious audition, for example a start in the final Bledisloe test, would have been easy enough to do. He has done much the same as what Foster did, wasting valuable reps on known quantities that aren't going to provide a realistic answer to his problems, instead of rolling the dice and trying to find out exactly what he has
Yeah the problem with that is They had to give D Mac more and more game time because he wasn’ t getting the job done,they keep playing him against Fiji and Japan etc hoping he would show something but he didn’t.
So we are where we are with 2 shit fucking options.
And they may have known what they had in the other options playing them against Fiji and Japan would have shown fuck all.
So I call BS on that as well. -
Etc for me. Super ten, reads the game well, makes good decisions, accurate kicking, fearless in the tackle.
-
It's funny isn't it, because Wayne Smith is arguing that in the Japan game they were better than earlier in the year:
“A case in point of how this can be effective was the second quarter of the All Blacks’ game against Japan.
“This was high octane, attacking rugby with clarity of thought. The All Blacks attacked through precise passes and offloads and seemed to be learning where the space was next. This is critical.”
Attackers pressing forward across the field, forcing defenders to advance, limit their ability to step in and gang tackle. Playing this way, off fast ruck ball or offloads, allows teams to attack a retreating defensive line.
“Effective attacking rugby is based on shaping the enemy defence so that you can attack areas that are poorly defended. I saw glimpses of this from the All Blacks, and it’s exciting to think where they can go with it.”He contrasted that with where we were earlier in the year:
As one example, Smith points to the All Blacks exposing the Springboks in the wide channels in their first test in South Africa at Ellis Park before the defence adjusted. The All Blacks then didn’t identify that the space shifted elsewhere, to the blindside and around the ruck. The same applied to their kicking strategy.
“They’ve still got a bit of learning to do about where the space is once they’ve been successful in certain areas. Those areas get covered, so where’s the space now?”My feeling is that they have decided they want Dmac to finish the game, and have Mo'unga positioned to come back as the starting 10.
I believe they'll be looking for a new finisher if Mo'unga comes back though.
-
@gt12 said in McKenzie, Mo'unga etc:
It's funny isn't it, because Wayne Smith is arguing that in the Japan game they were better than earlier in the year:
“A case in point of how this can be effective was the second quarter of the All Blacks’ game against Japan.
“This was high octane, attacking rugby with clarity of thought. The All Blacks attacked through precise passes and offloads and seemed to be learning where the space was next. This is critical.”
Attackers pressing forward across the field, forcing defenders to advance, limit their ability to step in and gang tackle. Playing this way, off fast ruck ball or offloads, allows teams to attack a retreating defensive line.
“Effective attacking rugby is based on shaping the enemy defence so that you can attack areas that are poorly defended. I saw glimpses of this from the All Blacks, and it’s exciting to think where they can go with it.”He contrasted that with where we were earlier in the year:
As one example, Smith points to the All Blacks exposing the Springboks in the wide channels in their first test in South Africa at Ellis Park before the defence adjusted. The All Blacks then didn’t identify that the space shifted elsewhere, to the blindside and around the ruck. The same applied to their kicking strategy.
“They’ve still got a bit of learning to do about where the space is once they’ve been successful in certain areas. Those areas get covered, so where’s the space now?”My feeling is that they have decided they want Dmac to finish the game, and have Mo'unga positioned to come back as the starting 10.
I believe they'll be looking for a new finisher if Mo'unga comes back though.
I suppose until they bed in the way they want to play we will not know.
Do you think it is a more traditional finisher solid player they will look for if is not a D Mac type player? -
@Chris said in McKenzie, Mo'unga etc:
@canefan said in McKenzie, Mo'unga etc:
I can't be bothered reading through the entire thread, so what I am about to say might have already been said. I read comments from some (Chris is the only one that springs to mind) that try to say Razor is in a tough spot and that justifies BBs inclusion at 10 due to a dearth of options. I call bullshit on that. Razor has fucked around with all of his selections, everything lacks direction. He had Plummer, who offers something different but along with other players in the squad Razor has shown no appetite to at least try them out in a proper game situation. Giving guys like Proctor, Plummer and others a serious audition, for example a start in the final Bledisloe test, would have been easy enough to do. He has done much the same as what Foster did, wasting valuable reps on known quantities that aren't going to provide a realistic answer to his problems, instead of rolling the dice and trying to find out exactly what he has
Yeah the problem with that is They had to give D Mac more and more game time because he wasn’ t getting the job done,they keep playing him against Fiji and Japan etc hoping he would show something but he didn’t.
So we are where we are with 2 shit fucking options.
And they may have known what they had in the other options playing them against Fiji and Japan would have shown fuck all.
So I call BS on that as well.McKenzie showed plenty: for once we've looked like we have the ability to beat a rush defence, and have a ten who can pass and put other players into space. Mistakes? Sure, but he was also the source of about 90% of the good things we did.
What actually happened as far as results go is that the team didn't get the job done in the last 20. Oh except for the 2nd Bledisloe, where McKenzie came on.
That's shit coaching, shit use of the bench, and shit on-field leadership, but somehow I don't expect you to call the two Scotts 2 shit fucking options. -
@reprobate said in McKenzie, Mo'unga etc:
@Chris said in McKenzie, Mo'unga etc:
@canefan said in McKenzie, Mo'unga etc:
I can't be bothered reading through the entire thread, so what I am about to say might have already been said. I read comments from some (Chris is the only one that springs to mind) that try to say Razor is in a tough spot and that justifies BBs inclusion at 10 due to a dearth of options. I call bullshit on that. Razor has fucked around with all of his selections, everything lacks direction. He had Plummer, who offers something different but along with other players in the squad Razor has shown no appetite to at least try them out in a proper game situation. Giving guys like Proctor, Plummer and others a serious audition, for example a start in the final Bledisloe test, would have been easy enough to do. He has done much the same as what Foster did, wasting valuable reps on known quantities that aren't going to provide a realistic answer to his problems, instead of rolling the dice and trying to find out exactly what he has
Yeah the problem with that is They had to give D Mac more and more game time because he wasn’ t getting the job done,they keep playing him against Fiji and Japan etc hoping he would show something but he didn’t.
So we are where we are with 2 shit fucking options.
And they may have known what they had in the other options playing them against Fiji and Japan would have shown fuck all.
So I call BS on that as well.McKenzie showed plenty: for once we've looked like we have the ability to beat a rush defence, and have a ten who can pass and put other players into space. Mistakes? Sure, but he was also the source of about 90% of the good things we did.
What actually happened as far as results go is that the team didn't get the job done in the last 20. Oh except for the 2nd Bledisloe, where McKenzie came on.
That's shit coaching, shit use of the bench, and shit on-field leadership, but somehow I don't expect you to call the two Scotts 2 shit fucking options.Nope they are not kicking out on the full and throwing dumb erratic passes when the last pass would have yielded tries or crabbing across field running our outsides out of space,that is on D Mac.
Are you trying to tell me 90% of all the good things we have done this year are down to D Mac lol.Then just play him we don't need the other 22. -
@Chris said in McKenzie, Mo'unga etc:
@gt12 said in McKenzie, Mo'unga etc:
It's funny isn't it, because Wayne Smith is arguing that in the Japan game they were better than earlier in the year:
“A case in point of how this can be effective was the second quarter of the All Blacks’ game against Japan.
“This was high octane, attacking rugby with clarity of thought. The All Blacks attacked through precise passes and offloads and seemed to be learning where the space was next. This is critical.”
Attackers pressing forward across the field, forcing defenders to advance, limit their ability to step in and gang tackle. Playing this way, off fast ruck ball or offloads, allows teams to attack a retreating defensive line.
“Effective attacking rugby is based on shaping the enemy defence so that you can attack areas that are poorly defended. I saw glimpses of this from the All Blacks, and it’s exciting to think where they can go with it.”He contrasted that with where we were earlier in the year:
As one example, Smith points to the All Blacks exposing the Springboks in the wide channels in their first test in South Africa at Ellis Park before the defence adjusted. The All Blacks then didn’t identify that the space shifted elsewhere, to the blindside and around the ruck. The same applied to their kicking strategy.
“They’ve still got a bit of learning to do about where the space is once they’ve been successful in certain areas. Those areas get covered, so where’s the space now?”My feeling is that they have decided they want Dmac to finish the game, and have Mo'unga positioned to come back as the starting 10.
I believe they'll be looking for a new finisher if Mo'unga comes back though.
I suppose until they bed in the way they want to play we will not know.
Do you think it is a more traditional finisher solid player they will look for if is not a D Mac type player?I think it really depends on whether they are following what Smith is suggesting.
They'll need a Dan Carter (or at least Aaron Cruden) talent and a surrounding cast with absolutely brilliant skills.
Personally speaking, if they are chasing Smith's vision, I think they need Dmac, I don't think there is another 10 around that has the capability to put others in space using both a running and passing game. Defenders just cannot lay off Dmac in the way they mostly can against Barrett. He's become very effective at Super after a couple of years to bed in, and with two years in a black jersey I think he has the capability.
I like Mo'unga at super level where he takes advantage of mismatches better than anyone, but at international level he's a bit pop-gun with the boot and seems to need the wrap play too much to be effective. Some of his work in support of the inside ball is really great (we ran a great play for him with Jordan using that at the WC), but we didn't use him in that way very much. So, if he comes back the same player and is with Robertson he may be the answer.
-
@Chris said in McKenzie, Mo'unga etc:
@canefan said in McKenzie, Mo'unga etc:
I can't be bothered reading through the entire thread, so what I am about to say might have already been said. I read comments from some (Chris is the only one that springs to mind) that try to say Razor is in a tough spot and that justifies BBs inclusion at 10 due to a dearth of options. I call bullshit on that. Razor has fucked around with all of his selections, everything lacks direction. He had Plummer, who offers something different but along with other players in the squad Razor has shown no appetite to at least try them out in a proper game situation. Giving guys like Proctor, Plummer and others a serious audition, for example a start in the final Bledisloe test, would have been easy enough to do. He has done much the same as what Foster did, wasting valuable reps on known quantities that aren't going to provide a realistic answer to his problems, instead of rolling the dice and trying to find out exactly what he has
Yeah the problem with that is They had to give D Mac more and more game time because he wasn’ t getting the job done,they keep playing him against Fiji and Japan etc hoping he would show something but he didn’t.
So we are where we are with 2 shit fucking options.
And they may have known what they had in the other options playing them against Fiji and Japan would have shown fuck all.
So I call BS on that as well.I'm still not convinced that our gameplan is sound. The Wayne Smith article about trying to turn back the clock to 2015 is telling, because Razor is one of his disciples. It's been said over and over, but we don't seem interested in playing vertically and direct in the forwards, we are far too eager to muck around with spinning the ball wide. DMac appears to have been instructed by Razor and his team to make all the play instead of passing it on, otherwise why has he not been dropped earlier? An approach that IMHO is flawed in today's rush D era, and the coaches don't appear to want to adjust it
-
@canefan said in McKenzie, Mo'unga etc:
@Chris said in McKenzie, Mo'unga etc:
@canefan said in McKenzie, Mo'unga etc:
I can't be bothered reading through the entire thread, so what I am about to say might have already been said. I read comments from some (Chris is the only one that springs to mind) that try to say Razor is in a tough spot and that justifies BBs inclusion at 10 due to a dearth of options. I call bullshit on that. Razor has fucked around with all of his selections, everything lacks direction. He had Plummer, who offers something different but along with other players in the squad Razor has shown no appetite to at least try them out in a proper game situation. Giving guys like Proctor, Plummer and others a serious audition, for example a start in the final Bledisloe test, would have been easy enough to do. He has done much the same as what Foster did, wasting valuable reps on known quantities that aren't going to provide a realistic answer to his problems, instead of rolling the dice and trying to find out exactly what he has
Yeah the problem with that is They had to give D Mac more and more game time because he wasn’ t getting the job done,they keep playing him against Fiji and Japan etc hoping he would show something but he didn’t.
So we are where we are with 2 shit fucking options.
And they may have known what they had in the other options playing them against Fiji and Japan would have shown fuck all.
So I call BS on that as well.I'm still not convinced that our gameplan is sound. The Wayne Smith article about trying to turn back the clock to 2015 is telling, because Razor is one of his disciples. It's been said over and over, but we don't seem interested in playing vertically and direct in the forwards, we are far too eager to muck around with spinning the ball wide. DMac appears to have been instructed by Razor and his team to make all the play instead of passing it on, otherwise why has he not been dropped earlier? An approach that IMHO is flawed in today's rush D era
Yeah it seems that is what is happening.
-
@nzzp said in McKenzie, Mo'unga etc:
@Chris said in All Blacks Vs England, Twickenham:
We lost a test series at Home v Ireland the First test v SA in SA in 2022 with Barrett at First five.
Beat SA in SA,England in England ,Ireland in the QF at WC and should have won the WC final v SA if it wasn't for the TMO all with Mounga at first five.
I know who I would rather have at First five going forward.That would be Mo'unga with 4 years starting at 10 right?
But you'd discard DMac after 8 tests this year?
I reckon DMac has a higher ceiling at Test level than RM, and I'd have been playing him through this tour. Mo'unga played a few good games in black at the back end of his career, but going into the RWC you wouldn't say he'd taken his chances. Overall win rate of 70% in black remember.
I suspect it is hard to gauge Mo'unga-led ABs against Dmac-led ABs- the former had Smith and some rather experienced senior players.
It may be easier to compare Mo'unga versus BB then again I thought I read somewhere recently that BB admitted his leg was only 80% during the last RWC and fixed in Japan. When I read that I thought what the hell was BB doing at the RWC? -
@Chris said in McKenzie, Mo'unga etc:
@reprobate said in McKenzie, Mo'unga etc:
@Chris said in McKenzie, Mo'unga etc:
@canefan said in McKenzie, Mo'unga etc:
I can't be bothered reading through the entire thread, so what I am about to say might have already been said. I read comments from some (Chris is the only one that springs to mind) that try to say Razor is in a tough spot and that justifies BBs inclusion at 10 due to a dearth of options. I call bullshit on that. Razor has fucked around with all of his selections, everything lacks direction. He had Plummer, who offers something different but along with other players in the squad Razor has shown no appetite to at least try them out in a proper game situation. Giving guys like Proctor, Plummer and others a serious audition, for example a start in the final Bledisloe test, would have been easy enough to do. He has done much the same as what Foster did, wasting valuable reps on known quantities that aren't going to provide a realistic answer to his problems, instead of rolling the dice and trying to find out exactly what he has
Yeah the problem with that is They had to give D Mac more and more game time because he wasn’ t getting the job done,they keep playing him against Fiji and Japan etc hoping he would show something but he didn’t.
So we are where we are with 2 shit fucking options.
And they may have known what they had in the other options playing them against Fiji and Japan would have shown fuck all.
So I call BS on that as well.McKenzie showed plenty: for once we've looked like we have the ability to beat a rush defence, and have a ten who can pass and put other players into space. Mistakes? Sure, but he was also the source of about 90% of the good things we did.
What actually happened as far as results go is that the team didn't get the job done in the last 20. Oh except for the 2nd Bledisloe, where McKenzie came on.
That's shit coaching, shit use of the bench, and shit on-field leadership, but somehow I don't expect you to call the two Scotts 2 shit fucking options.Nope they are not kicking out on the full and throwing dumb erratic passes when the last pass would have yielded tries or crabbing across field running our outsides out of space,that is on D Mac.
Are you trying to tell me 90% of all the good things we have done this year are down to D Mac lol.Then just play him we don't need the other 22.90% in terms of creativity in the backs yep. Who else has created anything? Jordie? Rieko?
All of the negatives you list are worse with Barrett, but you'd have to add numerous instances of kicking the ball away.
