All Blacks v France
-
Best Rugby Stadium in the world and the French really know how to organise a sporting event.
-
@mariner4life said in All Blacks v France:
@canefan said in All Blacks v France:
@junior said in All Blacks v France:
@Mr-Fish said in All Blacks v France:
@LagerLout said in All Blacks v France:
We are miles off being a good team, personnel wise and strategy wise. We were bloody slow to the ruck in the second half. Our wingers are bollock slow. The only places we look dangerous are in in the starting front and back rows, the rest of it we are struggling. Feels like a bleak WC cycle to me. We had so much talent and where is it now.
I have pretty much the completely opposite view. NZ lost to one of the top four teams in the world at their fortress (and it is a fortress, the loudest and most partisan atmosphere you'll get at any ground around the world).
NZ have a great front row with Samisoni Taukei'aho still to return, some very good young loose forwards, two very promising halfbacks in Roigard and Ratima.
There are a few issues across the line-up but Razor will probably push the boat out a little more next year. There's a few pieces of deadweight that probably need to be moved on but already Cane and Perenara will be gone next year, Reece has probably played his last game in black, and there are a few more players who will be under a lot of pressure. It bodes well for the future, even if they didn't always get the biscuits this year.
Bolded bit - agree with this a lot but I am not sure that we are playing to this area of strength. We are still trying to play the game like we have the world's best midfield and back 3, and a relatively weak but mobile pack, which we clearly do not.
If Razor has half a brain, over the next 3 years, we will become much more a 10 man rugby team, that scores tries off mauls, close in running and chaos ball counter attacks.
I would agree our best moments are when our forwards are smashing it up the guts, along with strong LO defence and strong scrummaging
Ah, what? Our only created try today was offload a-go-go, lots of passes around the back, and an almost intercepted loop pass.
When we were on top we played out the back almost exclusively.The problem came when France got their hands in the ball our pack had no answers for their round the corner at pace forwards game.
Then in the second half when France adapted and stopped missing tackles, and turned evey ruck in to a shit fight, we didn't adapt.
Amen to this. When France had the ball and played up the guts, they fucking bullied us. Constant momentum.
Us, not so much. All our metres pretty much made out wide, which again highlights the stupidity of picking Barrett B. -
@booboo said in All Blacks v France:
@MiketheSnow said in All Blacks v France:
Razor fucked around and found out
2-0 on a NH tour and he changes the team
That’s Wales level dumb
Who did he change? Roigard and ?
Edit: oh yeah, Taylor
And BB for DMac
-
@MiketheSnow said in All Blacks v France:
@booboo said in All Blacks v France:
@MiketheSnow said in All Blacks v France:
Razor fucked around and found out
2-0 on a NH tour and he changes the team
That’s Wales level dumb
Who did he change? Roigard and ?
Edit: oh yeah, Taylor
And BB for DMac
Noted
-
@BerniesCorner said in All Blacks v France:
@sparky At the stadium it was fun.
Music, DJ, crowd video interaction and genuine bonhomieI like the French. A general respect and admiration for the All Blacks, good sorts
-
Probably the biggest standout out for me is that not one Northern Hemisphere TV outlet knows how to follow rugby with a camera. Although the French may have done this on purpose so that the TMOs found it harder to get camera angles. Too many distant or spider cam angles, really delayed irrelevant replays etc.
Interestingly on the TMO piece, we have been schooled through the last few years about tackle accuracy, normally on the wrong end of it too, but I felt this ref was 5 years too late for his interpretations. The French this time lucky he largely refrained from using the whistle and for most of the early part of the game using his earpiece.
Still not overly upset strangely after losing that one, was a great game of rugby. Lots of positives. Our forwards were strong at set piece early, our defensive lineout was immense with many steals, just execution through the hands on attack largely let us down in the end.
I dont know if Reece lacks top end speed, or it was just lack of effort. Either way it didn't look good. I still don't largely agree in principal removing a wing tactically (unless in this case it looked like through disinterest)
Jordan either hit the line too flat (dropped ball for the try) or over corrected too late and potentially missed a late opportunity on the right wing. Was not his best performance either.
I think I understand the motive of playing BB against England, however DMac should have been starting here.
Looks like we have largely worked out how to create an impact bench, although Ratima probably would like to reflect on his efforts this week.
Lakai did not look out of place either, would have really liked to have seen how the Finau, Sitili, Savea combo worked, but we were not given a chance and unlikely this week.
Anyway, one more game and hopefully they don't bring out everyone in the squad. Probably a chance to try or continue a few new combinations, often discovered via injury this year, but promising signs
-
I think one thing that was pointed out at the post match presser was that the ABs 'didn't get the chance to have the game at speed and fatigue the opposition' is a big worry. Relying on that is stupid, cos depsite WR clocks and speed up efforts, teams can slow games right down so easily. Look how long each scrum took this time? 30 seconds my arse a minute for each one, even the ABs scrums. Fake injuries to fatties, just standing up at the scrum before engage, etc. It is a stupid thing to even think of relying on, you've got to have a very well practised Plan B that is based on a very slow game. Esp as the vast majority of big games, RWC games, are grind fests and slow as fuck.
-
Late to the thread, but lots of encouragement up front.
Hot take: nothing wrong with taking the 3 with 5 to go. You get the ball back ... and the task is then to advance it 40 metres downfield and win a penalty when the opposition are at their tiredest. We in fact got the ball and moved it well - just blew the last pass/catch with BB/RI.
I do not think it is necessarily as stupid a decision as people are saying, particularly the media.
Y'all should also apologise to @Bones; he's been consistent with his observations of Will Jordan - elite in some facets, but missing some bits that make great Test fullbacks. That's not a hit on Will, just that he's a better wing where the things he isn't as good at don't get exposed so much.
Overall, a pretty decent tour, but we're not slam dunks to dominate yet. Lots of promising signs though, roll on Italy and then 2025
-
@kpkanz said in All Blacks v France:
Let's not compare to the previous 4 years where against the big teams we were a genuine DISTANT second each time and looked like we needed them to capitulate for us to have a chance.
Actually against the big teams we were a lot like we have been this year. Looking world beaters one minute and utter chumps the next.
First half performance was probably the best we have played this year, but you didn't have to be a soothsayer to predict where the issues would arise. Roberston is such a naturally conservative coach. This seems to rub off on the team too. When his absolutely brilliant plan A doesn't work, he's clueless and so is the team.
Beauden - fuck surely even his super fluffers can see he's a liability in the team at first 5 and at FB. He's still a naturally gifted footy player but the flashes of brilliance come about 140 minutes apart nowadays.
Jordan has no footballing brain or awareness. Put him on the wing as a finisher and fid a proper fullback.
I've never been a massive DMac fan but he is streets ahead of BB and I reckon Razors love child Richie too.
I was in favour of taking the three points on offer - except for the last one. Although I wasn't massively disappointed then either as I didn't have much confidence that we would manufacture a try either. The best, most likely outcome from going for the line for me would have been a lineout penalty. So still a point behind and less time to play.
We are making baby steps forward. Reasonably happy with the forwards both starters and bench but still massive issues at 10/12/13/15 IMO. Progress is being hampered by poor selections.
Assuming we beat Italy the season would get a pass from me, if we hadn't lost badly to Argentina. Two close matches against the Bok offset by one dismal display against the Wobblies.
Bit of luck and we could have picked up two wins in SA, but with a different bounce of the ball we could also have lost 3-0 (undeservably but still lost) to the Poms.
So a report card that says 4.5/10 needs to apply self better and eliminate distrations sounds about right to me.
-
@dogmeat said in All Blacks v France:
@kpkanz said in All Blacks v France:
Let's not compare to the previous 4 years where against the big teams we were a genuine DISTANT second each time and looked like we needed them to capitulate for us to have a chance.
Actually against the big teams we were a lot like we have been this year. Looking world beaters one minute and utter chumps the next.
I'd actually disagree. Against the big teams last cycle we never looked like world beaters.
That's why it was so depressing. We looked like we never had a chance, imo.
Agree to disagree.
-
I'm also confused by this narrative that we were cowards for taking the 3, and it was un-All Black like.
To me it seems much more brave and confident to say "We're not going to camp out here and hope to sneak a try in with pick and go or maul for the next 5 minutes.
Instead, we're so confident we can get back here and you can't stop us getting here, that we'll take the 3 and be back here within 5 minutes to win the game."
Which btw we actually did get back near their 22 within the 5 minutes, only for Beauden/Rieko to screw up.
I guess Scott didn't take that into account unfortunately.
-
@kpkanz said in All Blacks v France:
I'm also confused by this narrative that we were cowards for taking the 3, and it was un-All Black like.
To me it seems much more brave and confident to say "We're not going to camp out here and hope to sneak a try in with pick and go or maul for the next 5 minutes.
Instead, we're so confident we can get back here and you can't stop us getting here, that we'll take the 3 and be back here within 5 minutes to win the game."
Which btw we actually did get back near their 22 within the 5 minutes, only for Beauden/Rieko to screw up.
I guess Scott didn't take that into account unfortunately.
Not sure if anyone on here has called them cowards, it was definitely not a cowardly move. I just think it was a stupid call.
What would the French have preferred? Defending a lineout 5-10 metres from their line and potentially being pinned in their red zone for the next few minutes, or to be 1 point ahead with a deep kickoff into the opposition half against a team that doesn't exit well? I think they would have been extremely relieved when we took the 3.
-
@dogmeat said in All Blacks v France:
Assuming we beat Italy the season would get a pass from me, if we hadn't lost badly to Argentina. Two close matches against the Bok offset by one dismal display against the Wobblies.
This, along with the continued picking of past it/never been it players means this year is not a pass for me. I expected Razor to
- Use the time to blood more young uns not forced by injury
- Related to above, not do favourite region and senitmental picks
- Change our 'play at speed to win' gameplan to a more test sensible just smash the fuckers like the saders gameplan. I will take winning over looking pretty every day. I'd prefer both, but the skill sets and fitness difference isn't there anymore - and won't be ever again
-
@kev said in All Blacks v France:
@Halfback said in All Blacks v France:
I think it's time for the Barrett brothers gimmick to be put to bed. Scott isn't the answer at captain, Beauden is out of date by a couple of seasons and Jordie barely gets a pass mark.
The 3 points with 5 to go is a pathetic call.
Also, anybody know what Havilli has added to this tour? Instagram shows me he's doing nothing but playing golf? Probably best, if he were playing he'd be throwing intercept passes.
They each stand on their own merits.
Scott looks like a good captain to me. Measured and one of our best players every game.
BB reverts to type and chooses the kick option too much. These were all poor:
- half time drop goal
- cross kick to Reece
- grubber in their 22
Jordie is Jordie.
sorry.....says they all stand on their own merits...then lists the players name as a merit...12s have to be named jordie?
-
@akan004 said in All Blacks v France:
Not sure if anyone on here has called them cowards, it was definitely not a cowardly move. I just think it was a stupid call.
Yeah not here, seemed to be passed around some of the media.
@akan004 said in All Blacks v France:
What would the French have preferred? Defending a lineout 5-10 metres from their line and potentially being pinned in their red zone for the next few minutes, or to be 1 point ahead with a deep kickoff into the opposition half against a team that doesn't exit well? I think they would have been extremely relieved when we took the 3.
I think we made the right choice. We had been in their 22 multiple times most of the game and failed to score. We hadnt scored a try since the Roigard individual play, which was 50 minutes earlier.
If we go for the lineout there, and then WE get penalized trying to score, France kick it down field with possession and we're now down 4 with a minute left with near no chance of winning.
Instead we take the 3 on offer, and then get back to their 22 (which we did) and then the french can't even risk being aggressive at the breakdown or offside or the game is over.
That's my perception of it. If we were more clinical in the 22 during the game I would have said go for the lineout, but we weren't.
I believe Scott felt more comfortable attacking from within our half to get back to their half and then only need a penalty, than he did actually getting past the tryline, which is how the entire game had gone really.
-
@junior said in All Blacks v France:
If Razor has half a brain, over the next 3 years, we will become much more a 10 man rugby team, that scores tries off mauls, close in running and chaos ball counter attacks.
Sounds like the style of a certain Super rugby coach
-
@akan004 said in All Blacks v France:
@kpkanz said in All Blacks v France:
I'm also confused by this narrative that we were cowards for taking the 3, and it was un-All Black like.
To me it seems much more brave and confident to say "We're not going to camp out here and hope to sneak a try in with pick and go or maul for the next 5 minutes.
Instead, we're so confident we can get back here and you can't stop us getting here, that we'll take the 3 and be back here within 5 minutes to win the game."
Which btw we actually did get back near their 22 within the 5 minutes, only for Beauden/Rieko to screw up.
I guess Scott didn't take that into account unfortunately.
Not sure if anyone on here has called them cowards, it was definitely not a cowardly move. I just think it was a stupid call.
What would the French have preferred? Defending a lineout 5-10 metres from their line and potentially being pinned in their red zone for the next few minutes, or to be 1 point ahead with a deep kickoff into the opposition half against a team that doesn't exit well? I think they would have been extremely relieved when we took the 3.
Don't know about the French, but Sir Richie would have been relieved.
At 26-22 down, Gavin Henson stepped up to put Wales one point behind with four minutes remaining. But they were unable to make any further headway.
McCaw said he was relieved at the Welsh captain's decision: "Wales could easily have had a crack at our line from their 76th-minute penalty if they had kicked for a line-out, but I was quite pleased that they went for goal because if they'd had a crack who knows what would have happened.
"It was a tough decision but they always say that in Test matches you take the points on offer. "But I guess for us there was a bit of relief that they took the shot at goal instead of going for the try."
-
@Chris-B said in All Blacks v France:
@akan004 said in All Blacks v France:
@kpkanz said in All Blacks v France:
I'm also confused by this narrative that we were cowards for taking the 3, and it was un-All Black like.
To me it seems much more brave and confident to say "We're not going to camp out here and hope to sneak a try in with pick and go or maul for the next 5 minutes.
Instead, we're so confident we can get back here and you can't stop us getting here, that we'll take the 3 and be back here within 5 minutes to win the game."
Which btw we actually did get back near their 22 within the 5 minutes, only for Beauden/Rieko to screw up.
I guess Scott didn't take that into account unfortunately.
Not sure if anyone on here has called them cowards, it was definitely not a cowardly move. I just think it was a stupid call.
What would the French have preferred? Defending a lineout 5-10 metres from their line and potentially being pinned in their red zone for the next few minutes, or to be 1 point ahead with a deep kickoff into the opposition half against a team that doesn't exit well? I think they would have been extremely relieved when we took the 3.
Don't know about the French, but Sir Richie would have been relieved.
At 26-22 down, Gavin Henson stepped up to put Wales one point behind with four minutes remaining. But they were unable to make any further headway.
McCaw said he was relieved at the Welsh captain's decision: "Wales could easily have had a crack at our line from their 76th-minute penalty if they had kicked for a line-out, but I was quite pleased that they went for goal because if they'd had a crack who knows what would have happened.
"It was a tough decision but they always say that in Test matches you take the points on offer. "But I guess for us there was a bit of relief that they took the shot at goal instead of going for the try."
So are we now the equivalent of 2004 Wales?
The shot at goal at that time did not sit well with me and it did not feel that it was part of the All Black DNA.
-
@kpkanz the points you make are why other posters feel it was an un-AB like decision. There are not many AB teams in history that wouldn't back themselves to kick for the corner and score a try to win it with 5 minutes on the clock. The fact that we did get back up field isn't evidence that it was a good decision; a lot has to go right to get all the way up field in one of the final plays and convert it into points, and as it turned out we got close but couldn't maintain it long enough. It's symptomatic of a game plan that isn't well suited to test footy.
If there is one positive to take from losing by 1, it's that hopefully this tour hasn't papered over the significant selection issues with this coaching team.
The biggest positive from this season is that we absolutely do have the cattle to be No. 1 again, but we need a much smarter game plan and much bolder selections from Razor and his team next season.
-
-
between that and the intercept where he was never getting away it's damning vision.
-
@nzzp said in All Blacks v France:
Y'all should also apologise to @Bones; he's been consistent with his observations of Will Jordan - elite in some facets, but missing some bits that make great Test fullbacks. That's not a hit on Will, just that he's a better wing where the things he isn't as good at don't get exposed so much.
Yeah look, Will can do some amazing stuff and fuck it's pretty to watch him in space. Just what annoys me is he still plays like that guy growing up who was bigger and better than everyone and so just grabbed the ball and did it on his own. It's not stuff that can't be worked on and I certainly would've hoped to see vast improvement this season - but there's nothing.
How is it that he's still consistently choosing selfish options, constantly overrunning players with the ball, etc? He doesn't value possession and just readily hands it back to the opposition.
If I could see even a tiny bit of improvement across his many seasons then I would be more comfortable, but he just doesn't appear to have any application or desire to improve - or he's not being taught well.
-
@reprobate said in All Blacks v France:
@Bones devil's advocate - being played on the wing isn't the best way to develop his fullback skills.
It's not fullback skills though - it's rugby skills.
Besides which, where does he play all his rugby below test level? The list of players that successfully transitioned from the wing to fullback is surely longer than the unsuccessful. I can't really think of anyone, but that's me.
-
@Bones said in All Blacks v France:
@nzzp said in All Blacks v France:
Y'all should also apologise to @Bones; he's been consistent with his observations of Will Jordan - elite in some facets, but missing some bits that make great Test fullbacks. That's not a hit on Will, just that he's a better wing where the things he isn't as good at don't get exposed so much.
Yeah look, Will can do some amazing stuff and fuck it's pretty to watch him in space. Just what annoys me is he still plays like that guy growing up who was bigger and better than everyone and so just grabbed the ball and did it on his own. It's not stuff that can't be worked on and I certainly would've hoped to see vast improvement this season - but there's nothing.
How is it that he's still consistently choosing selfish options, constantly overrunning players with the ball, etc? He doesn't value possession and just readily hands it back to the opposition.
If I could see even a tiny bit of improvement across his many seasons then I would be more comfortable, but he just doesn't appear to have any application or desire to improve - or he's not being taught well.
Whilst I agree his best position is wing, some of the things you have attacked Will on are just plain silly. He sets up other players well, is definitely not selfish (don't know where that is coming from), and his defensive positioning is very good (could be more physical in the tackle of course).
His best position is wing I think because he doesn't have the kicking game or maybe even the decision nous for fullback I think (neither does Jordie on the decision front....). On the wing he can roam and not have the same responsibilities that limits a fullback from getting in the game. -
@Old-Samurai-Jack said in All Blacks v France:
He sets up other players well, is definitely not selfish (don't know where that is coming from)
Right, so the multiple instances of him ignoring support and/or taking the limp option then turning the ball over is great team play? Keep drinking the coolade man. What's good about him not looking to link when he breaks, or overrunning the ball carrier, kicking the ball away randomly or throwing a shit 20/80 pass when he's eventually caught? Yeah very unselfish.
-
@Bones said in All Blacks v France:
Yeah very unselfish
In fairness, I don't think it's selfishness. I think it's mindset and decision making.
The brilliance in some facets blinds some people to areas he's not as good.
-
@Mauss said in All Blacks v France:
@Billy-Tell said in All Blacks v France:
The ref was fine. Let’s not become Irish.
My comment on Amashukeli wasn’t intended as a slight against him. I also think it’s possible to talk about refereeing without it turning into ref bashing.
A ref’s interpretation of the breakdown is always important but I feel like it gains more weight when you have two opposing teams with very different playing philosophies, like New Zealand and France have. Whereas the French forward pack generally plays like a tight, cohesive unit (where they are always within a 20 metre radius of each other), the ABs like to keep width and have forwards and backs dispersed across a backline.
That also means that the tackle area becomes very important for a side like the All Blacks, as they try to limit the number of players committed to securing the ruck. When the tackle area is a mess, and you have, for example, only Will Jordan and Sevu Reece available to clean out in a ten metre radius, then it’s easy to see how that quickly turns into a problem.
That being said, there’s certainly a case to be made that the current game plan isn’t working when facing sides like France and the Springboks. In all three tests, New Zealand lost the game through their inability to win the breakdown, both on attack and defence, with France and South Africa finding it too easy to generate scores through the pick and go when within the NZ 22. In all three tests, Robertson’s solution – of running them off their feet by keeping the ball – hasn’t worked. And you’d have to wonder whether he should radically alter his approach to these teams, for example, by picking a bigger pack and by tightening the game plan.
The current game plan can still work, I think, but then you have to have a number of strike moves off of lineout and scrum which almost guarantee points (similar to how France had that maul try with the early shift up their sleeve). Currently, the ABs are getting too little purchase of those attacks for them to win these test matches.
So again, definitely not intending to bash the ref. Simply trying to get some more insight on what went wrong against France.
They don’t really have a bigger pack to select.
Holland would make it bigger though.
-
@Bones said in All Blacks v France:
@Old-Samurai-Jack said in All Blacks v France:
He sets up other players well, is definitely not selfish (don't know where that is coming from)
Right, so the multiple instances of him ignoring support and/or taking the limp option then turning the ball over is great team play? Keep drinking the coolade man. What's good about him not looking to link when he breaks, or overrunning the ball carrier, kicking the ball away randomly or throwing a shit 20/80 pass when he's eventually caught? Yeah very unselfish.
It’s Kool Aid.
I’ve got your back bro
-
@No-Quarter Its got to be hard to make a decision like that after 75 minutes of running around. I don't envy his role in that respect, brain must be frazzled.
The longer you look at his decision the worse it gets though:
I think it was the 2 previous restarts we fluffed? 1 penalty and I think the other was a knock on? Can't fully remember. I'd prefer to fluff a restart in the lead.
If we had scored, the French would have to score a try to win minimum, surely it would be better to rumble up the field with possession, in the lead by a score, trying to achieve the same thing as if you were 1 point behind.
On that note, not to Barrett bash, I think Savea should be captain. I think Scotts position may be under threat soon. Savea not so much.
-
@Billy-Tell or South African 😂😂😂 resident Saffas exempted - but my God, some of your fellow countrymen and women have a pathological victim complex going on. Andrew Brace tried to rob the Boks on Saturday rather than the Boks being indisciplined and inviting pressure.
-
@stodders said in All Blacks v France:
@Billy-Tell or South African 😂😂😂 resident Saffas exempted - but my God, some of your fellow countrymen and women have a pathological victim complex going on. Andrew Brace tried to rob the Boks on Saturday rather than the Boks being indisciplined and inviting pressure.
Are you confusing me and @Billy-Tell ?
(For the record, I think the Boks went through a 20 minute patch of the worst ruck indiscipline I'd seen in quite some time. Rightfully penalized for it).
-
@nzzp said in All Blacks v France:
@Bones said in All Blacks v France:
Yeah very unselfish
In fairness, I don't think it's selfishness. I think it's mindset and decision making.
The brilliance in some facets blinds some people to areas he's not as good.
Fair - but to me it looks more like he puts the blinkers on and doesn't trust that he can do better with teamwork. You reckon he just gets too frazzled? Not ideal from someone I'd say should be experienced by now.
-
@Halfback said in All Blacks v France:
@No-Quarter Its got to be hard to make a decision like that after 75 minutes of running around. I don't envy his role in that respect, brain must be frazzled.
The longer you look at his decision the worse it gets though:
I think it was the 2 previous restarts we fluffed? 1 penalty and I think the other was a knock on? Can't fully remember. I'd prefer to fluff a restart in the lead.
If we had scored, the French would have to score a try to win minimum, surely it would be better to rumble up the field with possession, in the lead by a score, trying to achieve the same thing as if you were 1 point behind.
On that note, not to Barrett bash, I think Savea should be captain. I think Scotts position may be under threat soon. Savea not so much.
Scott Barrett’s position is no way in danger he will stay captain and starting lock.
There is some right BS being spoken about his performances.
Savea is the one who should be gone to the bench at least he has been a highlight reel for some time now. -
@DaGrubster said in All Blacks v France:
They don’t really have a bigger pack to select.
Perhaps bigger is not the right word. Players who thrive more in the tight spaces, something like that? Against France, NZ tried to keep the ball tight and go through the middle in the French 22 but the pick and go was very messy. Cleaners were often unable to keep their feet at the ruck and carriers didn't dominate contact, leading to a lack of forward momentum and French turnover ball.
Ireland’s win against South Africa in Durban came after selecting Beirne at six and playing more directly. They then tried a similar line-up against NZ (without playing as direct) and it didn’t work. I don’t want to simplify things too much, but with how close the top teams are (with Argentina and Australia on the rise), I’d think a horses for courses-approach might be best. In this approach, you’d have something like a "Crusader" gameplan for certain opponents (Ireland, England, Australia, Argentina) while taking on a Cotter/Schmidt/Blues-style for others like South Africa and France. The latter means more aggressive ruck defence, lots of blindside switches in attack, and picking players who excel in the pick and go and are able to dominate contact in close (Tu’ungafasi, Sotutu, Savea, Taukei’aho, Tuipulotu, etc.).
I don’t think it’s particularly likely that Robertson is going to go for something like this, but he can’t keep losing to teams with this playing style without coming onto serious pressure. I also don’t think this is unique to Robertson. Anyone who has been watching NZ U20s rugby for the past 12 years will probably have noticed how much these teams struggle with forward packs who stay tight together and flood the breakdown on attack and defence (some examples: SA 2012, ’14, ’19; FR 2018, ’23, ’24; WL 2012, ’19; IRL 2016; AU 2019, ’23). Those are a lot of coaches – Penney, Boyd, Robertson, Philpott, Laidlaw, Gibbes – who haven’t been able to successfully tackle this issue.
Robertson is a big believer in cohesion so that would go against this sort of mixed approach. I guess we’ll find out in the coming years whether cohesion is enough to overcome this close quarter forward-style.
-
@Mauss said in All Blacks v France:
@DaGrubster said in All Blacks v France:
They don’t really have a bigger pack to select.
Perhaps bigger is not the right word. Players who thrive more in the tight spaces, something like that? Against France, NZ tried to keep the ball tight and go through the middle in the French 22 but the pick and go was very messy. Cleaners were often unable to keep their feet at the ruck and carriers didn't dominate contact, leading to a lack of forward momentum and French turnover ball.
Ireland’s win against South Africa in Durban came after selecting Beirne at six and playing more directly. They then tried a similar line-up against NZ (without playing as direct) and it didn’t work. I don’t want to simplify things too much, but with how close the top teams are (with Argentina and Australia on the rise), I’d think a horses for courses-approach might be best. In this approach, you’d have something like a "Crusader" gameplan for certain opponents (Ireland, England, Australia, Argentina) while taking on a Cotter/Schmidt/Blues-style for others like South Africa and France. The latter means more aggressive ruck defence, lots of blindside switches in attack, and picking players who excel in the pick and go and are able to dominate contact in close (Tu’ungafasi, Sotutu, Savea, Taukei’aho, Tuipulotu, etc.).
I don’t think it’s particularly likely that Robertson is going to go for something like this, but he can’t keep losing to teams with this playing style without coming onto serious pressure. I also don’t think this is unique to Robertson. Anyone who has been watching NZ U20s rugby for the past 12 years will probably have noticed how much these teams struggle with forward packs who stay tight together and flood the breakdown on attack and defence (some examples: SA 2012, ’14, ’19; FR 2018, ’23, ’24; WL 2012, ’19; IRL 2016; AU 2019, ’23). Those are a lot of coaches – Penney, Boyd, Robertson, Philpott, Laidlaw, Gibbes – who haven’t been able to successfully tackle this issue.
Robertson is a big believer in cohesion so that would go against this sort of mixed approach. I guess we’ll find out in the coming years whether cohesion is enough to overcome this close quarter forward-style.
I agree with your comment about the lack of forward momentum.
Robertson hasn't picked the squad to play Vern ball when needed. You would need to add 3 big loose forwards to the current squad and 2 big midfielders. In the game which the Blues beat the Canes Heem absolutely dominated Jordie.
-
@Chris said in All Blacks v France:
@Halfback said in All Blacks v France:
@No-Quarter Its got to be hard to make a decision like that after 75 minutes of running around. I don't envy his role in that respect, brain must be frazzled.
The longer you look at his decision the worse it gets though:
I think it was the 2 previous restarts we fluffed? 1 penalty and I think the other was a knock on? Can't fully remember. I'd prefer to fluff a restart in the lead.
If we had scored, the French would have to score a try to win minimum, surely it would be better to rumble up the field with possession, in the lead by a score, trying to achieve the same thing as if you were 1 point behind.
On that note, not to Barrett bash, I think Savea should be captain. I think Scotts position may be under threat soon. Savea not so much.
Scott Barrett’s position is no way in danger he will stay captain and starting lock.
There is some right BS being spoken about his performances.
Savea is the one who should be gone to the bench at least he has been a highlight reel for some time now.Circle the wagons cantabs!!!!!
-
@Mauss said in All Blacks v France:
@DaGrubster said in All Blacks v France:
They don’t really have a bigger pack to select.
Perhaps bigger is not the right word. Players who thrive more in the tight spaces, something like that? Against France, NZ tried to keep the ball tight and go through the middle in the French 22 but the pick and go was very messy. Cleaners were often unable to keep their feet at the ruck and carriers didn't dominate contact, leading to a lack of forward momentum and French turnover ball.
Ireland’s win against South Africa in Durban came after selecting Beirne at six and playing more directly. They then tried a similar line-up against NZ (without playing as direct) and it didn’t work. I don’t want to simplify things too much, but with how close the top teams are (with Argentina and Australia on the rise), I’d think a horses for courses-approach might be best. In this approach, you’d have something like a "Crusader" gameplan for certain opponents (Ireland, England, Australia, Argentina) while taking on a Cotter/Schmidt/Blues-style for others like South Africa and France. The latter means more aggressive ruck defence, lots of blindside switches in attack, and picking players who excel in the pick and go and are able to dominate contact in close (Tu’ungafasi, Sotutu, Savea, Taukei’aho, Tuipulotu, etc.).
I don’t think it’s particularly likely that Robertson is going to go for something like this, but he can’t keep losing to teams with this playing style without coming onto serious pressure. I also don’t think this is unique to Robertson. Anyone who has been watching NZ U20s rugby for the past 12 years will probably have noticed how much these teams struggle with forward packs who stay tight together and flood the breakdown on attack and defence (some examples: SA 2012, ’14, ’19; FR 2018, ’23, ’24; WL 2012, ’19; IRL 2016; AU 2019, ’23). Those are a lot of coaches – Penney, Boyd, Robertson, Philpott, Laidlaw, Gibbes – who haven’t been able to successfully tackle this issue.
Robertson is a big believer in cohesion so that would go against this sort of mixed approach. I guess we’ll find out in the coming years whether cohesion is enough to overcome this close quarter forward-style.
It's totally philosophical.
If we wanted to play like France we totally could. But we are playing to outflank.
France play like an old school pack. Run hard as fuck, bash the ruck.
Neither is better than the other really. It comes down to if you do what you want AND stop the other team doing what they want.The ABs should watch Isaiah Yeo from Penrith. He's the master of the pass out the back, but if it's not on, he takes 12 metres.
If we can learn to make the pass while actually running we'll be unstoppable
-
@stodders said in All Blacks v France:
@Billy-Tell or South African 😂😂😂 resident Saffas exempted - but my God, some of your fellow countrymen and women have a pathological victim complex going on. Andrew Brace tried to rob the Boks on Saturday rather than the Boks being indisciplined and inviting pressure.
I’m not South African! Nor English!
-
@mariner4life said in All Blacks v France:
@Chris said in All Blacks v France:
@Halfback said in All Blacks v France:
@No-Quarter Its got to be hard to make a decision like that after 75 minutes of running around. I don't envy his role in that respect, brain must be frazzled.
The longer you look at his decision the worse it gets though:
I think it was the 2 previous restarts we fluffed? 1 penalty and I think the other was a knock on? Can't fully remember. I'd prefer to fluff a restart in the lead.
If we had scored, the French would have to score a try to win minimum, surely it would be better to rumble up the field with possession, in the lead by a score, trying to achieve the same thing as if you were 1 point behind.
On that note, not to Barrett bash, I think Savea should be captain. I think Scotts position may be under threat soon. Savea not so much.
Scott Barrett’s position is no way in danger he will stay captain and starting lock.
There is some right BS being spoken about his performances.
Savea is the one who should be gone to the bench at least he has been a highlight reel for some time now.Circle the wagons cantabs!!!!!
He nailed all his line out takes,Pinched a French throw,made a lot of good carries,was one of the leading tacklers,and was in the engine room of a dominant scrum.
Vai had a very good first half but threw the stupid pass that led to the French wingers try.
Not sure what Barrett was expected to do kick the goals kick for touch.throw into the linouts and catch it at the same time.
Just dribble being written.
Post 1123 of 1218