All Blacks v France I
-
Holland was great - secured ball and didn't stuff up and ran all day. I don't remember him going back at all in tackle or on deck - very secure. For a debut a safe pair of hands and dominance at lineout will do for me.
-
@mariner4life said in All Blacks v France I:
For the same reason as savea i reckon I'm close to done with DMac.
I can understand the allure, when it goes right it goes very right, but is it balanced out by the untold errors and created pressure?
I'm quite torn on DMac and Beauden, I caused a bit of a stir when I said picking Beauden for this test wasn't all that controversial as I think they are much of a muchness really. Personally I'd have DMac starting at 10 just on account of his kicking game, as we can struggle to get out of our half when on the back foot otherwise.
But outside of that both players go from the sublime to the ridiculous far too often for test match footy. I was really hoping shifting DMac to 10 would sort of force him to play within himself a bit more and pick his moments, but he often still tries to do too much to create something out of nothing, which sometimes leads to something brilliant, but often puts us under pressure. TBH I think a lot of this comes down to coaching - it felt like our tactics with him last year put FAR too much on him to create everything, and we ended up running him into the ground and then ditched him for Beauden again.
I don't want to be too doom and gloom though, both are incredibly talented players that would make pretty much all international teams 23, so it's not like we have a dearth of talent. I just don't think any of our coaches have worked out how to get the best out of them at test level.
-
@frugby said in All Blacks v France I:
@Mr-Fish said in All Blacks v France I:
Holland's received a lot of praise but I was a little bit underwhelmed.
He didn't really put a foot wrong but he also didn't do anything to suggest he's a better option that Lord or Tuipulotu at this stage. I'm absolutely not saying he shouldn't be in there, I'm as keen to see him given a go as anyone else and I'd love for him to be the new Brodie Retallick, but I've not yet (yet is key, obviously) seen anything from Holland to suggest he's anything more than a safe pair of hands in the second row.
Again, very happy to get him getting some minutes and would certainly keep giving him time in the saddle, but it's a bit unfair that we expect the loose forward to all be dynamic carriers of the ball or threats at the breakdown when the bar for Holland seems so low?
He dominated the lineout in a way Tuipulotu couldn’t, and Lord hasn’t. He works hard and makes a ton of tackles (more than both those two).
What are you looking for from him? Locks don’t tend to make line breaks…
I hugely disagree about him dominating the lineout. I think Tuipulotu or Lord would've gone just as well against that French side.
From what we saw against France, Holland is basically the Blackadder of locks. Does all the basics well, industrious, big engine, not necessarily dominant at all. I think there's time for him to grow into that more.
-
@Mr-Fish said in All Blacks v France I:
Holland's received a lot of praise but I was a little bit underwhelmed.
He didn't really put a foot wrong but he also didn't do anything to suggest he's a better option that Lord or Tuipulotu at this stage. I'm absolutely not saying he shouldn't be in there, I'm as keen to see him given a go as anyone else and I'd love for him to be the new Brodie Retallick, but I've not yet (yet is key, obviously) seen anything from Holland to suggest he's anything more than a safe pair of hands in the second row.
Again, very happy to get him getting some minutes and would certainly keep giving him time in the saddle, but it's a bit unfair that we expect the loose forward to all be dynamic carriers of the ball or threats at the breakdown when the bar for Holland seems so low?
I take your point to a degree, but the thing is he was on debut. Generally players on debut get a bit overawed, get a bit found out and/or make some silly mistakes. Holland absolutely nailed every part of his role as a lock for the full 80 minutes. That's one hell of a base to build from and is exactly what made Brodie and Whitelock so damn good. They nailed their core roles every game, and then anything else on top of that (some big hits, strong carries etc) puts them straight into MOTM territory. We have a real problem in NZ rugby where we don't value doing the basics to a high standard; we're always looking for the big line breaks or elusive runners while neglecting the aspects of play that actually win you the tight test matches.
-
@No-Quarter said in All Blacks v France I:
We have a real problem in NZ rugby where we don't value doing the basics to a high standard
100%!!
-
I think doing the basics right is incredibly important but I also expect All Blacks do be doing more than just the basics. As I say, hopefully Holland develops into a player that's a bit more than just a safe pair of hands.
Again, I just think there's an interesting double standard between what we expect from a lock (in particular, this lock) and what we expect from any of our loose forwards. Retallick and Whitelock were certainly much more than just busy and accurate (and from right at the starts of their careers too). Holland may get there after only a couple of games too.
-
@Bones said in All Blacks v France I:
@pakman said in All Blacks v France I:
@reprobate said in All Blacks v France I:
@taniwharugby said in All Blacks v France I:
I guess the issue with BB and his kicking, is he either is 'allowed' to kick or told he shouldn't...I doubt any coach will do that.
I think he has had free reign for so long, he sees space then poorly executes...
It was notable when we put our kicking boots away, we were all over them and looking like breaking loose, but didn't, then re went back to the kicking duel, which kept putting ourselves under pressure.
Kicking asid, BB went pretty well, so how do you get your hugely experienced 10 to kick less?
His passing was really pretty good, best we've seen from him this year, and he kicked his goals well. But fuck me, he kicks so much attacking ball away it does my head in. Each one of those should be treated as a turnover, because that's what they are - if someone knocked the ball on multiple times every game while hot on attack, they would be crucified.
I'm sure there'll be some game where it all comes off and we look amazing and put 50 on some team, but most of the time it means not converting opportunities or applying pressure. that's how you get France C staying close enough to potentially snatch victory - and there are several teams out there better than France C.And he can't exit with distance. And missed touch from a penalty. And a defensive bomb. And we still don't chase and contest - TBH that's the bit that really confuses me - because if it's a plan, sack the chasers. if it's not a plan, sack the kicker.
It was noticeable that France had two or three effective chasers, whereas we often had no one getting near the ball.
What was most frustrating, was when we do have chasers, they seem coached to wait for the ball to either hit the turf or be caught by the opposition. Really substandard.
Based purely on the eye test, from Super rugby this season the two best attacking kick chasers were Narawa and Reece. The latter created the odd opportunity contesting in the air but a bucket load from being on the spot for the tackle and driving over the ball
-
@Mr-Fish said in All Blacks v France I:
I think doing the basics right is incredibly important but I also expect All Blacks do be doing more than just the basics.
The problem is there are a number of players in NZ who can't do the basics of their core roll well. And that includes ABs.
-
@Chris said in All Blacks v France I:
@mariner4life said in All Blacks v France I:
@Chris said in All Blacks v France I:
Finau for a big unit really added no impact in this game,He was passive in the tackle he got knocked back a few times.And went no where forward.
Even though Vai'i maybe found out as a bit slow at 6 in the harder games, he was 100% better than Finau.Hard disagree. He dropped an early one cold and I was ready to write him off.
But after that he ran fucking hard and made yards in tight. He has a future i think.
Nah didn’t see any of that to me he was pretty weak.
People often see what they look for.
-
@No-Quarter said in All Blacks v France I:
@mariner4life said in All Blacks v France I:
For the same reason as savea i reckon I'm close to done with DMac.
I can understand the allure, when it goes right it goes very right, but is it balanced out by the untold errors and created pressure?
I'm quite torn on DMac and Beauden, I caused a bit of a stir when I said picking Beauden for this test wasn't all that controversial as I think they are much of a muchness really. Personally I'd have DMac starting at 10 just on account of his kicking game, as we can struggle to get out of our half when on the back foot otherwise.
But outside of that both players go from the sublime to the ridiculous far too often for test match footy.
Hard disagree. McKenzie kicked the ball away badly once (and fortuitously grabbed the rebound). He also threw an intercept - which really doesn't count, as it was under penalty advantage so why not.
Aside from that , his decision-making was pretty conservative - he took contact in preference to trying too much on several occasions.
Beauden tried too much - and it's always kicking with him - about half a dozen times. Always a turnover. -
@reprobate I wasn't talking about this game specifically, I was referring to them playing 10. DMac had a lot more space and touched the ball less this game as he was fullback so hard to compare based on that. I actually think both are better suited to 15.
-
@frugby said in All Blacks v France I:
@Mr-Fish said in All Blacks v France I:
Holland's received a lot of praise but I was a little bit underwhelmed.
He didn't really put a foot wrong but he also didn't do anything to suggest he's a better option that Lord or Tuipulotu at this stage. I'm absolutely not saying he shouldn't be in there, I'm as keen to see him given a go as anyone else and I'd love for him to be the new Brodie Retallick, but I've not yet (yet is key, obviously) seen anything from Holland to suggest he's anything more than a safe pair of hands in the second row.
Again, very happy to get him getting some minutes and would certainly keep giving him time in the saddle, but it's a bit unfair that we expect the loose forward to all be dynamic carriers of the ball or threats at the breakdown when the bar for Holland seems so low?
He dominated the lineout in a way Tuipulotu couldn’t, and Lord hasn’t. He works hard and makes a ton of tackles (more than both those two).
What are you looking for from him? Locks don’t tend to make line breaks…
He did everything you want from a tight lock - won lineouts dependably, tackled accurately and strongly, cleaned well at rucks and pushed hard in scrums.
TBH for a debut and start he did bloody well.
-
@MN5 said in All Blacks v France I:
Holland is a very passive ball carrier for a big unit
my only comment, as everything else seems to have been said, a few people said similar and true although i thought it looked like he was just playing it safe in his first test, go to ground, secure and recycle the ball, i hope we wait until his tenure is counted in matches and not minutes before hes judged too harshly
-
@Mr-Fish said in All Blacks v France I:
I think doing the basics right is incredibly important but I also expect All Blacks do be doing more than just the basics. As I say, hopefully Holland develops into a player that's a bit more than just a safe pair of hands.
Again, I just think there's an interesting double standard between what we expect from a lock (in particular, this lock) and what we expect from any of our loose forwards. Retallick and Whitelock were certainly much more than just busy and accurate (and from right at the starts of their careers too). Holland may get there after only a couple of games too.
Retallick was okayish when he started out but it took some time and that’s partly why I think the coaches rotated him out of the starting XV those first couple of seasons. But he had great size and his mobility improved out of sight.
-
@booboo said in All Blacks v France I:
@Chris said in All Blacks v France I:
@mariner4life said in All Blacks v France I:
@Chris said in All Blacks v France I:
Finau for a big unit really added no impact in this game,He was passive in the tackle he got knocked back a few times.And went no where forward.
Even though Vai'i maybe found out as a bit slow at 6 in the harder games, he was 100% better than Finau.Hard disagree. He dropped an early one cold and I was ready to write him off.
But after that he ran fucking hard and made yards in tight. He has a future i think.
Nah didn’t see any of that to me he was pretty weak.
People often see what they look for.
that is true both ways but I have no real option on Finau I hoped he would be the player we need at 6, but I was disappointed again on what I saw as a weak performance again.
-
I'm amused that we expect a debutant lock born 22 years ago and rushed into the national team as soon as possible, being compared to two of the greatest ever AB locks. And he didn't spend all his life playing rugby in NZ-he arrived here about 4 or 5 years ago, didn't he?
-
@reprobate said in All Blacks v France I:
@No-Quarter said in All Blacks v France I:
@mariner4life said in All Blacks v France I:
For the same reason as savea i reckon I'm close to done with DMac.
I can understand the allure, when it goes right it goes very right, but is it balanced out by the untold errors and created pressure?
I'm quite torn on DMac and Beauden, I caused a bit of a stir when I said picking Beauden for this test wasn't all that controversial as I think they are much of a muchness really. Personally I'd have DMac starting at 10 just on account of his kicking game, as we can struggle to get out of our half when on the back foot otherwise.
But outside of that both players go from the sublime to the ridiculous far too often for test match footy.
Hard disagree. McKenzie kicked the ball away badly once (and fortuitously grabbed the rebound). He also threw an intercept - which really doesn't count, as it was under penalty advantage so why not.
Aside from that , his decision-making was pretty conservative - he took contact in preference to trying too much on several occasions.My takeaway was he danced around and then flat footed just popped it to a stationary forward to get smashed.
I'm not as forgiving of the intercept since he took a poor option and managed to single out the only French defender with at least three other All Blacks, including an unmarked Ardie inside of him.
Again, a player best suited for the final 20mins in the hope we've created space.
-
@nostrildamus said in All Blacks v France I:
I'm amused that we expect a debutant lock born 22 years ago and rushed into the national team as soon as possible, being compared to two of the greatest ever AB locks. And he didn't spend all his life playing rugby in NZ-he arrived here about 4 or 5 years ago, didn't he?
Getting rinsed on the fern is part and parcel of being an allblack.
He should have done his homework before he signed up for the gig.
If you want the rainbow you need to put up with a bit of rain Fabian.
Welcome to test footy…on and off the field son
.
