All Blacks v Argentina II
-
Timu was much more of a threat with ball in hand than wright. Wright was a great finisher; but Kirwan and Inga were all round threats.
If you played Fox, why would you have Crowley at the back; Timu Kirwan Innes Inga as outsides - way more threatening. Especially if you've got Fox and who? inside who are zero threat to run the ball.
Yeah would have been easy for Poidevin.
I think your memory is no good - Fox breaking the line! I sure as hell cant remember ever seeing that!
Search for that and even AI will just give you an lol! -
@Chris-B said in All Blacks v Argentina II:
Had a little re-watch this evening. A few things that spring to mind.
We made far too many largely unforced errors. Early on dropping cold a couple of catchable passes, Jordie's skewed chip, giving away dumb penalties and towards the end a couple of lineout malfunctions. You could easily find ten errors from poor skills or foolishness that stopped momentum cold.
Three yellow cards to nil - again handing momentum to Argentina - and points. A killer, but still not terminal even for this side - though Sevu's probably gets close.
Kicking. The Argentine's seemed to largely be kicking with momentum behind them - so their kicks were attacking kicks, while most of ours were defensive. They mainly kicked off shorter than we did and got arms up into the receptions to contest (and win), while we mainly kicked off deeper. Similarly, with box kicks - especially later in th game - almost all of theirs were contestible and they were rolling the dice by getting an arm up to disrupt the catcher - sometimes knocking on, but other times causing us to spill the ball loose. Ours were mainly too deep to contest. Sometimes to touch. Maybe we were backing our lineout?
These things are fixable.
What I wonder about our backline, though is - do we have to go back to the lesson of RWC 1991.
That day, we fielded Bachop, Fox, Timu, McCahill, Innes, Kirwan and Crowley.
Afterwards Simon Poidevin (the Wallaby openside) said the game was pretty easy for him because he knew neither Fox nor McCahill would run - so he just headed straight for Innes. Crowley also wasn't much of an offensive threat and Timu a bit mediocre. So Innes and Kirwan - can't remember if Bachop ran or not. Late in the game Foxy dummied and broke clear, but the cover mopped him up because he had no real pace.
The lesson was - almost everyone in your backline needs to offer offensive threat. Otherwise it's too easy to mark the threats and shut them down. We need size, speed, outrageous skills.
When you're running around with Christie, Beaudy, Rieko, Jordie, Billy, Sevu and Will - who will, apart from Will?
It's pretty bland offensively.
DMac had the backline playing pretty well last ywar for the most part.
He also made far more line breaks than any player in world rugby and was named at 10 in the world xv.
Now our backline has ground to a halt.
-
@mohikamo I have a completely precise memory of Fox breaking clear in that match. It was one of the few moments that gave us hope that we might win - and reinforced Poidevin's comment.
They ignored him, so there was space to run. He dummied and ran 25 metres - but the break was easily contained.
Nepia is somewhat correct as I recall - the post-match analyisis was that picking Crowley was a disaster (they called him up from outside the squad, I think) - we should have put Timu at the back and Inga on the wing - for the reasons I've outline above.
I daresay Grizz wanted to, but Harty countermanded him!
-
@nzzp said in All Blacks v Argentina II:
Stat watch from a mate - from WIkipedia, may or may not be fully accurate.
The last two years of Foster in the rugby championship: 9 games, 4 yellows (rest of league 32).
Current coaching: 8 games 12 yellows, (rest of league 14 cards)The whole discipline thing is a can of worms for me.
What Reece did was dumb, what Jordan did I see done all the time and Vaai getting the yellow was borderline/harsh for me. Ultimately though I have no real issue with any of the cards.........
However, Argentina had a period of 4 infringements back to back while we were hot on attack in their red zone. Berry did nothing, despite being an offside pedant all night, inside the 10 on lineouts etc.
One team gets lashed for indiscipline. The other is lauded for keeping their noses clean.
But thats not what happened was it? One team was held to a higher standard than the other by the ref.
Taavao gets a red for his tackle on Ringrose. Porter gets yellow for breaking Retallicks eye socket.
Which team is more ill-disciplined there?
Following on from this, Scott Hansen was in the media scrum a few weeks back saying we wanted to "give the TMO the night off and let him have a cup of tea and enjoy the game".
These days there are two games. There is the first game which are the 80 minutes on the field, and then game 2 is the intervening 7 days from final whistle of last game to first whistle of the next. We also fall down miserably here.
Razor or Scooter or Hansen ,in his next scrum when pressed, have to allude to the fact that while our own discipline was poor, had the same level of rigorous scrutiny been applied to both teams, then maybe the card count would have been 3-2 etc "we are just looking for consistency in that space" or some other corporate bullshit.
We have been the most carded team in the world since SBW and Garces got acquainted in 2017.
But we never cry blue murder enough at our oppositions getting away with it.
-
@Chris-B said in All Blacks v Argentina II:
@mohikamo I have a completely precise memory of Fox breaking clear in that match. It was one of the few moments that gave us hope that we might win - and reinforced Poidevin's comment.
They ignored him, so there was space to run. He dummied and ran 25 metres - but the break was easily contained.
Nepia is somewhat correct as I recall - the post-match analyisis was that picking Crowley was a disaster (they called him up from outside the squad, I think) - we should have put Timu at the back and Inga on the wing - for the reasons I've outline above.
I daresay Grizz wanted to, but Harty countermanded him!
You can all fill your boots here:
-
-
@Chris-B said in All Blacks v Argentina II:
@gt12 It better have been this game Foxy sells his dummy or I'll be fucked off that my memory of 35 years ago is so shit!
I can't blame Foxy for my shonky memory but I can blame him for this!
-
A snippet from 55 - 69.
56: We kick off well to Pumas 22.
After a couple of phases they launch up and under to Reece's wing landing around halfway. We don't take properly (natch) but luckily ball goes out off Blue.
We try for ball off top, but slightly off so Pumas regain possession and go through phases.
Defence holds but scrappy and Pumas win the knock on lottery and get scrum about 10 out right in front. DMac on (for defence?)
Mantera off scrum like shot, but Vaa'i slow to break and, although making stop, loses advantage line badly.[Has he had much experience defending off blind side in red zone??].
59: Easy try, converted into goal.
Pumas haven't really done much from own 22 but bank seven.
60 Tupaea on at 13.
61-68 AB backs much more penetrative with DMac at 10. Grind Pumas into 22. Good run Sititi.
Make heavy weather of last 10m but end up with lineout 10 out.68: Pressure tells and Sami try off maul.
69: Excellent conversion DMac.
70: 26-20 and momentum with Black...
-
I'd be interested to hear what folks who lurk here but don't post often think about Saturday's performance.
Was it as bad as regular poster have said?
What were the key problems?
Should Beauden Barrett be selected at 10?
What about the wings?
What are the solutions?
Is the All Blacks losing at least four games a year simply something we have to live with?
Or can the ABs be a champion, feared team again? -
@sparky Beauden should go. Reece should go. Christie should go.
Maybe Tupaea iin the centres.
Damn sure we need fast and powerful wings Narawa, Clarke come to mind.
And a bit of mongrel in the pack please. They were bloody passive yesterday. There has to be someone better than Christie. Jeez maybe we sjould look at the Sevens as the BFs did , no substitute for pace and power. -
Watching back now. Argies have just gone 26-13 - Sititi going into achieve nothing at the ruck leaving space for Argie 9 to dot it down easily.
Matera ripping everyone to pieces. Grinning like a wolf doing it. Vaa'i a total passenger by comparison.
How's the atmos? That crowd is awesome
-
-
@gt12 said in All Blacks v Argentina II:
Quite possibly an ice-cold take.
Wayne Smith is probably the greatest attacking mind in rugby, is clearly a fantastic person, and is beloved for all he has done for NZ rugby. I love him.
He also hates the box kick. As do I. I'd ban it if I could.
He's been on record telling his teams to avoid contestables of that nature.
He's the coach of the AB coaches.
It seems to me that NZ rugby has been trying to find a way to play 'in our style' without recognizing the reality of where Rugby is right now, ala 2009.
Are the coaches (and those coaching them) strategizing about how to play rugby in a way that just isn't possible under current law interpretations?
Is Smith the right person to help bring the coaches back to reality when they seem to be losing their way?
In 2009, the coaches were prepared to select in a way to at least negate the kick-chase game of other teams. Can he he bring that reality check to these guys and help them see that their desire to play in a certain way isn't looking achievable?
I'm fascinated to see whether NZR, the coaches, and those who coach the coaches respond to this loss.
The manner of it is of huge concern; we seem like a club team that had a bad week and the ABs just can not be that type of team.
This also feeds into our discipline issues - we don’t seem to want to face the rules and their application as they are, but rather how we wish they would be. Is it any wonder then that we get penalised and carded seemingly so much more than other teams…?
-
I think whatever happens with the back three, Will Jordan probably needs to move to the right wing. That's not because I think he's performing poorly at fullback, I just don't think we have many quick wingers who are also strong under the high ball. I'd have either Jordie Barrett or Ruben Love at fullback (with Tupaea taking over at 12 if its the former) and then, when fit, Clarke on the left wing. In the mean time, I'd probably give Carter or Narawa a go - with the former faster and the latter better under the high ball (but still not great). Narawa is more a Sivivatu than a Rupeni and deserves a shot given the performances of Reece and Ioane. Realistically for the first Boks game the best we can hope for is a change on one of the wings, so ideally Reece replaced with Narawa or Carter.
-
@Chris said in All Blacks v Argentina II:
@brodean said in All Blacks v Argentina II:
@Chris said in All Blacks v Argentina II:
@brodean said in All Blacks v Argentina II:
@Chris said in All Blacks v Argentina II:
@canefan said in All Blacks v Argentina II:
@Chris said in All Blacks v Argentina II:
@canefan said in All Blacks v Argentina II:
Can anyone remember how Razor's Crusaders teams played? My recollection was they did the basics well. But I could be wrong
Strong set piece, good kicking game and put a lot of phases together to exert pressure on the oppositions defence.
That's what I thought. That's what I based my hope for Razor on. So what is this shit we're being served up then???
The one different piece of the coaching puzzle is Wayne Smith this really is a fingerprint of Smiths helter skelter run at all costs game, as it was mentioned above the Black Ferns used this pattern as soon as Smith came on board.
I can only think he is the person setting this way of playing.
As it makes no sense Razor,Hansen especially had a completely different way of playing for 7 years at the Crusaders.Razor and Hansen are culpable. You can't make Smith a scape goat. He's only an occasional mentor.
Who said I am making him a scapegoat but why change a game plan that worked for 7 years and won 7 titles to a game plan similar to what the Black ferns and other teams have used under Smith, seems to point to something changing.
He is a mentor they talk to every week more than once I know that for a fact.You continue to try and make Smith a scape goat with this comment.
Robertson and co are middle aged men with decades of coaching experience.
They can choose to take and leave whatever advice Smith gives them but the buck stops with them and ultimately Robertson is 100% responsible for the outcomes as head coach.
No I am stating a fact its there for you to see why things may have changed since the Crusaders.
And I did state Razor needs to be responsible for his decisions
You are just picking out a true statement and bleating about it.Why are you putting the change entirely down to Smith’s influence? Maybe Razor and co have decided they can’t or don’t want to play the same way as the Crusaders because of the talent available in the ABs. Maybe there is another reason why they think a different approach is warranted at AB and test level. Putting it all down to Smith’s influence - especially when you have Ryan and Holland also added to the mix - seems like a real stretch.
Rugby World Cup 1991 - Australia vs New Zealand
