England vs All Blacks
-
@crucial said in England vs All Blacks:
Was it Andre Watson who said 'if a bird can shit on it, it is out'?
Jonathan Kaplan.
@billy-webb said in England vs All Blacks:
@crucial said in England vs All Blacks:
Was it Andre Watson who said 'if a bird can shit on it, it is out'?
Jonathan Kaplan.
Kaplan. The bloke who last half the worlds credibility as a ref (not I), and then the other half once he set himself up on twitter (including I).
I used to read it religiously, as I thought he was a good ref. Until I noticed a pattern which means he just became a fan.
-
Cully is on the Dmac bandwagon.
I may have to rewatch it to see how well Dmac did from first receiver, because he only talks about one example here:
-
Cully is on the Dmac bandwagon.
I may have to rewatch it to see how well Dmac did from first receiver, because he only talks about one example here:
@gt12 said in England vs All Blacks:
Cully is on the Dmac bandwagon.
I may have to rewatch it to see how well Dmac did from first receiver, because he only talks about one example here:
That was my thoughts on the article as well. He uses one example to make a big call on.
I think all he has done is finally seen the reasons why the ABs want to go with a two playmaker system. It isn't for the old left/right theory it is for breaking rush defences. I don't think that BB is always forced to go infield and take the tackle, he is doing it to try and set a quick recycle that can be fed to DMac, who can then look for opportunities to step through and break the line.
At the moment they aren't overplaying that hand, not so much to keep powder dry for the future, but because they would rather perfect the move rather than put themselves under more pressure.
The move has risks as well, especially in the type of wet weather game we just had. If BB gets caught on the ground and DMac gets turned over then there a big spaces behind us to target with kicks or runs. -
@gt12 said in England vs All Blacks:
Cully is on the Dmac bandwagon.
I may have to rewatch it to see how well Dmac did from first receiver, because he only talks about one example here:
That was my thoughts on the article as well. He uses one example to make a big call on.
I think all he has done is finally seen the reasons why the ABs want to go with a two playmaker system. It isn't for the old left/right theory it is for breaking rush defences. I don't think that BB is always forced to go infield and take the tackle, he is doing it to try and set a quick recycle that can be fed to DMac, who can then look for opportunities to step through and break the line.
At the moment they aren't overplaying that hand, not so much to keep powder dry for the future, but because they would rather perfect the move rather than put themselves under more pressure.
The move has risks as well, especially in the type of wet weather game we just had. If BB gets caught on the ground and DMac gets turned over then there a big spaces behind us to target with kicks or runs.I don't know about that risk, if Bender is there covering the back, and Ioane isn't terrible back there either.
I'd been hoping for Dmac at 15 as starter, so I'm pleased with the two playmakers, but so far I don't think it's really payed off, and they pulled him right at the time he usually starts having a big effect. I'd love it if that were strategic, but at some point, we'll see three playmakers finish a game. The problem with that is that one of Bender or Ioane needs to go (or Ioane to 13 and pull a midfielder).Actually, that doesn't sound too bad.
-
I don't know about that risk, if Bender is there covering the back, and Ioane isn't terrible back there either.
I'd been hoping for Dmac at 15 as starter, so I'm pleased with the two playmakers, but so far I don't think it's really payed off, and they pulled him right at the time he usually starts having a big effect. I'd love it if that were strategic, but at some point, we'll see three playmakers finish a game. The problem with that is that one of Bender or Ioane needs to go (or Ioane to 13 and pull a midfielder).Actually, that doesn't sound too bad.
-
@gt12 in the example used in that article it was Bender that 'appeared' in order to take the offload after the break from DMac. Presumably that leaves only Reiko to cover the back which is a little risky should there be a turnover
That's a good point.
I watched the 62 minutes of DMac being on at 10 second skip intervals to find examples of him at first receiver, so may have missed one (possibly two), but it's a small sample size. I count six times he appeared at first receiver, mostly on the short side, sometimes with two options available (i.e., Barrett on the open). He certainly runs on to it more than Barrett, who tends to do his catch/pass, but it's a tiny sample size, so I'm hoping that Cully has seen something at training - or heard something from someone, to make such a big claim. Barrett can also make that run and that offload - in fact, I was wrong in my write up, as Barrett ran for the first time at the 33 minute mark, and tried the same inside step run that got Dmac away in the Cully example.
Anyway, I do think that Dmac looks dangerous at first receiver, but as you can see below, it's pretty rocks and diamonds - probably only reinforcing the view of some that he's better attacking from 15, rather than at 10. Another interesting thing is how often DMac shows up outside Barrett at second receiver (no notes sorry), where he also made one line break. I wonder why Cully didn't mention that, because I'm sure it happened more than 6 times.
My notes (Dmac at 1st receiver):
17:42 pass to SBW (short side)
17:52 pass to Goodhue (short side)
40:41 kick for Ioane (short side)
41:13 Cully’s example with the offload to B Smith
57:49 knocks it on then gets tossed around by Shields (we get the penalty)
60:48 kick charged by Farrell -
The phrase I associate with Andre Watson was "if you are on the ground all you can do is breathe".
@bovidae said in England vs All Blacks:
The phrase I associate with Andre Watson was "if you are on the ground all you can do is breathe".
Yep. Coined the expression "lazy runner" too I think? Ali Williams v Boks? Was a lock IIRC. Pissed me off at the time because he really meant offside but in those days a retreating player was usually considered onside if retreating. Set a precedent for a law interpretation.
Actually a good one, that players must stay out of the way if they aren't in a position to be involved with the ball / player legally. That's just my memory of it, but does show the evolution of the way rugby is played and hence the changes being made to the touchline, for example, which opens up the opportunity for the player to do something clever / athletic and we get the ball in play more.For a curmudgeonly prick I actually like some of the changes.
-
I think dmac is great at 15. He’s a genuine point of difference to every other team in world rugby. He’s also fearless in the air. I don’t have confidence in Naholo, Jordie is out of form, nms has been a poor choice this season. Selectors do need another choice at wing, maybe it will be bridge we see.
-
I think dmac is great at 15. He’s a genuine point of difference to every other team in world rugby. He’s also fearless in the air. I don’t have confidence in Naholo, Jordie is out of form, nms has been a poor choice this season. Selectors do need another choice at wing, maybe it will be bridge we see.
@billy-tell I agree but am hoping we see Bridge or another genuine wing option emerge - I want BFA at fullback for our 2019 campaign with the option to shift him to wing to let us bring on DMac + Mounga etc. Whether we are dropping BB to fullback to have Mounga or DMac at 1st five, or moving BFA for DMac coming on at 15 and leaving BB at first receiver. Plus having a wing/FB hybrid in Bridge gives us even more flexibility.
Funny how next years super rugby season is (kind of) all about finding a outside back that let us get our balance and sub options humming. Bridge has a cap now so can we still call him a bolter?
-
@billy-tell I agree but am hoping we see Bridge or another genuine wing option emerge - I want BFA at fullback for our 2019 campaign with the option to shift him to wing to let us bring on DMac + Mounga etc. Whether we are dropping BB to fullback to have Mounga or DMac at 1st five, or moving BFA for DMac coming on at 15 and leaving BB at first receiver. Plus having a wing/FB hybrid in Bridge gives us even more flexibility.
Funny how next years super rugby season is (kind of) all about finding a outside back that let us get our balance and sub options humming. Bridge has a cap now so can we still call him a bolter?
@paekakboyz said in England vs All Blacks:
@billy-tell I agree but am hoping we see Bridge or another genuine wing option emerge - I want BFA at fullback for our 2019 campaign with the option to shift him to wing to let us bring on DMac + Mounga etc. Whether we are dropping BB to fullback to have Mounga or DMac at 1st five, or moving BFA for DMac coming on at 15 and leaving BB at first receiver. Plus having a wing/FB hybrid in Bridge gives us even more flexibility.
What about McKenzie as that style of winger in the starting xv? That's my preferred option at the moment.
Ben Smith makes more correct choices and is still incredibly effective on attack. I want him touching the ball more often than he does on the wing.
McKenzie can still drift into first receiver from the wing and he'll still be heavily involved on kick returns. I think he would go better than some of the other 14s tried this year - NMS, NaholoIt's worth a look if you think that Smith should be the RWC fullback
-
@paekakboyz said in England vs All Blacks:
@billy-tell I agree but am hoping we see Bridge or another genuine wing option emerge - I want BFA at fullback for our 2019 campaign with the option to shift him to wing to let us bring on DMac + Mounga etc. Whether we are dropping BB to fullback to have Mounga or DMac at 1st five, or moving BFA for DMac coming on at 15 and leaving BB at first receiver. Plus having a wing/FB hybrid in Bridge gives us even more flexibility.
What about McKenzie as that style of winger in the starting xv? That's my preferred option at the moment.
Ben Smith makes more correct choices and is still incredibly effective on attack. I want him touching the ball more often than he does on the wing.
McKenzie can still drift into first receiver from the wing and he'll still be heavily involved on kick returns. I think he would go better than some of the other 14s tried this year - NMS, NaholoIt's worth a look if you think that Smith should be the RWC fullback
@duluth said in England vs All Blacks:
@paekakboyz said in England vs All Blacks:
@billy-tell I agree but am hoping we see Bridge or another genuine wing option emerge - I want BFA at fullback for our 2019 campaign with the option to shift him to wing to let us bring on DMac + Mounga etc. Whether we are dropping BB to fullback to have Mounga or DMac at 1st five, or moving BFA for DMac coming on at 15 and leaving BB at first receiver. Plus having a wing/FB hybrid in Bridge gives us even more flexibility.
What about McKenzie as that style of winger in the starting xv? That's my preferred option at the moment.
Ben Smith makes more correct choices and is still incredibly effective on attack. I want him touching the ball more often than he does on the wing.
McKenzie can still drift into first receiver from the wing and he'll still be heavily involved on kick returns. I think he would go better than some of the other 14s tried this year - NMS, NaholoIt's worth a look if you think that Smith should be the RWC fullback
That would be my choice too. Ben Smith is the most reliable back we have. It also still surprises me how elusive he is too. His power to weight ratio must be something else
-
@paekakboyz said in England vs All Blacks:
@billy-tell I agree but am hoping we see Bridge or another genuine wing option emerge - I want BFA at fullback for our 2019 campaign with the option to shift him to wing to let us bring on DMac + Mounga etc. Whether we are dropping BB to fullback to have Mounga or DMac at 1st five, or moving BFA for DMac coming on at 15 and leaving BB at first receiver. Plus having a wing/FB hybrid in Bridge gives us even more flexibility.
What about McKenzie as that style of winger in the starting xv? That's my preferred option at the moment.
Ben Smith makes more correct choices and is still incredibly effective on attack. I want him touching the ball more often than he does on the wing.
McKenzie can still drift into first receiver from the wing and he'll still be heavily involved on kick returns. I think he would go better than some of the other 14s tried this year - NMS, NaholoIt's worth a look if you think that Smith should be the RWC fullback
@duluth good question, but three things jump out. With a disclaimer that I'm a DMac fan.
- Height
- size re defending and making dominant tackles, especially for line defense and covering.
- risk that we get caught out in our structures in broken play if he's been involved earlier or has a floating mandate etc.
I know some of those aren't big things but reckon we are down to fine tuning- so the one percenters matter.
Dude is fearless though and battles well above his weight. But I just think a diff approach could make things that little bit more robust, while still getting him in the game.
-
@billy-tell I agree but am hoping we see Bridge or another genuine wing option emerge - I want BFA at fullback for our 2019 campaign with the option to shift him to wing to let us bring on DMac + Mounga etc. Whether we are dropping BB to fullback to have Mounga or DMac at 1st five, or moving BFA for DMac coming on at 15 and leaving BB at first receiver. Plus having a wing/FB hybrid in Bridge gives us even more flexibility.
Funny how next years super rugby season is (kind of) all about finding a outside back that let us get our balance and sub options humming. Bridge has a cap now so can we still call him a bolter?
@paekakboyz said in England vs All Blacks:
@billy-tell I agree but am hoping we see Bridge or another genuine wing option emerge - I want BFA at fullback for our 2019 campaign with the option to shift him to wing to let us bring on DMac + Mounga etc.
I don't see how the inclusion of Bridge helps this situation, other than be a squad member. Bridge is a left winger so is competing with Ioane for the same position. There aren't that many right wingers around outside of Naholo, and at the moment he's not part of their preferred XV either.
It seems at the moment they've found a formula that includes BB, DMac and Mo'unga in the 23. All I hope for is that Hansen and Foster are flexible in their thinking and the substitution of BB or DMac is based on the game situation at the time and their impact on the game, not predetermined that DMac goes off after 60-65 mins. If BB isn't firing then yank him.
-
@duluth good question, but three things jump out. With a disclaimer that I'm a DMac fan.
- Height
- size re defending and making dominant tackles, especially for line defense and covering.
- risk that we get caught out in our structures in broken play if he's been involved earlier or has a floating mandate etc.
I know some of those aren't big things but reckon we are down to fine tuning- so the one percenters matter.
Dude is fearless though and battles well above his weight. But I just think a diff approach could make things that little bit more robust, while still getting him in the game.
All valid reasons.. still think it's worth a look
Is it too late to try because we are down to fine tuning? Maybe, but that would count against finding another winger too
-
@duluth good question, but three things jump out. With a disclaimer that I'm a DMac fan.
- Height
- size re defending and making dominant tackles, especially for line defense and covering.
- risk that we get caught out in our structures in broken play if he's been involved earlier or has a floating mandate etc.
I know some of those aren't big things but reckon we are down to fine tuning- so the one percenters matter.
Dude is fearless though and battles well above his weight. But I just think a diff approach could make things that little bit more robust, while still getting him in the game.
@paekakboyz said in England vs All Blacks:
@duluth good question, but three things jump out. With a disclaimer that I'm a DMac fan.
- Height
- size re defending and making dominant tackles, especially for line defense and covering.
- risk that we get caught out in our structures in broken play if he's been involved earlier or has a floating mandate etc.
Which would all apply to NMS and yet have never been questioned when discussing him
-
@paekakboyz said in England vs All Blacks:
@duluth good question, but three things jump out. With a disclaimer that I'm a DMac fan.
- Height
- size re defending and making dominant tackles, especially for line defense and covering.
- risk that we get caught out in our structures in broken play if he's been involved earlier or has a floating mandate etc.
Which would all apply to NMS and yet have never been questioned when discussing him
@bones said in England vs All Blacks:
@paekakboyz said in England vs All Blacks:
@duluth good question, but three things jump out. With a disclaimer that I'm a DMac fan.
- Height
- size re defending and making dominant tackles, especially for line defense and covering.
- risk that we get caught out in our structures in broken play if he's been involved earlier or has a floating mandate etc.
Which would all apply to NMS and yet have never been questioned when discussing him
And Dmac is strong in the tackle too. We aren't really known for our wingers ever being consistent power tacklers. Naholo doesn't even bother tackling...
-
@paekakboyz said in England vs All Blacks:
@billy-tell I agree but am hoping we see Bridge or another genuine wing option emerge - I want BFA at fullback for our 2019 campaign with the option to shift him to wing to let us bring on DMac + Mounga etc.
I don't see how the inclusion of Bridge helps this situation, other than be a squad member. Bridge is a left winger so is competing with Ioane for the same position. There aren't that many right wingers around outside of Naholo, and at the moment he's not part of their preferred XV either.
It seems at the moment they've found a formula that includes BB, DMac and Mo'unga in the 23. All I hope for is that Hansen and Foster are flexible in their thinking and the substitution of BB or DMac is based on the game situation at the time and their impact on the game, not predetermined that DMac goes off after 60-65 mins. If BB isn't firing then yank him.
@bovidae said in England vs All Blacks:
@paekakboyz said in England vs All Blacks:
@billy-tell I agree but am hoping we see Bridge or another genuine wing option emerge - I want BFA at fullback for our 2019 campaign with the option to shift him to wing to let us bring on DMac + Mounga etc.
I don't see how the inclusion of Bridge helps this situation, other than be a squad member. Bridge is a left winger so is competing with Ioane for the same position. There aren't that many right wingers around outside of Naholo, and at the moment he's not part of their preferred XV either.
It seems at the moment they've found a formula that includes BB, DMac and Mo'unga in the 23. All I hope for is that Hansen and Foster are flexible in their thinking and the substitution of BB or DMac is based on the game situation at the time and their impact on the game, not predetermined that DMac goes off after 60-65 mins. If BB isn't firing then yank him.
Yeah, the problem with DMac starting and being subbed is that he is not on the field at exactly the time he has made the most impact in black. I really want him out there in the final 15 minutes running around tired defenders, that is his bread and butter.
It's pretty difficult to get Beauden, Mo'unga and DMac on the field at the same time unless Rieko or BFA move to centre. Rieko moving there in the final stanza is not a bad option TBH given he has some experience there already. Then the backline in the final 20 could look like:
TJP
Mo'unga
DMac
Goodhue
Rieko
BFA
BeaudenWhich would be unbelievably dangerous!
-
Would have been handy to have piutau still floating around. No point flogging a dead horse I suppose.
-
@bovidae said in England vs All Blacks:
The phrase I associate with Andre Watson was "if you are on the ground all you can do is breathe".
Yep. Coined the expression "lazy runner" too I think? Ali Williams v Boks? Was a lock IIRC. Pissed me off at the time because he really meant offside but in those days a retreating player was usually considered onside if retreating. Set a precedent for a law interpretation.
Actually a good one, that players must stay out of the way if they aren't in a position to be involved with the ball / player legally. That's just my memory of it, but does show the evolution of the way rugby is played and hence the changes being made to the touchline, for example, which opens up the opportunity for the player to do something clever / athletic and we get the ball in play more.For a curmudgeonly prick I actually like some of the changes.
@snowy said in England vs All Blacks:
@bovidae said in England vs All Blacks:
The phrase I associate with Andre Watson was "if you are on the ground all you can do is breathe".
Yep. Coined the expression "lazy runner" too I think? Ali Williams v Boks? Was a lock IIRC. Pissed me off at the time because he really meant offside but in those days a retreating player was usually considered onside if retreating. Set a precedent for a law interpretation.
Actually a good one, that players must stay out of the way if they aren't in a position to be involved with the ball / player legally. That's just my memory of it, but does show the evolution of the way rugby is played and hence the changes being made to the touchline, for example, which opens up the opportunity for the player to do something clever / athletic and we get the ball in play more.For a curmudgeonly prick I actually like some of the changes.
Norm Maxwell I thought.
