Ireland vs All Blacks (2018)
-
@nta said in Ireland Vs All Blacks:
@mn5 we're going to get fucked smashed by England so...
Is this you foxing or displaying uncharacteristially un Australian humility?
-
@mariner4life This is a very good point. But it also wouldn't hurt if you picked some backs who could bend the line in heavy traffic.
Everyone talks about how chips and grubbers are a way to unlock a rush defence. And sure they are. But crawl through this thread and count the moaning on all the kicks. They're bloody hard to execute well, and once you give players a licence to do them they become infectious. So you lose promising attacking positions because instead of recycling, some wing or loosie has grubbered the ball away.
A much better answer to a rush defence is to pass early to a big, fast, nimble meathead while making the defence second guess itself. But to do that, you need to select some big, fast, nimble meatheads. And I for one hope that your selectors continue to ignore the obvious solution to your current backline ineffectiveness.
@smuts said in Ireland Vs All Blacks:
@mariner4life This is a very good point. But it also wouldn't hurt if you picked some backs who could bend the line in heavy traffic.
Everyone talks about how chips and grubbers are a way to unlock a rush defence. And sure they are. But crawl through this thread and count the moaning on all the kicks. They're bloody hard to execute well, and once you give players a licence to do them they become infectious. So you lose promising attacking positions because instead of recycling, some wing or loosie has grubbered the ball away.
A much better answer to a rush defence is to pass early to a big, fast, nimble meathead while making the defence second guess itself. But to do that, you need to select some big, fast, nimble meatheads. And I for one hope that your selectors continue to ignore the obvious solution to your current backline ineffectiveness.
Not sure I completely agree with that. Even the biggest munters will struggle if they are flat footed against a rush defense.
For me, the key to unlocking a rush defense is the forwards manning the fuck up and getting over the gain line in close. Much harder to rush up in a line if you keep having to backpedal, especially if we can get some quick ruck ball.
-
@smuts said in Ireland Vs All Blacks:
@mariner4life This is a very good point. But it also wouldn't hurt if you picked some backs who could bend the line in heavy traffic.
Everyone talks about how chips and grubbers are a way to unlock a rush defence. And sure they are. But crawl through this thread and count the moaning on all the kicks. They're bloody hard to execute well, and once you give players a licence to do them they become infectious. So you lose promising attacking positions because instead of recycling, some wing or loosie has grubbered the ball away.
A much better answer to a rush defence is to pass early to a big, fast, nimble meathead while making the defence second guess itself. But to do that, you need to select some big, fast, nimble meatheads. And I for one hope that your selectors continue to ignore the obvious solution to your current backline ineffectiveness.
Not sure I completely agree with that. Even the biggest munters will struggle if they are flat footed against a rush defense.
For me, the key to unlocking a rush defense is the forwards manning the fuck up and getting over the gain line in close. Much harder to rush up in a line if you keep having to backpedal, especially if we can get some quick ruck ball.
@no-quarter said in Ireland Vs All Blacks:
@smuts said in Ireland Vs All Blacks:
@mariner4life This is a very good point. But it also wouldn't hurt if you picked some backs who could bend the line in heavy traffic.
Everyone talks about how chips and grubbers are a way to unlock a rush defence. And sure they are. But crawl through this thread and count the moaning on all the kicks. They're bloody hard to execute well, and once you give players a licence to do them they become infectious. So you lose promising attacking positions because instead of recycling, some wing or loosie has grubbered the ball away.
A much better answer to a rush defence is to pass early to a big, fast, nimble meathead while making the defence second guess itself. But to do that, you need to select some big, fast, nimble meatheads. And I for one hope that your selectors continue to ignore the obvious solution to your current backline ineffectiveness.
Not sure I completely agree with that. Even the biggest munters will struggle if they are flat footed against a rush defense.
For me, the key to unlocking a rush defense is the forwards manning the fuck up and getting over the gain line in close. Much harder to rush up in a line if you keep having to backpedal, especially if we can get some quick ruck ball.
Absolutely. On the odd occasion we actually did that we got fairly easy metres and the Paddies weren't able to get forward to fast. We just couldn't seal the deal
-
That's alright, then: http://www.allblacks.com/News/33471/test-review-provided-optimism-for-all-blacks
-
That's alright, then: http://www.allblacks.com/News/33471/test-review-provided-optimism-for-all-blacks
@pakman said in Ireland Vs All Blacks:
That's alright, then: http://www.allblacks.com/News/33471/test-review-provided-optimism-for-all-blacks
Phew - we’re not favorites any more. I knew it was all a big mistake.
I love the smell of burning underdog in the morning....
-
@donsteppa was looking at my TAB account last night when NZ were paying $15 with the Pakis needing 27 runs and 6 wkts in hand..thought about it,and thought nah..that ain’t gonna happen..
Woke up this morning..WTF..!@steven-harris said in Ireland Vs All Blacks:
@donsteppa was looking at my TAB account last night when NZ were paying $15 with the Pakis needing 27 runs and 6 wkts in hand..thought about it,and thought nah..that ain’t gonna happen..
Woke up this morning..WTF..!I wonder if some of the Pakistani players placed that bet?
-
@steven-harris said in Ireland Vs All Blacks:
@donsteppa was looking at my TAB account last night when NZ were paying $15 with the Pakis needing 27 runs and 6 wkts in hand..thought about it,and thought nah..that ain’t gonna happen..
Woke up this morning..WTF..!I wonder if some of the Pakistani players placed that bet?
@akan004 said in Ireland Vs All Blacks:
@steven-harris said in Ireland Vs All Blacks:
@donsteppa was looking at my TAB account last night when NZ were paying $15 with the Pakis needing 27 runs and 6 wkts in hand..thought about it,and thought nah..that ain’t gonna happen..
Woke up this morning..WTF..!I wonder if some of the Pakistani players placed that bet?
I had thought of mentioning that but didn't want to detract from a famous victory. It's a shame though that when something away from the normal run of things happens with Pakistan there is always that nagging thought.
Broad's century is one.
-
Very interesting powder dry and\or exhaustion analysis
http://www.rugbypass.com/news/analysis-did-the-all-blacks-bottle-it-and-shadow-box-against-ireland/
-
So, was Sam Whitelock sitting on the ground, offside, slapping an Irish pass forward not something we're keeping dry for next year?
Pleased about that. Small mercies.
@rapido said in Ireland Vs All Blacks:
So, was Sam Whitelock sitting on the ground, offside, slapping an Irish pass forward not something we're keeping dry for next year?
Pleased about that. Small mercies.
You can take the boy out of the Crusaders, but you can't take the Crusader out of the boy?
-
@snowy said in Ireland Vs All Blacks:
Maybe Ireland are just better than they were when D'Arcy played for them.
He must be a hoot at functions: "Congrats boys, well done but you're lucky you didn't play good All Black teams like I had to."
-
-
Has anyone linked through to the 1014 breakdown of the game?
It's pretty interesting, and the highlight some of our problems really well, such as how we heavily rely on metres by 10/11/14/15. Even though those players contributed about half of our metres in this game, it was less than usual, indicating that Ireland still shut us down by comparison, which I found fascinating. It really suggests that we are over-reliant on systems to get Barrett, Ioane, Smith, and Dmac space, which seems pretty dangerous.
They also picked up on the fact that this game is the first in ages where we had a better tackle percentage (only just) and still lost, essentially showing that we have real problems ons attack.
They also highlight the absolute non contribution of Squire at 6, suggesting that position is a problem. So, the good news is that we all on here on the fern are not as far away as we thought.
One thing no one has mentioned is that A. Smith did not run. At all. No metres. This is huge because we average 6 metres per carry when our halfback runs, but he never sniped nor got in a support position to get metres. For those pushing TJP, this could be some support. Alternatively, it could mean we were trying some new things.
They also highlight that we didn't get any metres out of Karl, which I think I also wrote about in my review - we need those from LH because we aren't getting them from TH (btw, with about .25 metres per carry, Owen Franks was above the season average for the 3 jersey!).
They also do a good job of breaking down how the Irish defense appears to offer the kick in behind as an option, but due to systems (and players) it isn't half as much of an opportunity as it appears. This is seems a bit vital, because the ABs kept trying it, even after it wasn't working. They do suggest that it can be broken down (the space is there) just that we couldn't manipulate it accordingly. It's one thing that gives me hope, if we can devise plays for it.
Anyway, it's worth a watch:
-
So, was Sam Whitelock sitting on the ground, offside, slapping an Irish pass forward not something we're keeping dry for next year?
Pleased about that. Small mercies.
@rapido said in Ireland Vs All Blacks:
So, was Sam Whitelock sitting on the ground, offside, slapping an Irish pass forward not something we're keeping dry for next year?
Pleased about that. Small mercies.
I hear Sam was surprised that anyone saw that as he thought just for a few seconds he had McCaw’s cloak of invisibility on.
-
Has anyone linked through to the 1014 breakdown of the game?
It's pretty interesting, and the highlight some of our problems really well, such as how we heavily rely on metres by 10/11/14/15. Even though those players contributed about half of our metres in this game, it was less than usual, indicating that Ireland still shut us down by comparison, which I found fascinating. It really suggests that we are over-reliant on systems to get Barrett, Ioane, Smith, and Dmac space, which seems pretty dangerous.
They also picked up on the fact that this game is the first in ages where we had a better tackle percentage (only just) and still lost, essentially showing that we have real problems ons attack.
They also highlight the absolute non contribution of Squire at 6, suggesting that position is a problem. So, the good news is that we all on here on the fern are not as far away as we thought.
One thing no one has mentioned is that A. Smith did not run. At all. No metres. This is huge because we average 6 metres per carry when our halfback runs, but he never sniped nor got in a support position to get metres. For those pushing TJP, this could be some support. Alternatively, it could mean we were trying some new things.
They also highlight that we didn't get any metres out of Karl, which I think I also wrote about in my review - we need those from LH because we aren't getting them from TH (btw, with about .25 metres per carry, Owen Franks was above the season average for the 3 jersey!).
They also do a good job of breaking down how the Irish defense appears to offer the kick in behind as an option, but due to systems (and players) it isn't half as much of an opportunity as it appears. This is seems a bit vital, because the ABs kept trying it, even after it wasn't working. They do suggest that it can be broken down (the space is there) just that we couldn't manipulate it accordingly. It's one thing that gives me hope, if we can devise plays for it.
Anyway, it's worth a watch:
@gt12 said in Ireland Vs All Blacks:
They also do a good job of breaking down how the Irish defense appears to offer the kick in behind as an option, but due to systems (and players) it isn't half as much of an opportunity as it appears. This is seems a bit vital, because the ABs kept trying it, even after it wasn't working. They do suggest that it can be broken down (the space is there) just that we couldn't manipulate it accordingly. It's one thing that gives me hope, if we can devise plays for it.
I havent watched it yet, but would an accurate kicking game have helped, as that seems to have been the issue with our kicks of late, too long/short/wide and as such, the chasing pressure hasnt been where it should have been (although even our chases havent been that great)
-
Has anyone linked through to the 1014 breakdown of the game?
It's pretty interesting, and the highlight some of our problems really well, such as how we heavily rely on metres by 10/11/14/15. Even though those players contributed about half of our metres in this game, it was less than usual, indicating that Ireland still shut us down by comparison, which I found fascinating. It really suggests that we are over-reliant on systems to get Barrett, Ioane, Smith, and Dmac space, which seems pretty dangerous.
They also picked up on the fact that this game is the first in ages where we had a better tackle percentage (only just) and still lost, essentially showing that we have real problems ons attack.
They also highlight the absolute non contribution of Squire at 6, suggesting that position is a problem. So, the good news is that we all on here on the fern are not as far away as we thought.
One thing no one has mentioned is that A. Smith did not run. At all. No metres. This is huge because we average 6 metres per carry when our halfback runs, but he never sniped nor got in a support position to get metres. For those pushing TJP, this could be some support. Alternatively, it could mean we were trying some new things.
They also highlight that we didn't get any metres out of Karl, which I think I also wrote about in my review - we need those from LH because we aren't getting them from TH (btw, with about .25 metres per carry, Owen Franks was above the season average for the 3 jersey!).
They also do a good job of breaking down how the Irish defense appears to offer the kick in behind as an option, but due to systems (and players) it isn't half as much of an opportunity as it appears. This is seems a bit vital, because the ABs kept trying it, even after it wasn't working. They do suggest that it can be broken down (the space is there) just that we couldn't manipulate it accordingly. It's one thing that gives me hope, if we can devise plays for it.
Anyway, it's worth a watch:
@gt12 said in Ireland Vs All Blacks:
Has anyone linked through to the 1014 breakdown of the game?
It's pretty interesting, and the highlight some of our problems really well, such as how we heavily rely on metres by 10/11/14/15. Even though those players contributed about half of our metres in this game, it was less than usual, indicating that Ireland still shut us down by comparison, which I found fascinating. It really suggests that we are over-reliant on systems to get Barrett, Ioane, Smith, and Dmac space, which seems pretty dangerous.
They also picked up on the fact that this game is the first in ages where we had a better tackle percentage (only just) and still lost, essentially showing that we have real problems ons attack.
They also highlight the absolute non contribution of Squire at 6, suggesting that position is a problem. So, the good news is that we all on here on the fern are not as far away as we thought.
One thing no one has mentioned is that A. Smith did not run. At all. No metres. This is huge because we average 6 metres per carry when our halfback runs, but he never sniped nor got in a support position to get metres. For those pushing TJP, this could be some support. Alternatively, it could mean we were trying some new things.
They also highlight that we didn't get any metres out of Karl, which I think I also wrote about in my review - we need those from LH because we aren't getting them from TH (btw, with about .25 metres per carry, Owen Franks was above the season average for the 3 jersey!).
They also do a good job of breaking down how the Irish defense appears to offer the kick in behind as an option, but due to systems (and players) it isn't half as much of an opportunity as it appears. This is seems a bit vital, because the ABs kept trying it, even after it wasn't working. They do suggest that it can be broken down (the space is there) just that we couldn't manipulate it accordingly. It's one thing that gives me hope, if we can devise plays for it.
Anyway, it's worth a watch:
I know these guys seem like flavour of the month, but I thought some of their conclusions were over reaching a tad.
Regarding the bolded, firstly I don’t think that is a bad thing at all wanting 4 of your 6 running backs to get space. I don’t think we are over reliant on it, but there are issues when we don’t have our offload in contact game not going. That’s where Moody, Retallick, Read, Savea come into play. That wasn’t there and so when Aaron Smith and Barrett just shovelled ball on we were easily shut down.
-
@gt12 said in Ireland Vs All Blacks:
Has anyone linked through to the 1014 breakdown of the game?
It's pretty interesting, and the highlight some of our problems really well, such as how we heavily rely on metres by 10/11/14/15. Even though those players contributed about half of our metres in this game, it was less than usual, indicating that Ireland still shut us down by comparison, which I found fascinating. It really suggests that we are over-reliant on systems to get Barrett, Ioane, Smith, and Dmac space, which seems pretty dangerous.
They also picked up on the fact that this game is the first in ages where we had a better tackle percentage (only just) and still lost, essentially showing that we have real problems ons attack.
They also highlight the absolute non contribution of Squire at 6, suggesting that position is a problem. So, the good news is that we all on here on the fern are not as far away as we thought.
One thing no one has mentioned is that A. Smith did not run. At all. No metres. This is huge because we average 6 metres per carry when our halfback runs, but he never sniped nor got in a support position to get metres. For those pushing TJP, this could be some support. Alternatively, it could mean we were trying some new things.
They also highlight that we didn't get any metres out of Karl, which I think I also wrote about in my review - we need those from LH because we aren't getting them from TH (btw, with about .25 metres per carry, Owen Franks was above the season average for the 3 jersey!).
They also do a good job of breaking down how the Irish defense appears to offer the kick in behind as an option, but due to systems (and players) it isn't half as much of an opportunity as it appears. This is seems a bit vital, because the ABs kept trying it, even after it wasn't working. They do suggest that it can be broken down (the space is there) just that we couldn't manipulate it accordingly. It's one thing that gives me hope, if we can devise plays for it.
Anyway, it's worth a watch:
I know these guys seem like flavour of the month, but I thought some of their conclusions were over reaching a tad.
Regarding the bolded, firstly I don’t think that is a bad thing at all wanting 4 of your 6 running backs to get space. I don’t think we are over reliant on it, but there are issues when we don’t have our offload in contact game not going. That’s where Moody, Retallick, Read, Savea come into play. That wasn’t there and so when Aaron Smith and Barrett just shovelled ball on we were easily shut down.
Well, I don’t know how much better they are than many posters here in breaking things down, although they do have opta stats, which is much more than we get, and they are better than most in the media. At times, I wonder about their reliance on metres per carry for one game as this can easily be miles away from the statistical mean but not an outlier.
And, I’m not suggesting that our outsides running is bad, I’m suggesting that we are reliant on it - in an unbalanced way. That’s where we disagree I guess. I think I wrote about this in my review, but I hadn’t realized that these numbers were even that was less than usual.
Basically, and in an oversimplified summary, from the Lions on it seems that if you can make Barrett have a bad day, and make you tackles, we are very beatable. We don’t seem to offer much attack threat through our forwards.
@taniwharugby that certainly contributes, but it could also be related to there not being as much space as there looks. Certainly, if we had been super accurate with the kicking, we’d have got more points, and probably won, so I thats a fair issue to focus on.
I’m wondering about what other plans we have? It could be that with key players missing (Cane, Moody) we haven’t been able to get our forward running game going, or have we been seeing it in patches. I assume that this week, we'll see lots of little things tried.
-
Has anyone linked through to the 1014 breakdown of the game?
It's pretty interesting, and the highlight some of our problems really well, such as how we heavily rely on metres by 10/11/14/15. Even though those players contributed about half of our metres in this game, it was less than usual, indicating that Ireland still shut us down by comparison, which I found fascinating. It really suggests that we are over-reliant on systems to get Barrett, Ioane, Smith, and Dmac space, which seems pretty dangerous.
They also picked up on the fact that this game is the first in ages where we had a better tackle percentage (only just) and still lost, essentially showing that we have real problems ons attack.
They also highlight the absolute non contribution of Squire at 6, suggesting that position is a problem. So, the good news is that we all on here on the fern are not as far away as we thought.
One thing no one has mentioned is that A. Smith did not run. At all. No metres. This is huge because we average 6 metres per carry when our halfback runs, but he never sniped nor got in a support position to get metres. For those pushing TJP, this could be some support. Alternatively, it could mean we were trying some new things.
They also highlight that we didn't get any metres out of Karl, which I think I also wrote about in my review - we need those from LH because we aren't getting them from TH (btw, with about .25 metres per carry, Owen Franks was above the season average for the 3 jersey!).
They also do a good job of breaking down how the Irish defense appears to offer the kick in behind as an option, but due to systems (and players) it isn't half as much of an opportunity as it appears. This is seems a bit vital, because the ABs kept trying it, even after it wasn't working. They do suggest that it can be broken down (the space is there) just that we couldn't manipulate it accordingly. It's one thing that gives me hope, if we can devise plays for it.
Anyway, it's worth a watch:
@gt12 said in Ireland Vs All Blacks:
Has anyone linked through to the 1014 breakdown of the game?
I watched it on Sky earlier in the week. To be honest the video breakdown of tactics/game plan is usually more interesting to me than some of the metrics they use (e.g. tackle%) to compare teams or games during the season, as in many cases there are minimal differences.
It would be good to see an historical comparison with the 2015 ABs to see if metrics like metres per carry have changed only due to the personnel in the team or due to tactics, the quality of the opposition etc.
