Why this feels different...
-
I'm sure that the ABs got seduced into going wide after watching Aust having some success there a week earlier. The problem is that you need to earn that right first and the forwards failed to provide any platform to launch off, like they did against Ireland. Read's poor captaincy was evident as they didn't try to change tactics that clearly weren't working.
-
This may be severely tainted with my bitterness about walking out the stadium last night, at these fluffybunny Englishmen bleating about wonderful they were and how shit we were. And they were right, I had nothing to say except that they were, and are, worthy winners and deservedly favourites for the WC.
The risk analysis tragedy at the heart of the All Blacks
Every teams loses. Sport wouldn’t be interesting if a team didn’t– at least occasionally - lose. However, the AB loss to England was an embarrassing defeat for a group of coaches – and players - supposedly thought to have taken rugby to a 'new level'. The risk loving play and tactics of the players, when the situation clearly doesn’t call for it, has been a hallmark of Steve Hansen’s coaching since 2015 - and it’s one we should face up to as look to a new needed coaching group.
Firstly, let’s talk about how incredibly accurate, well-coached, and defensively sound England were. Watching the game live at the stadium, I was truly impressed at how much better they were – both offensively and defensively – than the ABs. They kicked very accurately, defended strongly (less accurately than NZ overall at 82% to 89%, but for more dominantly) and conceded less turnovers, with very few penalties. Furthermore, they didn’t play in their own half – they got the ball out into the NZ 40 (or deeper) and tried (successfully) to keep the game there.
The ABs on the other hand, well, that’s a different story.
Beyond the personal tragedies of this game from supposed leaders – such as Read’s five missed tackles (and BBBR’s three!), or Beauden Barrett’s three turnovers, or Aaron Smith’s ridiculous up and under to their 22 when we had great attacking ball – it is the consistent decisions by ABs to engage in risky plays that highlights why we couldn’t even get close to this England team. We simply never put them under any pressure. Why?
It amazes me to think that professional rugby players don’t know the (old) Ps, but it certainly seems that way: position, possession, pressure, points. We didn’t seem to value any of the first two, so it is little wonder that we didn’t seem to get any of the last.
Consistently, when we had opportunities, rather than try to work it through the forwards – we would try to go around the English, sometimes getting caught midfield (thanks to their effective rush) but often turning it over due to little kicks. Even those we regathered often had little meaning. An example is the cross kick to ALB – who was easily well covered – he caught it but was then easily taken to touch. Why kick that? Beauden Barrett, Aaron Smith, and Richie Mo’unga were all guilty of possession giveaways. It seems to be that the thinking is we’ll get plenty of opportunities, so one of them will come off. But, what if we only get one or two opportunities? Then what happens? You’ve just kicked it away to a team that won’t give it back in any place you want it. Now what? That’s All Black arrogance.
Even worse, when territory mattered, we’d either do something stupid (I’m looking at you Jordie Barrett with that stupid fucking attempted run and offload) or not kick deep enough. Sadly, our exits were just, pretty shit. Smith had two good exit box kicks to touch that I saw – apart from that I never saw us try to exit our territory with any real class. Barrett’s kicks were generally too short, while we commonly got pushed around by the English with superior kicks that found grass – posters have been talking about how Reece could be taken advantage of in this way and finally a team put that into play against us effectively. His danger man status hid the fact that he was also defensively a liability on kick coverage. His is the risk-loving strategy in selection.
Furthermore, we were just too happy to try and play rugby inside our half, rather than put it in their half. As a result, England had 62% of territory (and I’ll bet most of ours was in between halfway and their 40), making the game pretty easy in terms of tactics for them. Our kicks never put them under any territorial pressure, so they could attack us at will, from almost any field position. My favorite memory of the AB-Oz game from 2011 was Piri Weepu’s first kick to the corner – we got position to put on pressure, from which we generated possession and later on - points. It was beautiful and simple, but so well done. Where is that in this team? Why can’t we be traditionally pure with classical tactical soundness? Isn’t that a club that we are meant to have in our bag?
The Jordie Barrett attempted offload that led to a penalty – which put the game beyond reach - is the perfect example of this AB team seeing ‘pictures’ (as the coaches refer to them) that don’t match with the real risk involved. I’m sure that in Jordie’s mind, he could make a few metres, possibly even break through with an offload, and start us up on our way towards the winning try. But, he’s in our 22. If he fucks up, or anyone fucks up, or if the ball is dropped, it’s potentially curtains. That’s the game situation. He has a 99% certain clearance chance if he kicks or passes to BB for the clearance, but he chooses a risky run.
Why?
I think the problem is that he doesn’t accurately assess the risk of his action. He sees an isolated ‘picture’, designed (I think) to help players express themselves as well as they can. However, He didn’t seem to see it within the wider game, that is, with respect to the scoreboard pressure or the context. Even worse, that’s a pattern for him for which there has been no improvement.
But beyond the selection (hi Ben Smith @Tim) problem here, I wonder who is in charge of guiding these young men as they make decisions about how to respond to key pressure situations? Are they assessing these challenges appropriately? Is this game just a normal rugby game? Isn’t this rugby game very different to every other game? Isn’t that what we’ve learned from the last 30 years?
Once upon a time, we won a final by recognizing that we had to be a different kind of team – playing to the situation and context. It was certainly not pretty, but it was driven by a leader (and a group of senior players) who knew what the situation required.
Yesterday showed that the current players – including the leadership group and particularly this coaching group – haven’t learned that lesson. It’s been forgotten in trying to ‘revolutionize’ our play – devolving responsibility to players to make decisions based on what they ‘see’. But what if what they ‘see’ is not even close to the full picture? Is not assessed against the real potential risks of competition tournament rugby?
Is it because there has also been an abandonment of an overall game strategy? Certainly, we don’t have the quality of leadership as we had (no McCaw, Smith, etc.) but also shouldn’t two WC wins give the coaching team a better idea of what is required in that situation? How can this team continue to make bad decisions over 24 months (let’s go back to the Lion’s series) when faced with the rush defence? That’s on the coaches and the players. Why has there been no attempt to have multiple ways of playing the rush – incredibly they left the guy behind the pod alone all night last night, after one or two times it was clear that this player (often BBBR, also often Mo’unga) was under so much pressure they needed help, yet there was no inside fallback option available. They were just alone back there with flat options to the side they couldn’t use. The pass to the inside runner was completely shelved and our outsides were just pushed to the sideline while we never used our front running pods well at all. Then, we conceded interceptions, yet the risk-loving strategy to find outside space or try to kick to that space continued.
We are still one of the best teams in the world, certainly by player talent standards. We have the players - Japan has even shown that good players can be amazing with great coaching and a clear strategy – this is a problem of preparation. People go on about Eddie Jones and his brilliance – who the fuck didn’t know we were going to play England here? In this game? You’re fucking kidding me if that was a surprise, and furthermore, his brilliance seems to be more based on a desire to work harder and stronger and be more prepared than anyone out there. He’s even come out and said he’s been working on this for two and a half years. Of course he has. Who at the Abs hasn’t been considering that? Where were our plays designed to play to their weaknesses?
Maybe it suggests that after two WC wins, we just don’t want it enough anymore? Really want it – like ‘bone deep’ want it as they say? Have we got a preparation and conscientiousness problem in the players and coaches? Or, are they just not strategically sound enough to design tactics against the other premier coaches? If so, why the fuck would we reappoint any of the current coaches?
This team and coaching setup couldn’t beat the Lions. They lost to Ireland, twice. And, we got belittled by England at the WC. It’s not the defeat but the manner of it. Every time we’ve had to produce – except for Bledisloe cup games against an equally weak Aussie side while playing at Eden Park – we’ve been shown up.
This team has been too happy to make game losing decisions - it’s time to reassess the strategic and tactical goals of the ABs and relearn some key strategic insights from past failures. Maybe that’s why winning three WCs in a row will be the ultimate challenge for any team – it may be that the playing and coaching group just doesn’t have enough desire against teams desperate to make up for their past WC failures.
@gt12 Spot on analysis and comment GT, we did not seem to have a back up plan to the high risk rugby style that Eddie new we were going to play.
I know there has been a lot of comment on the Barrett Cane selection and I just wonder if Cane was maybe not fully fit and the selectors knew he probably at best only had 40 mins of rugby in him which was better to use at the back end rather than the start
-
I think what makes it a slightly easier pill to swallow is that in my opinion, that was up there as one of the best performances England has produced.
The pace, accuracy, agression, if it wasnt against us was something to behold.
We were simply not given any room or time to get into the game, they grabbed us by the balls in minute 1 and never needed to let go to regrip.
The onslaught we faced was something we might weather in the opening stanza v SA, but there was no let up, no weather the storm regroup and win, we barely got out of neutral.
I said 2 weeks ago when people were worrying about Ireland, I said I was worried about England.
That we were beaten by a performance like that, and 2011/2015 makes it easier to deal with.
-
I think what makes it a slightly easier pill to swallow is that in my opinion, that was up there as one of the best performances England has produced.
The pace, accuracy, agression, if it wasnt against us was something to behold.
We were simply not given any room or time to get into the game, they grabbed us by the balls in minute 1 and never needed to let go to regrip.
The onslaught we faced was something we might weather in the opening stanza v SA, but there was no let up, no weather the storm regroup and win, we barely got out of neutral.
I said 2 weeks ago when people were worrying about Ireland, I said I was worried about England.
That we were beaten by a performance like that, and 2011/2015 makes it easier to deal with.
@taniwharugby said in Why this feels different...:
The onslaught we faced was something we might weather in the opening stanza v SA, but there was no let up, no weather the storm regroup and win, we barely got out of neutral.
It's funny, seemed one of those games where the bounce of the ball just didn't go our way. they dropped a bit of ball, and opened the door to us - we just didn't go through. Seemed to spend the night kicking it back to them, being bundled into touch, or conceding turnovers at the breakdown.
In the end, we thought they'd be good enough to get 20-odd points. Just keeping us to 7 is the issue; we just weren't good enough to score. After last week, it's particularly disappointing, we had the capability, just didn't execute at all (or tkae good options)
-
@taniwharugby said in Why this feels different...:
The onslaught we faced was something we might weather in the opening stanza v SA, but there was no let up, no weather the storm regroup and win, we barely got out of neutral.
It's funny, seemed one of those games where the bounce of the ball just didn't go our way. they dropped a bit of ball, and opened the door to us - we just didn't go through. Seemed to spend the night kicking it back to them, being bundled into touch, or conceding turnovers at the breakdown.
In the end, we thought they'd be good enough to get 20-odd points. Just keeping us to 7 is the issue; we just weren't good enough to score. After last week, it's particularly disappointing, we had the capability, just didn't execute at all (or tkae good options)
@nzzp when you are on the Crest of the wave, the balls bounce your way, the 50-50 calls go your way...similarly when you are in the trough and cant see what's coming...
-
@nzzp Agree with a lot of the above. Been a great ride since 2009. So many special players and performances from the last decade. Wiining a third consecutive RWC was a tough ask when all the other sides are watching you and learning from you. Always thought a side would rise above themselves to end our era sooner or later and so it proved.
Once the Ioane brothers didn't make the team, I was never that optimistic about this RWC for the All Blacks. We needed those two fantastic athletes to be in top form for 2019 to be our year. Brodie's injury didn't help either.
I've seen England as a dangerous side for a while. Eddie has been putting together a great set of forwards and an England squad with a fantastic attitude for some time.
Two surprises though:
-
How well George Ford played yesterday.
-
How badly the All Blacks played and how soon ran out of ideas once Plan A didn't work.
For me it is not the loss but the manner of it that hurts. Haven't seen our Forward pack outclassed like that for a long, long time.
@sparky Ioane BROTHERS?? Akira is such a waste of talent it's criminal.
He needs a huge super season to be even sniffing an AB Jersey next year.
Yes the forward pack will not be one we look back at and go wow they are up there among the great packs we have fielded. Some great indivduals, and some that may go on to become AB greats, but not yet.
Just not enough raw horsepower in tjis front row. Sometimes the broadsword beats the rapier. I think Franks was missed. Didnt see anything more from Laulala than Frank's used to produce.
We were just straight out outplayed from minute 1 to 81.
-
-
@nzzp agree entirely.
I have no angst over the result.
There was no food poisoning that affected us, no forward pass that wasn't ruled on.
We just lost to a team that clearly played better than us on the day.
So let's go for 2023.
-
@sparky Ioane BROTHERS?? Akira is such a waste of talent it's criminal.
He needs a huge super season to be even sniffing an AB Jersey next year.
Yes the forward pack will not be one we look back at and go wow they are up there among the great packs we have fielded. Some great indivduals, and some that may go on to become AB greats, but not yet.
Just not enough raw horsepower in tjis front row. Sometimes the broadsword beats the rapier. I think Franks was missed. Didnt see anything more from Laulala than Frank's used to produce.
We were just straight out outplayed from minute 1 to 81.
@BartMan said in Why this feels different...:
@sparky Ioane BROTHERS?? Akira is such a waste of talent it's criminal.
He didn't front in NPC this year. Could be a great if he gets his head right, but the chances of that are diminishing day by day. It's really sad.
-
I think what makes it a slightly easier pill to swallow is that in my opinion, that was up there as one of the best performances England has produced.
The pace, accuracy, agression, if it wasnt against us was something to behold.
We were simply not given any room or time to get into the game, they grabbed us by the balls in minute 1 and never needed to let go to regrip.
The onslaught we faced was something we might weather in the opening stanza v SA, but there was no let up, no weather the storm regroup and win, we barely got out of neutral.
I said 2 weeks ago when people were worrying about Ireland, I said I was worried about England.
That we were beaten by a performance like that, and 2011/2015 makes it easier to deal with.
@taniwharugby said in Why this feels different...:
I said 2 weeks ago when people were worrying about Ireland, I said I was worried about England.
I don't think it was that we weren't worried about England, but the fact that the ABs had to beat Ireland first before they would play England. QF loses don't go down well...
-
Jeez, I’m totally down. Maybe I’m alone in thinking that this was the worst AB display I can remember. It’s not the loss, it’s the manner of it.
What a fucking embarrassment. We looked like Scotland getting totally taken apart like that - in a WC cup semi final ffs.
It was horrible walking past all those fucking crowing English fluffybunnies to leave the stadium.
I’m still pissed off and I don’t and won’t forgive the coaches or some players for that performance.
@gt12 said in Why this feels different...:
It was horrible walking past all those fucking crowing English fluffybunnies to leave the stadium.
THIS!
I sat down outside the stadium for about half an hour to get my shit together (unsuccessfully), and you could still hear bouts of that hateful “swing low” coming from inside.
Absolute fluffybunnies.
But with good reason to celebrate... their team was bloody good. The filthy bastard fluffybunnies. -
What doesn’t feel different are the “reasons” for the loss being made on this forum.
Rewind 12 years ago and you could replay many of the same tag lines being put out last night and today with those following the France loss.
Forward pass aside, our tactics in the 2nd half in 07 were baffling and frustrating. Heard that today.
We missed experience - tick.
Leadership went missing and not just from the captain - tick.
Arrogance from coaches - I recall many saying Henry was so focused on the 2 AB XVs in 2006 that we never settled on one.
Strange selections leading in - Nonu and Weepu missing, Toeava in.
-
@gt12 said in Why this feels different...:
It was horrible walking past all those fucking crowing English fluffybunnies to leave the stadium.
THIS!
I sat down outside the stadium for about half an hour to get my shit together (unsuccessfully), and you could still hear bouts of that hateful “swing low” coming from inside.
Absolute fluffybunnies.
But with good reason to celebrate... their team was bloody good. The filthy bastard fluffybunnies.@Kruse said in Why this feels different...:
@gt12 said in Why this feels different...:
It was horrible walking past all those fucking crowing English fluffybunnies to leave the stadium.
THIS!
I sat down outside the stadium for about half an hour to get my shit together (unsuccessfully), and you could still hear bouts of that hateful “swing low” coming from inside.
Absolute fluffybunnies.
But with good reason to celebrate... their team was bloody good. The filthy bastard fluffybunnies.I must say, all of the pommie fans I talked to, in the stadium and outside back in Tokyo were very nice. In turn we were very gracious. The guys sitting in front us were almost apologetic and couldn't believe they won. Well played
-
What doesn’t feel different are the “reasons” for the loss being made on this forum.
Rewind 12 years ago and you could replay many of the same tag lines being put out last night and today with those following the France loss.
Forward pass aside, our tactics in the 2nd half in 07 were baffling and frustrating. Heard that today.
We missed experience - tick.
Leadership went missing and not just from the captain - tick.
Arrogance from coaches - I recall many saying Henry was so focused on the 2 AB XVs in 2006 that we never settled on one.
Strange selections leading in - Nonu and Weepu missing, Toeava in.
@ACT-Crusader said in Why this feels different...:
Rewind 12 years ago and you could replay many of the same tag lines being put out last night and today with those following the France loss.
Disagree. In 07 we got shafted by a perfect storm of poor game from us, dodgy refereeing and an 'up for it' French side.
This time around, we went 'ok' - didn't really shit the bed, just got thoroughly out played. THat, and in 07 we hadn't come off back to back wins, and put out a statement performance in a knockout game the week before.
I'd argue that this game was South Africa in the Semi in 2015. We just weren't as good, and not able to handle it. I re-watched that game again in the buildup to this tourney, and we got beaten up all over the park all night ... but did enough to come away. Critical drop goal from Carter, and a bunch of really good contributions (including SBW). This lot just aren't as good in tight games, and I don't think there's much shame in that
-
I watched the thing at my partner's place, who - before the game - asked me how I would be like if they lose, and I told her I'd be gloomy all day and probably for the next couple of days. Then when it all happened I somehow felt almost fine with it. I didn't watch rugby in 2007, so never had to see the France game, but the Lions series in 2017 felt horrible and somehow much, much worse for me. Yesterday was a well deserved loss, England played incredibly well, the ABs didn't, Owens didn't make any game deciding howlers (wasn't perfect, but who is?), and it was a simple case of the better team won. The Lions loss and then draw was much harder to swallow for me, I didn't feel they were deserved, especially considering SBW's stupid RC, Faumuina's "tackling in the air", and all that.
I don't know, I can just say I really don't like England, but have somehow no real problem with them being in the final. I really hope either South Africa (likable team, great national anthem) or Wales (new WC winner!) do it, though. Owen Farrell is still a dick, especially how he milked Whitelock's shove (Sam, you IDIOT!).
-
@ACT-Crusader said in Why this feels different...:
Rewind 12 years ago and you could replay many of the same tag lines being put out last night and today with those following the France loss.
Disagree. In 07 we got shafted by a perfect storm of poor game from us, dodgy refereeing and an 'up for it' French side.
This time around, we went 'ok' - didn't really shit the bed, just got thoroughly out played. THat, and in 07 we hadn't come off back to back wins, and put out a statement performance in a knockout game the week before.
I'd argue that this game was South Africa in the Semi in 2015. We just weren't as good, and not able to handle it. I re-watched that game again in the buildup to this tourney, and we got beaten up all over the park all night ... but did enough to come away. Critical drop goal from Carter, and a bunch of really good contributions (including SBW). This lot just aren't as good in tight games, and I don't think there's much shame in that
@nzzp England were “up for it” as well. We got dominated off the ball. Similar to 2007 when I saw French players desperately diving on the ball squirting out of rucks.
Owens clearly missed some English indiscretions when we were attacking. Same as Barnes in 07.
That second 40 against France was hard to watch as was last night.
-
I would hope that we (the rugby public) do show more maturity after this loss, and winning in 2011 and 2015 makes this one more bearable. When you are beaten by a much better team on the day there can't be any excuses.
NZ was the only major team that England hadn't beaten at a RWC, until now.
-
This may be severely tainted with my bitterness about walking out the stadium last night, at these fluffybunny Englishmen bleating about wonderful they were and how shit we were. And they were right, I had nothing to say except that they were, and are, worthy winners and deservedly favourites for the WC.
The risk analysis tragedy at the heart of the All Blacks
Every teams loses. Sport wouldn’t be interesting if a team didn’t– at least occasionally - lose. However, the AB loss to England was an embarrassing defeat for a group of coaches – and players - supposedly thought to have taken rugby to a 'new level'. The risk loving play and tactics of the players, when the situation clearly doesn’t call for it, has been a hallmark of Steve Hansen’s coaching since 2015 - and it’s one we should face up to as look to a new needed coaching group.
Firstly, let’s talk about how incredibly accurate, well-coached, and defensively sound England were. Watching the game live at the stadium, I was truly impressed at how much better they were – both offensively and defensively – than the ABs. They kicked very accurately, defended strongly (less accurately than NZ overall at 82% to 89%, but for more dominantly) and conceded less turnovers, with very few penalties. Furthermore, they didn’t play in their own half – they got the ball out into the NZ 40 (or deeper) and tried (successfully) to keep the game there.
The ABs on the other hand, well, that’s a different story.
Beyond the personal tragedies of this game from supposed leaders – such as Read’s five missed tackles (and BBBR’s three!), or Beauden Barrett’s three turnovers, or Aaron Smith’s ridiculous up and under to their 22 when we had great attacking ball – it is the consistent decisions by ABs to engage in risky plays that highlights why we couldn’t even get close to this England team. We simply never put them under any pressure. Why?
It amazes me to think that professional rugby players don’t know the (old) Ps, but it certainly seems that way: position, possession, pressure, points. We didn’t seem to value any of the first two, so it is little wonder that we didn’t seem to get any of the last.
Consistently, when we had opportunities, rather than try to work it through the forwards – we would try to go around the English, sometimes getting caught midfield (thanks to their effective rush) but often turning it over due to little kicks. Even those we regathered often had little meaning. An example is the cross kick to ALB – who was easily well covered – he caught it but was then easily taken to touch. Why kick that? Beauden Barrett, Aaron Smith, and Richie Mo’unga were all guilty of possession giveaways. It seems to be that the thinking is we’ll get plenty of opportunities, so one of them will come off. But, what if we only get one or two opportunities? Then what happens? You’ve just kicked it away to a team that won’t give it back in any place you want it. Now what? That’s All Black arrogance.
Even worse, when territory mattered, we’d either do something stupid (I’m looking at you Jordie Barrett with that stupid fucking attempted run and offload) or not kick deep enough. Sadly, our exits were just, pretty shit. Smith had two good exit box kicks to touch that I saw – apart from that I never saw us try to exit our territory with any real class. Barrett’s kicks were generally too short, while we commonly got pushed around by the English with superior kicks that found grass – posters have been talking about how Reece could be taken advantage of in this way and finally a team put that into play against us effectively. His danger man status hid the fact that he was also defensively a liability on kick coverage. His is the risk-loving strategy in selection.
Furthermore, we were just too happy to try and play rugby inside our half, rather than put it in their half. As a result, England had 62% of territory (and I’ll bet most of ours was in between halfway and their 40), making the game pretty easy in terms of tactics for them. Our kicks never put them under any territorial pressure, so they could attack us at will, from almost any field position. My favorite memory of the AB-Oz game from 2011 was Piri Weepu’s first kick to the corner – we got position to put on pressure, from which we generated possession and later on - points. It was beautiful and simple, but so well done. Where is that in this team? Why can’t we be traditionally pure with classical tactical soundness? Isn’t that a club that we are meant to have in our bag?
The Jordie Barrett attempted offload that led to a penalty – which put the game beyond reach - is the perfect example of this AB team seeing ‘pictures’ (as the coaches refer to them) that don’t match with the real risk involved. I’m sure that in Jordie’s mind, he could make a few metres, possibly even break through with an offload, and start us up on our way towards the winning try. But, he’s in our 22. If he fucks up, or anyone fucks up, or if the ball is dropped, it’s potentially curtains. That’s the game situation. He has a 99% certain clearance chance if he kicks or passes to BB for the clearance, but he chooses a risky run.
Why?
I think the problem is that he doesn’t accurately assess the risk of his action. He sees an isolated ‘picture’, designed (I think) to help players express themselves as well as they can. However, He didn’t seem to see it within the wider game, that is, with respect to the scoreboard pressure or the context. Even worse, that’s a pattern for him for which there has been no improvement.
But beyond the selection (hi Ben Smith @Tim) problem here, I wonder who is in charge of guiding these young men as they make decisions about how to respond to key pressure situations? Are they assessing these challenges appropriately? Is this game just a normal rugby game? Isn’t this rugby game very different to every other game? Isn’t that what we’ve learned from the last 30 years?
Once upon a time, we won a final by recognizing that we had to be a different kind of team – playing to the situation and context. It was certainly not pretty, but it was driven by a leader (and a group of senior players) who knew what the situation required.
Yesterday showed that the current players – including the leadership group and particularly this coaching group – haven’t learned that lesson. It’s been forgotten in trying to ‘revolutionize’ our play – devolving responsibility to players to make decisions based on what they ‘see’. But what if what they ‘see’ is not even close to the full picture? Is not assessed against the real potential risks of competition tournament rugby?
Is it because there has also been an abandonment of an overall game strategy? Certainly, we don’t have the quality of leadership as we had (no McCaw, Smith, etc.) but also shouldn’t two WC wins give the coaching team a better idea of what is required in that situation? How can this team continue to make bad decisions over 24 months (let’s go back to the Lion’s series) when faced with the rush defence? That’s on the coaches and the players. Why has there been no attempt to have multiple ways of playing the rush – incredibly they left the guy behind the pod alone all night last night, after one or two times it was clear that this player (often BBBR, also often Mo’unga) was under so much pressure they needed help, yet there was no inside fallback option available. They were just alone back there with flat options to the side they couldn’t use. The pass to the inside runner was completely shelved and our outsides were just pushed to the sideline while we never used our front running pods well at all. Then, we conceded interceptions, yet the risk-loving strategy to find outside space or try to kick to that space continued.
We are still one of the best teams in the world, certainly by player talent standards. We have the players - Japan has even shown that good players can be amazing with great coaching and a clear strategy – this is a problem of preparation. People go on about Eddie Jones and his brilliance – who the fuck didn’t know we were going to play England here? In this game? You’re fucking kidding me if that was a surprise, and furthermore, his brilliance seems to be more based on a desire to work harder and stronger and be more prepared than anyone out there. He’s even come out and said he’s been working on this for two and a half years. Of course he has. Who at the Abs hasn’t been considering that? Where were our plays designed to play to their weaknesses?
Maybe it suggests that after two WC wins, we just don’t want it enough anymore? Really want it – like ‘bone deep’ want it as they say? Have we got a preparation and conscientiousness problem in the players and coaches? Or, are they just not strategically sound enough to design tactics against the other premier coaches? If so, why the fuck would we reappoint any of the current coaches?
This team and coaching setup couldn’t beat the Lions. They lost to Ireland, twice. And, we got belittled by England at the WC. It’s not the defeat but the manner of it. Every time we’ve had to produce – except for Bledisloe cup games against an equally weak Aussie side while playing at Eden Park – we’ve been shown up.
This team has been too happy to make game losing decisions - it’s time to reassess the strategic and tactical goals of the ABs and relearn some key strategic insights from past failures. Maybe that’s why winning three WCs in a row will be the ultimate challenge for any team – it may be that the playing and coaching group just doesn’t have enough desire against teams desperate to make up for their past WC failures.
@gt12 awesome post.
The worst part for me is we did have the game and tactics to be successful, we even saw them in this game. However, inexplicably whenever something worked successfully, it was very quickly put back in the box. That series of pick and go's in the second half that took us close to the tryline being a prime example (and eerily reminiscent of lions series). Once we got close, they oddly decided to just start throwing it wide to where the England defence was....and when that failed we never saw pick and go's again. Wtf?
-
@gt12 awesome post.
The worst part for me is we did have the game and tactics to be successful, we even saw them in this game. However, inexplicably whenever something worked successfully, it was very quickly put back in the box. That series of pick and go's in the second half that took us close to the tryline being a prime example (and eerily reminiscent of lions series). Once we got close, they oddly decided to just start throwing it wide to where the England defence was....and when that failed we never saw pick and go's again. Wtf?
@Bones said in Why this feels different...:
@gt12 awesome post.
The worst part for me is we did have the game and tactics to be successful, we even saw them in this game. However, inexplicably whenever something worked successfully, it was very quickly put back in the box. That series of pick and go's in the second half that took us close to the tryline being a prime example (and eerily reminiscent of lions series). Once we got close, they oddly decided to just start throwing it wide to where the England defence was....and when that failed we never saw pick and go's again. Wtf?
We also used the tactic to good effect in the QF. I dont believe the poms are that superior physically, I think we had enough skill and power to win, but we just played into their hands with poor selection and gameplan
-
@Bones said in Why this feels different...:
@gt12 awesome post.
The worst part for me is we did have the game and tactics to be successful, we even saw them in this game. However, inexplicably whenever something worked successfully, it was very quickly put back in the box. That series of pick and go's in the second half that took us close to the tryline being a prime example (and eerily reminiscent of lions series). Once we got close, they oddly decided to just start throwing it wide to where the England defence was....and when that failed we never saw pick and go's again. Wtf?
We also used the tactic to good effect in the QF. I dont believe the poms are that superior physically, I think we had enough skill and power to win, but we just played into their hands with poor selection and gameplan
-
@canefan it was basically anti game plan. I think the state of the lineout is probably an apt description for the performance. Pathetic execution and appalling accuracy.
The plan was there, the selection was fine.
@Bones said in Why this feels different...:
@canefan it was basically anti game plan. I think the state of the lineout is probably an apt description for the performance. Pathetic execution and appalling accuracy.
The plan was there, the selection was fine.
It was like all of the lessons we learned from 2007, with the senior player group and shared responsibility, were ignored. When the game went against us we couldn't right the ship
