All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.
-
@Tregaskis said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@ACT-Crusader Agreed. Ardie is not seen as a starter (yet) against Tier 1 nations, after they had a look at him starting in the home Boks test.
Dixon covering 7 (if he's not already starting that game at 6).Not by Hansen. I wonder why. Ardie is so clearly the better players. Who does Todd play for?
All Blacks coach Steve Hansen says Ardie Savea better suited to bench role for now
Not
-
@Tregaskis said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@ACT-Crusader Agreed. Ardie is not seen as a starter (yet) against Tier 1 nations, after they had a look at him starting in the home Boks test.
Dixon covering 7 (if he's not already starting that game at 6).Not by Hansen. I wonder why. Ardie is so clearly the better players. Who does Todd play for?
All Blacks coach Steve Hansen says Ardie Savea better suited to bench role for now
Not
-
look on the bright side winger - at least one of the saveas who doesn't deserve to be there is getting a run mate.
@reprobate said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
look on the bright side winger - at least one of the saveas who doesn't deserve to be there is getting a run mate.
That's a bit harsh, Ardie is pretty damn good in the back end of the game, off the bench. It's just he's proven he's not yet up to starting.
-
@akan004 said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Rancid-Schnitzel I don't think this team is any weaker than the 2015 RWC team. In some positions this team is considerable stronger imo. I think Barret has taken the running game of a 10 to a new level and surpasses Carter for mine. Woodcock was on his last legs and Moody is definitely an improvement. GOAT was past his prime and Cane has been his equal this year. ALB is arguably better than what Conrad was last year. Nonu is the only guy whom I can think of from last year who is well ahead of his counterpart in 2016. Add fresh players like Squire, Taylor and Ardie, and this team has arguably a stronger bench than last year as well.
Moody was there for the most important games as well so I reckon he's classified as part of the 2015 mob. Barrett has indeed been a revelation and I haven't felt this excited about a player since Cullen. But Carter had a better boot and better game management (man of the match in the RWC final). Thought GOAT was great last year and him and Cane kind of cancel each other out now. ALB has been great, but you'd still take the Nonu-Smith combo over Crotty-ALB any day.
Bench last year was Mealamu, Franks, Faumuina, Vito, Cane, TKB, BB and SBW. I reckon that's pretty tough to beat.
You also have to factor in that Savea has been below his best for most of the season and NMS has been out for the entire season.
It's obviously open for debate but I think man for man the 2015 side was better.
IMHO one thing that has been particular great about the team this year is TJP becoming a genuine test player. That is of massive significance going forward and I really hope it continues.
Man for man, the 2015 AB were possibly the better side but I think the 2016 side, as a team, are better.
Remember the RC defeat against Australia, the poor discipline in the RWC semi-final against the Boks and most of all, the game against Georgia, IMO the poorest display by any AB team in decades.
Man for man, this 2016 side is possibly not as good but it has been more dominant : can you remember a team winning the RC with such a margin, scoring so many tries in every game ? -
Man for man, the 2015 AB were possibly the better side but I think the 2016 side, as a team, are better.
Remember the RC defeat against Australia, the poor discipline in the RWC semi-final against the Boks and most of all, the game against Georgia, IMO the poorest display by any AB team in decades.
Man for man, this 2016 side is possibly not as good but it has been more dominant : can you remember a team winning the RC with such a margin, scoring so many tries in every game ?For me every WC all sides have a transition phase where old guys who have clung on go, fringe guys who thought they had a shot go etc.
So they lose experienced starters & depth. Like post 2007 we lost the experience of Hayman, but also the depth of Evans. The difference this year is the way the last 4 years of selection has meant the switch has been seamless - for the ABs. For everyone else its been the usual mess.
As well as we are playing - and we are playing superbly, Australia, Wales, Ireland, England & SA are all transitioning with varying degrees of success. While France are in a club led death spiral.
The cattle on the park for the ABs this yerar has been great, but far more so its the way the likes of Todd, Cane, Crotty, Barrett, TJP, Crockett etc have been used in the previous 4 years, its been a selectorial masterclass in building depth, confidence, continuity etc. And you can see it again with guys like ALB, Ardie, Moala etc all being carefully slotted into the AB machine to develop & peak in 3 years.
We have very few one season (let alone one test) All Blacks anymore. Compare that to say, Eddie Jones yanking his centre after 25 minutes v Aussie this year, and then yanking his 7 after 30 in the last test.
-
"Testing new ideas on the biggest stage – sometimes maybe some people might not think [now] is the right time but I think that's the time and that's the place where you see that if it really is something that can work in the future. We'll see how we go," Cheika said.
"Maybe it's not about if Bernard is a better option than Quade but more about the combination changing. I figured this was the right time."
Christ, he just exudes competence, doesn't he?
-
@reprobate said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Rancid-Schnitzel cane/savea/todd have won one lineout between them so far this tournament. pocock's in no way a well-rounded player, but if you have our locks, read and kaino, then 7 doesn't need to be a lineout option. this is kinda where my opinion differs - cost vs benefit - would the costs really effect us that much? we've got no shortage of ball runners either, particularly once the bench gets involved.
IIRC Retallick is used very sparingly at lineout time as well. It's a massive benefit having that extra lineout option even if he is rarely used.
I just don't see the upside here. The number of turnovers won with him vs the number won by the team as whole without him would be negligible. So you win maybe a couple more turnovers a game and sacrifice a lineout option and any attacking threat.
IMHO that's a really shit trade off.
@Rancid-Schnitzel I note commentators always rave on about BBBR's engine but Whitelock is just as fit and energetic. He doesn't stand out as much but I rate him very very highly.
-
@Rancid-Schnitzel I note commentators always rave on about BBBR's engine but Whitelock is just as fit and energetic. He doesn't stand out as much but I rate him very very highly.
@nostrildamus said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Rancid-Schnitzel I note commentators always rave on about BBBR's engine but Whitelock is just as fit and energetic. He doesn't stand out as much but I rate him very very highly.
Absolutely agree. Sam is not as prominent in the loose, but has a huge engine and is a massive contributor.
Made that key lineout steal in the QF as well. Critical.
That, and he's the modern skinny lock. At 115kg. FML.
-
@Bones you forgot hahahahaha
Big selector suppressing the canes players international ambitions.
-
@jegga said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Bones you forgot hahahahaha
Big selector suppressing the canes players international ambitions.
Its almost like... A CONSPIRACY!!!!
-
The Wallabies haven't won at Eden Park for 30 years and combined with such form poor, they are paying $10 to beat the All Blacks, who are at $1.03.
I tend to think that if things go to script then we'll win by 15-20 points - could blow out, but I suspect the Aussies are actually the best team we're going to play this year.
Playing the Argies, when Moody got yellow carded, we were on the back foot and under pressure. I'm wondering how much of a penalty would make this an even-stevens game and thinking a first half red card would certainly do it. If I were an Aussie I'd definitely want a piece of those $10 odds.
Meanwhile that quote comes from a stuff article about some guy who put $100K on the ABs to win all their games this year....at $1.50.
He's either rich enough not to worry or bought himself a fair amount of stress.
-
I agree Chris. Think this will be tougher than previousky and tougher than many are thinking.
The fact that they have some height in the loosies, some starch in the second row and a front row that isn't hopeless creates a different dynamic.
I'm less concerned about their backs. But I'm a terible analyst so they'll probably tear it up ...
Anyway, I'm picking an AB win. But they'll have to work.
-
I agree Chris. Think this will be tougher than previousky and tougher than many are thinking.
The fact that they have some height in the loosies, some starch in the second row and a front row that isn't hopeless creates a different dynamic.
I'm less concerned about their backs. But I'm a terible analyst so they'll probably tear it up ...
Anyway, I'm picking an AB win. But they'll have to work.
@booboo said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
But I'm a terible analyst so they'll probably tear it up
Anyway, I'm picking an AB win. But they'll have to work.The problem with picking scores in rugby is that you can get all sorts of different dynamics in a match depending on who gets a lucky break at the start and the way the game ebbs and flows. Plenty of scope to be made to look like a plonker!
The ABs could really run away with this if they get early points and the Aussies lose confidence in their systems, or it could be tight as, if the Aussies manage to get an early lead and the ABs start to see their streak being broken.
I'm not really sure what I think about those odds. On one hand it seems crazy that the Aussies are paying $10 in a two horse race - on the other hand, short of us getting multiple yellows or a red I can't see them winning. If we played the game 10 times (independent of each other) - I'd really expect us to win all of them, so the $10 odds are probably realistic - most likely they're not particularly generous.
I don't want any part of the $1.03 odds though. I guess there's people putting $100 on to make $3, but those odds seem a bit dubious.
