All Blacks v Italy

[Bones]

@booboo said in v Italy:

@Bones said in v Italy:

Did Steven Kerr-Barlow lead the haka? Was the quickest in a long time.

Tawera's brother?

When they announced the team at the ground they flashed up Steven on the screen and the announcer called him that from then on, it was pretty funny.

[pukunui]

Just finished watching the full replay on youtube after catching highlights earlier.
Italy were pretty pathetic. Offered nothing, tried nothing. Just kicked the ball away all day. Don't see what you could hope to achieve by doing that. Hope the fullback drops it? or kicks it back and out on the full? Then they celebrate their one try from an intercept like they are minnows at the world cup, just happy to be playing the big guys and scoring a try is as good as winning. Pretty shit from a country that has been in the 6 Nations for a long time.

From the ABs perspective i thought Crockett, ALB, Luatua, Naholo and Dagg were all good. Great to see Ioane go well on debut as well. Could have a big future.

TKB, Dmac, Dixon and Cruden not so great. Cruden really needs to put away the shitty attacking kicks. One came off but the rest just killed momentum. He seems to have gone backwards since BB took the number 1 spot. Goal kicking was good though.
Dixon didn't really have the impact we expect from our 6. Thought he bombed a try in the first half by throwing a silly offload 5m out from the line with guys outside him. Also thought the draw and pass for the Luatua try would have been a better option rather than risking the offload in the tackle. They scored anyway so hard to criticise.
I think the comparison with Thompson is probably pretty fair. Decent player but not entirely suited to test rugby and may get overtaken by guys who fit better. Squire/Luatua etc. Still early days though.

Naholo had a decent game i thought. Made some good runs and didn't drop many, if any. IMO him and Savea are pretty similar in what they offer. Both good on attack and rarely get pushed back in a tackle but both prone to tits for hands. Naholo probably slightly in front on the form side at the moment even if it is just handling. Savea probably ahead for "good" games this season though (after his good games vs Australia). Im happy for them to keep rotating until one is clearly ahead.

Edit: I also noted that Luatua went into lock with BBBR late in the game. Scrum went pretty well with him there too.

[Siam]

I wanted nothing more than a win. Couldn't really give two stuffs how we got the win. Just wanted a win - same as it's always been. In a world where you can't take no shit for granted, a win after a loss is paramount in my mind

And what a marvellous win it was!

The young lads, the dirt trackers in old currency really stood up. They showed eagerness, (but not too much), they showed adventure and they sent a well timed message to the rest of the squad about standards and effort.

Fucken well done young'uns

Looking for holes and criticisms is a bit wanky I reckon, but each to their own.
This was the most inexperienced team for ages and with so many 100% starters not there, it was a rather unique test match for the men in black

The Eyeties had no attacking clue, but when have they ever?
They did front up on defence though and our breaks and tries were not from defenders falling off tackles but rather speed of hand, clever offloads and finding different ways to get over the gainline.
The Italians tackled better than the Aussies in Sydney for sure but were always in damage control, and their "just kick it back" tactics didn't help

Cane, Cruden, Crockett and Dagg demonstrated excellent composure and examples to others in their demeanour and leadership.

Barrett is a definite keeper - got his line out ball with ease and is very good around the park. Pat T pilfered heaps and was strong in contact.

Front row and scrum was solid as. Charlie and Wyatt were playing like fatting boom bah backs and Taylor is a fine 2nd hooker behind Dane.

Cane was smashing people and Dixon was not noticeable in the first half but certainly no passenger. Like Luatua he played fine and contributed a lot to the win.
If those stats posted by username above are accurate (no reason why they shouldn't be) then all those posters saying Luatua did more than Dixon are deluded, and proof that confirmation bias is alive and well on the fern.
Not saying either doesn't have deficiencies when compared to Read and Kaino but fuck they played well in a big win so shitting on either seems churlish to me.

TKB was the only one to feel a bit down afterwards. He's a fine 3rd halfback in the squad but was a little rattled and less composed last night.

The zing in the backline and off rucks returned with toilet boy and it was good to see him crisp and nippy again, although I think it'll take a wee while for his swagger to come back after all the shit he's been through/put on himself.

Cruden was good, took the ball to the line well and there's a few comments about his cross field kicks and chips which got me thinking:

1. they're obviously a team plan. No doubt examined, practiced and spoken about in detail all week - so it's not really cruden deciding to do them

2. on most occasions the cross field kicks (ALB did some too I think) were regathered and a gain over the advantage line and forward momentum was achieved. The alternative in those situations when the kicks took place is through the hands (Italians were rushing up well in a good formation) where the winger gets no space on the touchline and everyone (sic) wonders why he doesn't go all Jonah and beat 3 tacklers to score from 40 metres out. (insert finger circling mental smiley)

3. The kicks were all done in our half or on halfway so no prime attacking ball was really wasted

4. They're good tactics and, like all rugby plays rely on the execution which was fine. They are another way of turning a team around and sure you can't always score off them but they played a part in creating the momentum for tries to come a few phases after

Naholo was solid, ran hard but they always double teamed him. We ask a lot of our wingers when we shovel it straight out and for the most part he recycled the ball over the mainline after a planned battering ram injection about 2 out from a ruck

Dang's pass to Feki for the first try was training stuff executed perfectly. Dagg MUST pass immediately and Feki MUST be in the right place - for a move from a scrum it was just the fillip the team needed so early

Good wheels from Izzy these days too

ALB is class

Feki was much better - ran hard and didn't die with the ball

Little Damian is a brave wee fella and did some really good things. There's a lot to like there but we'll see if size is an impediment to staying in the job, particularly when it's apparent that BFA and Izzy are better All Black fullbacks

Like I said, I fucken enjoyed that performance. I feel no need to state the obvious and point out who the players *aren't * rather I'm pleased that they responded to a challenge and got us a very fine win against a team who didn't offer a lot but never gave up in defence either.

Randoms:
BT net feed commentator was muted after incessantly talking non stop during the first 2 minutes - cockhead. Who was he and the kiwi comments man BTW?

Parisse is a very good and skilful player, struts and ponces around though

Nigel seemed lazy around ruck time but played very good advantages and it was clear his intent was to keep it flowing

What to do about the constant stoppages for medical treatment and spraying magic aerosols? One time the hooker stayed down for ages (Nige thought fuck it and let the play continue around him and the medico). Play stopped for a scrum, still he stayed down. I thought "fuck maybe he broke the ankle they're spraying?" He still stayed down. eventually he got up and trotted over without even a fucking limp.
It's an annoying blight but I can't see a way out of it as some nancy will wail "legitimate injury!!"

I reckon Nige was thinking penalty try just before Pat's try. Good reffing to let it go

Weird camera angles on the BT feed but with the sound muffled it felt like sitting high up in the stand

Lovely to have it in the can at halftime and thereby give all the subs good gametime

Did I mention it was great that we got a win and the young fellas made a good statement to the 1st choices in their blazers for next week?

Overall a pleasantly surprising and fulfilling 80 mins of rugby watching at 1am for this ferner

[mooshld]

I'm not surprised by the result Italy have been on the slide for a few years now. But they really fired no shots at all in this game.

Going to be another tough 6 nations for them next year unless Conor has some tricks up his sleeve.

[Unco]

Not sure why everyone's whining about Cruden's kicking. I thought he overdid it a bit but they were still all well timed and placed, so at worst he pinned the Italians inside their 22. If you want to see a bad kick, look for that chip Dagg did in the first half. May as well have gift wrapped it for the Italians.

Decent game but got pretty messy in the last 20-30 minutes, so that was disappointing. Going through the team: Crockett and Charlie were fantastic, SBarrett continued to show he belonged, PatT had a much improved game, Cane still wasn't back to his best but led well and it was great to see Luatua back in there. For the backs, good game from TKB, loved that quick flat pass from the base of the ruck for Pat's try. I mentioned Cruden above but also thought he directed the backline really well and did a great job with his goal kicking. ALB is a star and his combo with Fekitoa seemed to work even better than the one with Crotty (though we'll have to wait and see how it fares against decent opposition). And Dagg has really come into his own on the right wing, I kinda feel like he's better than he ever was at fullback.

Biggest disappointment was definitely Dixon. The Thomson comparison sounds about right, good player but doesn't have the game for international rugby. Might be a good team man to have around but with our insane depth in the loosies, not really needed. DMac wasn't great either but I think he showed his potential at points, he just needs to adjust to that level of rugby, put on a bit more weight and cut down on the errors. I think he'll get there eventually.

Worst part of the game was the shitty camera work. Couldn't have been more obvious whoever was directing it was brought straight across from soccer, what with the entire game shown from way up high and close-ups relegated to replays. Sucked.

[pukunui]

@Siam said in v Italy:

Cruden was good, took the ball to the line well and there's a few comments about his cross field kicks and chips which got me thinking:
1) they're obviously a team plan. No doubt examined, practiced and spoken about in detail all week - so it's not really cruden deciding to do them

2. on most occasions the cross field kicks (ALB did some too I think) were regathered and a gain over the advantage line and forward momentum was achieved. The alternative in those situations when the kicks took place is through the hands (Italians were rushing up well in a good formation) where the winger gets no space on the touchline and everyone (sic) wonders why he doesn't go all Jonah and beat 3 tacklers to score from 40 metres out. (insert finger circling mental smiley)

3. The kicks were all done in our half or on halfway so no prime attacking ball was really wasted

4. They're good tactics and, like all rugby plays rely on the execution which was fine. They are another way of turning a team around and sure you can't always score off them but they played a part in creating the momentum for tries to come a few phases after

Really? Are you saying they are a team plan for only when Cruden is at 1st 5? Because Barrett isn't playing from that plan and Sopoaga hasn't been either. I don't mind the tactic when used sparingly against a rushing defence but it is something Cruden has been over doing for a while now. The offensive bomb into the Italian 22 was particularly shit IMO.

Agree on the camera work being bad. Zoomed way too far out for rugby. Happens every time we play in Italy.

[Siam]

@pukunui said in v Italy:

@Siam said in v Italy:

Cruden was good, took the ball to the line well and there's a few comments about his cross field kicks and chips which got me thinking:
1) they're obviously a team plan. No doubt examined, practiced and spoken about in detail all week - so it's not really cruden deciding to do them

2. on most occasions the cross field kicks (ALB did some too I think) were regathered and a gain over the advantage line and forward momentum was achieved. The alternative in those situations when the kicks took place is through the hands (Italians were rushing up well in a good formation) where the winger gets no space on the touchline and everyone (sic) wonders why he doesn't go all Jonah and beat 3 tacklers to score from 40 metres out. (insert finger circling mental smiley)

3. The kicks were all done in our half or on halfway so no prime attacking ball was really wasted

4. They're good tactics and, like all rugby plays rely on the execution which was fine. They are another way of turning a team around and sure you can't always score off them but they played a part in creating the momentum for tries to come a few phases after

Really? Are you saying they are a team plan for only when Cruden is at 1st 5?

I'm saying it was a team plan against Italy on November 12 2016 - yes.

That's the game we're talking about isn't it?

[taniwharugby]

I thought the camera work last week was poor too, but then I guess we are blessed with sky needing to be specialists in producing for rugby.

I noticed last week there was a camera man right by the Irish maul try, yet his footage was never looked at.

[Siam]

And fucken super slow mos of reaching into a ruck

Shitty coverage all round really

[pukunui]

@Siam said in v Italy:

@pukunui said in v Italy:

@Siam said in v Italy:

Cruden was good, took the ball to the line well and there's a few comments about his cross field kicks and chips which got me thinking:
1) they're obviously a team plan. No doubt examined, practiced and spoken about in detail all week - so it's not really cruden deciding to do them

2. on most occasions the cross field kicks (ALB did some too I think) were regathered and a gain over the advantage line and forward momentum was achieved. The alternative in those situations when the kicks took place is through the hands (Italians were rushing up well in a good formation) where the winger gets no space on the touchline and everyone (sic) wonders why he doesn't go all Jonah and beat 3 tacklers to score from 40 metres out. (insert finger circling mental smiley)

3. The kicks were all done in our half or on halfway so no prime attacking ball was really wasted

4. They're good tactics and, like all rugby plays rely on the execution which was fine. They are another way of turning a team around and sure you can't always score off them but they played a part in creating the momentum for tries to come a few phases after

Really? Are you saying they are a team plan for only when Cruden is at 1st 5?

I'm saying it was a team plan against Italy on November 12 2016 - yes.

That's the game we're talking about isn't it?

Was it a team plan for all the other games where Cruden has over played it too?
I am disputing your point that this was "obviously" a team tactic and not just a play that Cruden likes to use by pointing out he has over done it in other games recently where our other 1st 5s haven't. So yes talking about this game and others.

[Rapido]

@pukunui said in v Italy:

@Siam said in v Italy:

Cruden was good, took the ball to the line well and there's a few comments about his cross field kicks and chips which got me thinking:
1) they're obviously a team plan. No doubt examined, practiced and spoken about in detail all week - so it's not really cruden deciding to do them

2. on most occasions the cross field kicks (ALB did some too I think) were regathered and a gain over the advantage line and forward momentum was achieved. The alternative in those situations when the kicks took place is through the hands (Italians were rushing up well in a good formation) where the winger gets no space on the touchline and everyone (sic) wonders why he doesn't go all Jonah and beat 3 tacklers to score from 40 metres out. (insert finger circling mental smiley)

3. The kicks were all done in our half or on halfway so no prime attacking ball was really wasted

4. They're good tactics and, like all rugby plays rely on the execution which was fine. They are another way of turning a team around and sure you can't always score off them but they played a part in creating the momentum for tries to come a few phases after

Really? Are you saying they are a team plan for only when Cruden is at 1st 5? Because Barrett isn't playing from that plan and Sopoaga hasn't been either. I don't mind the tactic when used sparingly against a rushing defence but it is something Cruden has been over doing for a while now. The offensive bomb into the Italian 22 was particularly shit IMO.

Agree on the camera work being bad. Zoomed way too far out for rugby. Happens every time we play in Italy.

All our 10s put in plenty of grubbers, chips and cross kicks. Whether Carter, Barrett, Cruden.

[No Quarter]

Cruden has the most accurate chip kick of our 10s so I don't doubt that it is part of the plan when he is on the field, especially if the defense is rushing up cutting down our ability to go wide. Pretty easy to implement.

[pakman]

Seem to recall that Lima had at least one pearler of a kick pass.

[booboo]

@pukunui said in v Italy:

@Siam said in v Italy:

@pukunui said in v Italy:

@Siam said in v Italy:

Cruden was good, took the ball to the line well and there's a few comments about his cross field kicks and chips which got me thinking:
1) they're obviously a team plan. No doubt examined, practiced and spoken about in detail all week - so it's not really cruden deciding to do them

2. on most occasions the cross field kicks (ALB did some too I think) were regathered and a gain over the advantage line and forward momentum was achieved. The alternative in those situations when the kicks took place is through the hands (Italians were rushing up well in a good formation) where the winger gets no space on the touchline and everyone (sic) wonders why he doesn't go all Jonah and beat 3 tacklers to score from 40 metres out. (insert finger circling mental smiley)

3. The kicks were all done in our half or on halfway so no prime attacking ball was really wasted

4. They're good tactics and, like all rugby plays rely on the execution which was fine. They are another way of turning a team around and sure you can't always score off them but they played a part in creating the momentum for tries to come a few phases after

Really? Are you saying they are a team plan for only when Cruden is at 1st 5?

I'm saying it was a team plan against Italy on November 12 2016 - yes.

That's the game we're talking about isn't it?

Was it a team plan for all the other games where Cruden has over played it too?
I am disputing your point that this was "obviously" a team tactic and not just a play that Cruden likes to use by pointing out he has over done it in other games recently where our other 1st 5s haven't. So yes talking about this game and others.

Seriously. If he is doing it and he shouldn't his arse is dropped. ffs if you think he's doing it out of some sort of individual whim you ARE a moron.

[pukunui]

@booboo said in v Italy:

@pukunui said in v Italy:

@Siam said in v Italy:

@pukunui said in v Italy:

@Siam said in v Italy:

Cruden was good, took the ball to the line well and there's a few comments about his cross field kicks and chips which got me thinking:
1) they're obviously a team plan. No doubt examined, practiced and spoken about in detail all week - so it's not really cruden deciding to do them

2. on most occasions the cross field kicks (ALB did some too I think) were regathered and a gain over the advantage line and forward momentum was achieved. The alternative in those situations when the kicks took place is through the hands (Italians were rushing up well in a good formation) where the winger gets no space on the touchline and everyone (sic) wonders why he doesn't go all Jonah and beat 3 tacklers to score from 40 metres out. (insert finger circling mental smiley)

3. The kicks were all done in our half or on halfway so no prime attacking ball was really wasted

4. They're good tactics and, like all rugby plays rely on the execution which was fine. They are another way of turning a team around and sure you can't always score off them but they played a part in creating the momentum for tries to come a few phases after

Really? Are you saying they are a team plan for only when Cruden is at 1st 5?

I'm saying it was a team plan against Italy on November 12 2016 - yes.

That's the game we're talking about isn't it?

Was it a team plan for all the other games where Cruden has over played it too?
I am disputing your point that this was "obviously" a team tactic and not just a play that Cruden likes to use by pointing out he has over done it in other games recently where our other 1st 5s haven't. So yes talking about this game and others.

Seriously. If he is doing it and he shouldn't his arse is dropped. ffs if you think he's doing it out of some sort of individual whim you ARE a moron.

Oh fuck off with your moron rubbish. So you want me to believe EVERY play is part of an exact gameplan and there is NO individual input from the players to play what is infront of them. I just don't buy the "when Cruden is on our gameplan is to do lots of chip kicks and shitty bombs into the 22 but not so much when BB/Lima are on"

Not saying other don't kick or that there isn't a general plan to use attacking kicks when it's on. Just think it's rubbish to suggest Cruden isn't the one choosing when he does it and how often.

[nostrildamus]

@Rocky-Rockbottom I didn't think Naholo or Fekitoa played that badly at all.
Also interested in see posters' go for Luatua or Dixon. I thought both were mostly good, but they expect Dixon to be a superstar-not at this level. Also thought Luatua was seen more as a 8/6 and Dixon a 6/8 and that despite Luatua's height advantage Dixon is probably as good at lineout?
Interesting, neither are Kaino, but we still don't seem to have a suitable replacement for Read so maybe we don't have crazy depth in loosies.
6 and 7, yes.

[nostrildamus]

and I'd just like to add I thought Todd was a good player but not suitable for bench and I was wrong, he has been a great teamplayer.
It is almost tempting to have him/Savea on at 7 and move the hard tackling Cane to 6 or 8 but no doubt such heresy would melt down the forum.

[booboo]

@pukunui said in v Italy:

@booboo said in v Italy:

@pukunui said in v Italy:

@Siam said in v Italy:

@pukunui said in v Italy:

@Siam said in v Italy:

Cruden was good, took the ball to the line well and there's a few comments about his cross field kicks and chips which got me thinking:
1) they're obviously a team plan. No doubt examined, practiced and spoken about in detail all week - so it's not really cruden deciding to do them

2. on most occasions the cross field kicks (ALB did some too I think) were regathered and a gain over the advantage line and forward momentum was achieved. The alternative in those situations when the kicks took place is through the hands (Italians were rushing up well in a good formation) where the winger gets no space on the touchline and everyone (sic) wonders why he doesn't go all Jonah and beat 3 tacklers to score from 40 metres out. (insert finger circling mental smiley)

3. The kicks were all done in our half or on halfway so no prime attacking ball was really wasted

4. They're good tactics and, like all rugby plays rely on the execution which was fine. They are another way of turning a team around and sure you can't always score off them but they played a part in creating the momentum for tries to come a few phases after

Really? Are you saying they are a team plan for only when Cruden is at 1st 5?

I'm saying it was a team plan against Italy on November 12 2016 - yes.

That's the game we're talking about isn't it?

Was it a team plan for all the other games where Cruden has over played it too?
I am disputing your point that this was "obviously" a team tactic and not just a play that Cruden likes to use by pointing out he has over done it in other games recently where our other 1st 5s haven't. So yes talking about this game and others.

Seriously. If he is doing it and he shouldn't his arse is dropped. ffs if you think he's doing it out of some sort of individual whim you ARE a moron.

Oh fuck off with your moron rubbish. So you want me to believe EVERY play is part of an exact gameplan and there is NO individual input from the players to play what is infront of them. I just don't buy the "when Cruden is on our gameplan is to do lots of chip kicks and shitty bombs into the 22 but not so much when BB/Lima are on"

Not saying other don't kick or that there isn't a general plan to use attacking kicks when it's on. Just think it's rubbish to suggest Cruden isn't the one choosing when he does it and how often.

Apologies for "moron". A touch harsh.

However Cruden was NOT unilaterally deciding to employ those tactics. If he's deviating from the game plan he gets his arse kicked and dragged.

[reprobate]

@nostrildamus said in v Italy:

and I'd just like to add I thought Todd was a good player but not suitable for bench and I was wrong, he has been a great teamplayer.
It is almost tempting to have him/Savea on at 7 and move the hard tackling Cane to 6 or 8 but no doubt such heresy would melt down the forum.

i reckon todd has played the best game in black 7 this year, he's done well. big motor, best support runner of the 3 options.

[reprobate]

@nostrildamus said in v Italy:

@Rocky-Rockbottom I didn't think Naholo or Fekitoa played that badly at all.
Also interested in see posters' go for Luatua or Dixon. I thought both were mostly good, but they expect Dixon to be a superstar-not at this level. Also thought Luatua was seen more as a 8/6 and Dixon a 6/8 and that despite Luatua's height advantage Dixon is probably as good at lineout?
Interesting, neither are Kaino, but we still don't seem to have a suitable replacement for Read so maybe we don't have crazy depth in loosies.
6 and 7, yes.

hindsight and all that, but i hope serious thought was given to dixon playing in chicago. he is one of the best lineout forwards in the country and with our limitations at lock that could have helped things. highlanders use him more than anyone else, and far far more than squire. cane was also underdone, and dixon can play 7 so there were a few options there.