QF: Brumbies v Hurricanes
-
I'm a lot more confident going over to Canberra with Love and Cameron back in the 23. If we were going over there with Morgan running the cutter I'd say our season would be done.
The reason I selected Sullivan as my starter over Love was purely because of minutes played. Sullivan played more than Love on Saturday and he's also had a club game under his belt. I just don't think Love has played enough rugby to start even though tactically it would probably make more sense with his kicking game in those cold conditions over in Canberra.
@Canes4life If love was fit enough for a replacement vs the crusaders ... I would start him with Moorby on the wing. Give him game time to get match hardened for the semi and final if we get this far
Moorby plays with a running wing mindset. Love reads the game much better and either runs, passes or kicks as appropriate. He's a much better FB
-
@Number-10 is that a good thing? I haven’t watched him in a while.
-
@Number-10 is that a good thing? I haven’t watched him in a while.
@Canes4life Berry is all over the shop but then he's not alone on that front. All the QF refs have their issues. Pick your poison
-
Is it too much to ask to drop Blackwell? Just once please Holland.
I'd love an IWL & Sangster second row.
Canberra is a graveyard for us but this group should surely be up for it after exiting there twice in recent history as you say.
@foobaNZ said in QF: Brumbies v Hurricanes:
Is it too much to ask to drop Blackwell? Just once please Holland.
I'd love an IWL & Sangster second row.
Canberra is a graveyard for us but this group should surely be up for it after exiting there twice in recent history as you say.
He won't. As the coaches just have a blind spot and don't understand the importance of a good lineout. It's easy to blame Holland but Gibbes must also agree. We were just lucky last WE that Whitelock went at HT as our lineout was struggling up until then. Otherwise their selection are good. I don't agree 100% but have no WTF is going on reaction. But having a short lineout is a disaster against the top sides. They need a lot of luck to win. Like Whitelock going off. Or 3 tries in the last 15 vs the Blues.
Wellington selected Blackwell at lock. But the coaches were smart enough to select a tall lock with him (Bird 2.04) and another good lineout option at 6 (Delany 1.95) So the Wellington lineout was a strength not a weakness.
But the Canes ignore Bird. He should be selected to start if Blackwell is the other lock. I would also start Delany at 6 but only if Blackwell starts. My preference would be Bird and IWL to start. Flanders at 6 and Delany and Sangster as replacements so we would always have a strong lineout. Savea cover 7 and Flanders 8.
-
@foobaNZ said in QF: Brumbies v Hurricanes:
Is it too much to ask to drop Blackwell? Just once please Holland.
I'd love an IWL & Sangster second row.
Canberra is a graveyard for us but this group should surely be up for it after exiting there twice in recent history as you say.
He won't. As the coaches just have a blind spot and don't understand the importance of a good lineout. It's easy to blame Holland but Gibbes must also agree. We were just lucky last WE that Whitelock went at HT as our lineout was struggling up until then. Otherwise their selection are good. I don't agree 100% but have no WTF is going on reaction. But having a short lineout is a disaster against the top sides. They need a lot of luck to win. Like Whitelock going off. Or 3 tries in the last 15 vs the Blues.
Wellington selected Blackwell at lock. But the coaches were smart enough to select a tall lock with him (Bird 2.04) and another good lineout option at 6 (Delany 1.95) So the Wellington lineout was a strength not a weakness.
But the Canes ignore Bird. He should be selected to start if Blackwell is the other lock. I would also start Delany at 6 but only if Blackwell starts. My preference would be Bird and IWL to start. Flanders at 6 and Delany and Sangster as replacements so we would always have a strong lineout. Savea cover 7 and Flanders 8.
@Winger said in QF: Brumbies v Hurricanes:
@foobaNZ said in QF: Brumbies v Hurricanes:
Is it too much to ask to drop Blackwell? Just once please Holland.
I'd love an IWL & Sangster second row.
Canberra is a graveyard for us but this group should surely be up for it after exiting there twice in recent history as you say.
He won't. As the coaches just have a blind spot and don't understand the importance of a good lineout. It's easy to blame Holland but Gibbes must also agree. We were just lucky last WE that Whitelock went at HT as our lineout was struggling up until then. Otherwise their selection are good. I don't agree 100% but have no WTF is going on reaction. But having a short lineout is a disaster against the top sides. They need a lot of luck to win. Like Whitelock going off. Or 3 tries in the last 15 vs the Blues.
Wellington selected Blackwell at lock. But the coaches were smart enough to select a tall lock with him (Bird 2.04) and another good lineout option at 6 (Delany 1.95) So the Wellington lineout was a strength not a weakness.
But the Canes ignore Bird. He should be selected to start if Blackwell is the other lock. I would also start Delany at 6 but only if Blackwell starts. My preference would be Bird and IWL to start. Flanders at 6 and Delany and Sangster as replacements so we would always have a strong lineout. Savea cover 7 and Flanders 8.
I am sure the coaches realise the importance of lineout, I quite sure is us keyboard warriors do , they know a lot more than us. They also will no doubt way up general play, scrumming ability and everything else that is involved in a game of rugby. They just don't watch game on tv, but whole thing.
-
@Winger said in QF: Brumbies v Hurricanes:
@foobaNZ said in QF: Brumbies v Hurricanes:
Is it too much to ask to drop Blackwell? Just once please Holland.
I'd love an IWL & Sangster second row.
Canberra is a graveyard for us but this group should surely be up for it after exiting there twice in recent history as you say.
He won't. As the coaches just have a blind spot and don't understand the importance of a good lineout. It's easy to blame Holland but Gibbes must also agree. We were just lucky last WE that Whitelock went at HT as our lineout was struggling up until then. Otherwise their selection are good. I don't agree 100% but have no WTF is going on reaction. But having a short lineout is a disaster against the top sides. They need a lot of luck to win. Like Whitelock going off. Or 3 tries in the last 15 vs the Blues.
Wellington selected Blackwell at lock. But the coaches were smart enough to select a tall lock with him (Bird 2.04) and another good lineout option at 6 (Delany 1.95) So the Wellington lineout was a strength not a weakness.
But the Canes ignore Bird. He should be selected to start if Blackwell is the other lock. I would also start Delany at 6 but only if Blackwell starts. My preference would be Bird and IWL to start. Flanders at 6 and Delany and Sangster as replacements so we would always have a strong lineout. Savea cover 7 and Flanders 8.
I am sure the coaches realise the importance of lineout, I quite sure is us keyboard warriors do , they know a lot more than us. They also will no doubt way up general play, scrumming ability and everything else that is involved in a game of rugby. They just don't watch game on tv, but whole thing.
@Dan54 said in QF: Brumbies v Hurricanes:
@Winger said in QF: Brumbies v Hurricanes:
@foobaNZ said in QF: Brumbies v Hurricanes:
Is it too much to ask to drop Blackwell? Just once please Holland.
I'd love an IWL & Sangster second row.
Canberra is a graveyard for us but this group should surely be up for it after exiting there twice in recent history as you say.
He won't. As the coaches just have a blind spot and don't understand the importance of a good lineout. It's easy to blame Holland but Gibbes must also agree. We were just lucky last WE that Whitelock went at HT as our lineout was struggling up until then. Otherwise their selection are good. I don't agree 100% but have no WTF is going on reaction. But having a short lineout is a disaster against the top sides. They need a lot of luck to win. Like Whitelock going off. Or 3 tries in the last 15 vs the Blues.
Wellington selected Blackwell at lock. But the coaches were smart enough to select a tall lock with him (Bird 2.04) and another good lineout option at 6 (Delany 1.95) So the Wellington lineout was a strength not a weakness.
But the Canes ignore Bird. He should be selected to start if Blackwell is the other lock. I would also start Delany at 6 but only if Blackwell starts. My preference would be Bird and IWL to start. Flanders at 6 and Delany and Sangster as replacements so we would always have a strong lineout. Savea cover 7 and Flanders 8.
I am sure the coaches realise the importance of lineout, I quite sure is us keyboard warriors do , they know a lot more than us. They also will no doubt way up general play, scrumming ability and everything else that is involved in a game of rugby. They just don't watch game on tv, but whole thing.
I dunno. Our lineout has been dreadful.
Blackwell not all to blame but a bigger body would no doubt help in the air. We won't win anything with a 50/50 line out.
-
Looking at the starters in that game you could argue we have a stronger team than last year and they look to have a slightly weaker side. They no longer have Fainga'a and Banks, and we will likely have a healthy Flanders starting instead of Gibson, Cameron starting instead of Morgan, Lomax starting instead of Franks, and we don't have a flakey Rayasi on the wing.
We've got this.
-
@Duluth jeez that's a shocking record isn't it. Mind you they must have a pretty awful record in Wellington because isn't the head to head overall quite close?
-
Looking at the starters in that game you could argue we have a stronger team than last year and they look to have a slightly weaker side. They no longer have Fainga'a and Banks, and we will likely have a healthy Flanders starting instead of Gibson, Cameron starting instead of Morgan, Lomax starting instead of Franks, and we don't have a flakey Rayasi on the wing.
We've got this.
@Canes4life said in QF: Brumbies v Hurricanes:
Looking at the starters in that game you could argue we have a stronger team than last year and they look to have a slightly weaker side. They no longer have Fainga'a and Banks, and we will likely have a healthy Flanders starting instead of Gibson, Cameron starting instead of Morgan, Lomax starting instead of Franks, and we don't have a flakey Rayasi on the wing.
We've got this.
And let’s not forget you have Ardie Savea, the only current NZ player to make the greatest team of the professional era…
In da bag uce
-
Looking at the starters in that game you could argue we have a stronger team than last year and they look to have a slightly weaker side. They no longer have Fainga'a and Banks, and we will likely have a healthy Flanders starting instead of Gibson, Cameron starting instead of Morgan, Lomax starting instead of Franks, and we don't have a flakey Rayasi on the wing.
We've got this.
@Canes4life said in QF: Brumbies v Hurricanes:
Looking at the starters in that game you could argue we have a stronger team than last year and they look to have a slightly weaker side. They no longer have Fainga'a and Banks, and we will likely have a healthy Flanders starting instead of Gibson, Cameron starting instead of Morgan, Lomax starting instead of Franks, and we don't have a flakey Rayasi on the wing.
We've got this.
As long as Booth doesn't get 20 minutes...
-
@Canes4life said in QF: Brumbies v Hurricanes:
Looking at the starters in that game you could argue we have a stronger team than last year and they look to have a slightly weaker side. They no longer have Fainga'a and Banks, and we will likely have a healthy Flanders starting instead of Gibson, Cameron starting instead of Morgan, Lomax starting instead of Franks, and we don't have a flakey Rayasi on the wing.
We've got this.
And let’s not forget you have Ardie Savea, the only current NZ player to make the greatest team of the professional era…
In da bag uce
@ACT-Crusader said in QF: Brumbies v Hurricanes:
And let’s not forget you have Ardie Savea, the only current NZ player to make the greatest team of the professional era…
In da bag uce
Only if he plays at 6
-
@Canes4life said in QF: Brumbies v Hurricanes:
Looking at the starters in that game you could argue we have a stronger team than last year and they look to have a slightly weaker side. They no longer have Fainga'a and Banks, and we will likely have a healthy Flanders starting instead of Gibson, Cameron starting instead of Morgan, Lomax starting instead of Franks, and we don't have a flakey Rayasi on the wing.
We've got this.
And let’s not forget you have Ardie Savea, the only current NZ player to make the greatest team of the professional era…
In da bag uce
@ACT-Crusader said in QF: Brumbies v Hurricanes:
@Canes4life said in QF: Brumbies v Hurricanes:
Looking at the starters in that game you could argue we have a stronger team than last year and they look to have a slightly weaker side. They no longer have Fainga'a and Banks, and we will likely have a healthy Flanders starting instead of Gibson, Cameron starting instead of Morgan, Lomax starting instead of Franks, and we don't have a flakey Rayasi on the wing.
We've got this.
And let’s not forget you have Ardie Savea, the only current NZ player to make the greatest team of the professional era…
Sure, as an impact utility. Collins, McCaw & Read start for me.
-
https://www.hurricanes.co.nz/news/article/hurricanes-named-for-quarter-final-clash-in-canberra
1 Xavier Numia
2 Dane Coles
3 Tyrel Lomax (50th Hurricanes Game)
4 James Blackwell
5 Caleb Delany
6 Devan Flanders
7 Ardie Savea (Captain)
8 Brayden Iose
9 Cam Roigard
10 Brett Cameron
11 Kini Naholo
12 Jordie Barrett
13 Billy Proctor
14 Daniel Sinkinson
15 Josh MoorbyReplacements
16 Asafo Aumua
17 Tevita Mafileo
18 Owen Franks
19 Isaia Walker-Leawere
20 Du’Plessis Kirifi
21 Jamie Booth
22 Ruben Love
23 Bailyn Sullivan
