QF - Canterbury v Auckland
-
@TJ said in QF - Canterbury v Auckland:
A sad indictment on NZ rugby that two of the biggest provinces in the country finished the game with a 12 playing at 10. Scary the lack of depth.
Maybe that was a selection decision as Harford played at 1st 5 the week before. Poihipi played 1st 5 a lot at 1st XV level, and even had a game there for the Chiefs this year (vs Force).
-
@Bovidae it probably was a selection decision, but that suggests there are no 10s they trust enough for a Quarterfinal. Poihipi was good and has filled in there before, but he isn't going to be a long term 10.
-
@Bovidae it probably was a selection decision, but that suggests there are no 10s they trust enough for a Quarterfinal. Poihipi was good and has filled in there before, but he isn't going to be a long term 10.
@TJ said in QF - Canterbury v Auckland:
it probably was a selection decision, but that suggests there are no 10s they trust enough for a Quarterfinal.
Plummer was injured. I would've started Evans in the midfield and had McKenzie on the bench (with Tele'a or XTH). McKenzie is good enough.
So it was just a selection risk they took (or perhaps McKenzie was injured too? There's been no injury list published)
-
Did Harford play against Auckland? Fegus Burke got an injury, Saders will definetly be after a new 10 next year.
They have signed Rivez Reihana,But they will need another First Five as cover for Burke by the looks of that injury.
Harford didn't play against Auckland they dropped him out of the 23 after he had a shocker against Waikato the previous week.
I doubt the Crusaders will sign him he has not had a great NPC when he has been given game time. -
@TJ said in QF - Canterbury v Auckland:
it probably was a selection decision, but that suggests there are no 10s they trust enough for a Quarterfinal.
Plummer was injured. I would've started Evans in the midfield and had McKenzie on the bench (with Tele'a or XTH). McKenzie is good enough.
So it was just a selection risk they took (or perhaps McKenzie was injured too? There's been no injury list published)
@Duluth it just strikes me as wild that the 3rd best 10 in Auckland and the 3rd best 10 in Canterbury (incl Mounga) are players who predominantly play midfield and most likely won't play 10 regularly at a higher level.
I have been thinking for a while that NZ is extremely poor in the development of 10s, would love to know if the talent just isn't coming through or if there just isn't trust in young 10s, they so often seem to get pushed to fullback to develop.
-
@Duluth it just strikes me as wild that the 3rd best 10 in Auckland and the 3rd best 10 in Canterbury (incl Mounga) are players who predominantly play midfield and most likely won't play 10 regularly at a higher level.
I have been thinking for a while that NZ is extremely poor in the development of 10s, would love to know if the talent just isn't coming through or if there just isn't trust in young 10s, they so often seem to get pushed to fullback to develop.
@TJ said in QF - Canterbury v Auckland:
@Duluth it just strikes me as wild that the 3rd best 10 in Auckland and the 3rd best 10 in Canterbury (incl Mounga) are players who predominantly play midfield and most likely won't play 10 regularly at a higher level.
I have been thinking for a while that NZ is extremely poor in the development of 10s, would love to know if the talent just isn't coming through or if there just isn't trust in young 10s, they so often seem to get pushed to fullback to develop.
I think this is a tad overreaction. It goes in cycles. We’ve had periods where there were more 1st 5s than you could poke a stick at. Then there have been lean periods.
Given how the game is these days and the use of bench players, versatility is more important so I don’t think the Canterbury selections were that risky really.
-
@TJ said in QF - Canterbury v Auckland:
it probably was a selection decision, but that suggests there are no 10s they trust enough for a Quarterfinal.
Plummer was injured. I would've started Evans in the midfield and had McKenzie on the bench (with Tele'a or XTH). McKenzie is good enough.
So it was just a selection risk they took (or perhaps McKenzie was injured too? There's been no injury list published)
@Duluth said in QF - Canterbury v Auckland:
Plummer was injured. I would've started Evans in the midfield and had McKenzie on the bench (with Tele'a or XTH). McKenzie is good enough.
Evans got exposed badly in midfield vs Waikato.
Would have been nice to see that standout Rovers 12 make the squad and get some game time though....
-
@Duluth said in QF - Canterbury v Auckland:
Plummer was injured. I would've started Evans in the midfield and had McKenzie on the bench (with Tele'a or XTH). McKenzie is good enough.
Evans got exposed badly in midfield vs Waikato.
Would have been nice to see that standout Rovers 12 make the squad and get some game time though....
He should've been called up when Plummer first got injured.
The contract situation is genuinely retarded though. The system does not work
We know Evans was on year three of a three year deal. Tele'a when he came back from Counties probably signed on for at least two years? The SR players were already contracted. So they had 4/5 midfielders before club rugby kicked off
Even sides without large number of SR players are forced to contract earlier and earlier
By my count ~28 players would've been contract before the club season kicked off. Then there was 4-5 spots that went to age group players (Clark, Spencer, XTH etc) leaving a dribble for players in club rugby
The Canterbury squad would be even worse. I think they would've had in the low 30's contracted from SR not club rugby
It's completely broken
-
He should've been called up when Plummer first got injured.
The contract situation is genuinely retarded though. The system does not work
We know Evans was on year three of a three year deal. Tele'a when he came back from Counties probably signed on for at least two years? The SR players were already contracted. So they had 4/5 midfielders before club rugby kicked off
Even sides without large number of SR players are forced to contract earlier and earlier
By my count ~28 players would've been contract before the club season kicked off. Then there was 4-5 spots that went to age group players (Clark, Spencer, XTH etc) leaving a dribble for players in club rugby
The Canterbury squad would be even worse. I think they would've had in the low 30's contracted from SR not club rugby
It's completely broken
@Duluth said in QF - Canterbury v Auckland:
The contract situation is genuinely retarded though. The system does not work
100%.
Then it feeds through to the next level. At best if a player has a standout NPC and is not already contracted to Super the best they can hope for is a Wider Training Squad spot unless they are super lucky and a franchise has a spot free in their position.
-
@Duluth said in QF - Canterbury v Auckland:
Plummer was injured. I would've started Evans in the midfield and had McKenzie on the bench (with Tele'a or XTH). McKenzie is good enough.
Evans got exposed badly in midfield vs Waikato.
Would have been nice to see that standout Rovers 12 make the squad and get some game time though....
@KiwiMurph Faletoi Peni’s agent is already in discussions with other Unions , i can tell you that is fact
The problem with Auckland , they have tried to manufacture midfield backs without settling on the next best one from club
The best midfield pairing in the Auckland club comp were Faletoi Peni and Amanaki Savieti from Manukau Rovers. -
@ACT-Crusader said in QF - Canterbury v Auckland:
@KiwiMurph said in QF - Canterbury v Auckland:
Thought Grace played pretty well
Ran the ball with a bit of purpose (and didn’t break)
I have a feeling he did break. Just prior to going off the medics were looking at his shoulder, then a few moments later he had a short run down the sideline and looked weird in the way he took the contact with his shoulder. He wasn't seen on camera again.
@Crazy-Horse said in QF - Canterbury v Auckland:
@ACT-Crusader said in QF - Canterbury v Auckland:
@KiwiMurph said in QF - Canterbury v Auckland:
Thought Grace played pretty well
Ran the ball with a bit of purpose (and didn’t break)
I have a feeling he did break. Just prior to going off the medics were looking at his shoulder, then a few moments later he had a short run down the sideline and looked weird in the way he took the contact with his shoulder. He wasn't seen on camera again.
Grace is fine he will play in the SF.
-
Arguably the worst high tackle to go unpunished was just last week, when Auckland wing AJ Lam knocked the snot out of Canterbury replacement Blair Murray in Christchurch.
Bourke was amongst those puzzled referee Nick Briant didn’t show Lam a card, despite Murray going on to score a try.
It turns out Lam, who scored a try shortly after knocking Murray’s block off, has since been cited after it was deemed the hit met the red card threshold, and Briant later called Bourke.
-
Arguably the worst high tackle to go unpunished was just last week, when Auckland wing AJ Lam knocked the snot out of Canterbury replacement Blair Murray in Christchurch.
Bourke was amongst those puzzled referee Nick Briant didn’t show Lam a card, despite Murray going on to score a try.
It turns out Lam, who scored a try shortly after knocking Murray’s block off, has since been cited after it was deemed the hit met the red card threshold, and Briant later called Bourke.
@Stargazer said in QF - Canterbury v Auckland:
Arguably the worst high tackle to go unpunished was just last week, when Auckland wing AJ Lam knocked the snot out of Canterbury replacement Blair Murray in Christchurch.
Bourke was amongst those puzzled referee Nick Briant didn’t show Lam a card, despite Murray going on to score a try.
It turns out Lam, who scored a try shortly after knocking Murray’s block off, has since been cited after it was deemed the hit met the red card threshold, and Briant later called Bourke.
A Ranfurly Shield rematch
Yes, the Log o’ Wood isn’t on the line, but Saturday night’s semifinal between Wellington and Hawke’s Bay is a beaut match-up nonetheless.
Logs
