The Silver Fern

Is Brad related to Colin?

Love to see JRK take Reece's AB squad spot.

@pakman said in Chiefs 2026:

@Yeetyaah said in Chiefs 2026:

Looks like Rameka Poihipi is leaving

Tremendous player.

Yeah Poihipi is pretty good too.

@delicatessen

Sounds like he'll fit right in

@Duluth said in Auckland MOTM v Waikato:

Segner & XTH. Funaki had some good touches particularly his kicking.. I’ll ignore the defence when he was forced onto the wing

That's what I went for.

Man that was frustrating to watch in the end. This is what being a Wallabies fan must feel like.

Has the makings of a good team though. Need a bit more discipline and better defence.

@nzzp said in Auckland v Waikato:

Segner's been busy. Played well.

Taele runs like silk, but needs to carry better into contact

Shocking pass from Taele at the end there.

Once an attacking maul goes backwards it should be use.

@pakman said in Auckland v Waikato:

I have Taele marked as FAB.

Hard to say this far out. He's 20. As a talent he's not close to what Zarn Sullivan was at 20 but Zarn hasn't progressed since 20 - probably due to a combination of covid, injury and other players in his way. NZ coaches have also become very conservative.

@Victor-Meldrew said in All Blacks 2025:

@taniwharugby said in All Blacks 2025:

@Victor-Meldrew also shows a lack of trust in BB, DMac and any other 10s running around NZ.

I really like Robertson's approach this year on new-ish players/positions - it's refreshing after last year's conservative but often chaotic approach.

Just don't get waht appears to be an obsession with Mo'unga

France B was a good opportunity to try Love, Reihana or JB at 10.

@antipodean said in Auckland v Waikato:

@brodean said in Auckland v Waikato:

I'd prefer to see Taele at 12 and Lam at 13.

I like it the other way as I don't believe Taele has the size to be effective at 12 now the game has moved on from a traditional second five-eight playmaker to a skilled bash merchant.

On the face of it I agree but Taele's gainline stats etc for the Blues where he played at 12 were really impressive. He seems to have the skills of an old school 2nd five but is very effective at getting over the advantage line.

I also think with JB at 12, Lams best chance of cracking the ABs is at 13. Also think that's his best position

@mariner4life said in All Blacks 2025:

Fickou was fucking good what are you talking about?

And the French use their midfield very differently to us

Didn't say it was bad. Just asked if it was anything special? Do you think Fickou produced special performances?

I'd expect Fainga'anuku to be producing special performances against special players to be able to walk back into the ABs.

Also if the French use midfielders differently how relevant is Fainga'anukus form playing for a French club?

@Kirwan said in All Blacks 2025:

@brodean said in All Blacks 2025:

Is it fair to say the French midfielders in the test series didn't produce anything special?

How relevant is top14 form for midfielders?

Well that does also need consider that the best players didn't travel.

@Kirwan said in All Blacks 2025:

@brodean said in All Blacks 2025:

Is it fair to say the French midfielders in the test series didn't produce anything special?

How relevant is top14 form for midfielders?

Well that does also need consider that the best players didn't travel.

Not the very best but the best available. Fickou has a ton of experience and had been their best for a long time.

And Gailleton is the new 'it' boy isn't he? He came off the bench in the ABs NH test last year.

Barrasi played and he's a top guy.

Seems Moefana and Danty was the only guys missing in the series out of the top guys.

Is it fair to say the French midfielders in the test series didn't produce anything special?

How relevant is top14 form for midfielders?

@barbarian said in Wallabies v Lions II:

Ultimately the ref needed to understand the occasion and what people wanted to see. Don't have a feel for the game, have a feel for the series.

With that in mind it should have been a Wallaby penalty, and a yellow card to Owen Farrell.

I agree that if it was a 50 50 call then it should have been a penalty to the Wallabies and a yellow card to Owen Farrell.

@hikastags said in All Blacks 2025:

Leicester didn't play the Lions

He played the Boks outside PUJ for the Barbarians

It was Laumape who played 13 outside Havili vs Lions

That's true. There wasn't anything compelling in his play against the Boks at 13.

You’re right. He was average. Though I don’t think a one-off game with a make-shift side put together on a weeks notice against the World Champs undoes all he did at Toulon.

Caleb Clarke just put together a whole season of turgid rugby yet people want him to start. Leicester was better than Clarke when he left.

Look I agree that little can be made out of an end of season Barbarians match. The match didn't advocate for or against Fainga'anuku and should be ignored.

Paid off for Codie Taylor.

@antipodean said in Rugby Law Updates:

A simple place to start simplifying the laws is when the ball is deemed to have gone out instead of variations of whether you started in field, caught the ball, it crossed the plane of touch etc. If there's a good reason for the variations in this aspect, I don't possess the capacity to understand it.

Agree with this. Simplify and stream line everything.

@antipodean said in Rugby Law Updates:

@brodean said in Rugby Law Updates:

@antipodean said in Rugby Law Updates:

@brodean said in Rugby Law Updates:

@antipodean said in Rugby Law Updates:

I'm not interested in making it more difficult for the lobotomised to apply laws. I see no reason someone needs to keep their head above or in line with their hips before a ruck is formed.

The solution to this problem is to penalise every player who goes off their feet. Every. Time.

If a jackler has their head below their hips as soon as it becomes a ruck then its a sanction by free kick. You want to keep the game flowing and making the laws consistent so it prevents sanctions.

Wrong. The player that makes it a ruck has to have their head in line with or above their hips. As does every subsequent player that joins the ruck.

That's not what the laws say. As soon as someone from the other team binds with a jackler it becomes a ruck and the jackler is part of the ruck. 'All stages' includes the beginning of the ruck.

Let me introduce you to dependent conditional logic and retroactive logic:

• 15.2: "A ruck is formed when at least one player from each team are in contact, on their feet and over the ball which is on the ground."
• 15.3: "Players involved in all stages of the ruck must have their heads and shoulders no lower than their hips."

Law 15.3 explicitly refers to "players involved in all stages of the ruck." Therefore, it is only enforceable once a ruck is formed as defined in 15.2. If there is no ruck formed (e.g. only one team has a player over the ball), Law 15.3 does not yet apply.

"If a ruck exists, then players must..."

No ruck → no condition.

Player A (e.g. Tizzano) is allowed to be in any posture legal under the tackle law (Law 14), such as having their head below hips as long as they are supporting their weight and on their feet.

Law 15.3 only governs ruck posture, not individual contests at the breakdown prior to a ruck.

This creates a retroactive legal obligation as Player A is now deemed to have always been involved in the ruck from its first moment, and must now be compliant with a rule that didn’t apply when they took their position.

Enforcement of this is clearly stupid and hence why referees don't do it because you're making it practically impossible for people to contest possession at the tackle without almost immediately being penalised once someone else creates a ruck.

Yes I understood that from the beginning and agree with all of that except your last bit and I'm what I am saying is the law should not be stupid so the refs are forced to ignore it.

Refs should not be in a position where they are forced to ignore stupid laws.

Laws should not be written in a way that they create schrodinger cat scenarios.

I disagree that its impossible to compete for the ball without having your head below your hips.

@antipodean said in Rugby Law Updates:

It's not a fucking ruck until Morgan enters. It's a tackle situation and a player may contest possession by having their head below their hips. Relevant picture from WR:

Yes I understand that and my suggestion is that the same laws apply in the tackle situation as they do in a ruck to make things consistent so coaches, players, and fans don't get confused about the distinction.

Players competing for or with the ball in any scenario should always be on their feet with their heads in line or above their hips - at kickoffs, lineout, at scrum, at tackle, at ruck, carrying, tackling, and at maul etc. Same rule everywhere.

The more exceptions there are the more complicated things become.

Tizzano was actually in line with his hips anyway. He only went below his hips on contact.