All Blacks v France I
-
@Canes4life said in All Blacks v France I:
If people think Blackadder is a solution just go and watch the first game of Super Rugby this year, Kirifi completely runs over him. That probably sealed his fate IMO.
Certain players have had plenty of time in the jersey to make a statement and they haven’t taken their chance. It’s now time for these new guys to have a real crack at cementing their spots. Maybe instead of writing players off after one test, let’s give them a real chance instead of making changes every second game. To me that’s half the problem, we need some sort of consistency in selection.
Clarke ran over him in the SF
-
One tactical change the All Blacks may make is to bring Tavatavanawai into the matchday 23, purely because he can cover the wing to a better level than the other midfielders.
I'd argue that DMac coming on and Jordan sliding to the wing changed the way we would have played to a significant degree. If Jordan is your fullback, then ideally he shouldn't really be moving to the wing unless there is an injury IMO. I think it is preferable that unless Jordan gets injured, that when DMac comes on, he replaces Barrett.
A spine of Roigard, Barrett & DMac is too far in the direction of risk-taking and needs to be balanced with a safer pair of hands (Jordan).
-
@reprobate said in All Blacks v France I:
@Duluth said in All Blacks v France I:
@reprobate said in All Blacks v France I:
Maybe they are more likely, but that doesn't really change things - you still get that lineout if you take 10 phases under advantage
Burning the advantage would be criminal though. 10 phases gets into a subjective ref call. Or, another example is a bad cleanout (foul play) and you lose everything. That is a risk in the current game.
I just object to the idea that everything is stupid and that teams don't actually look at these numbers. Getting to the preferred situation immediately is a tactical call that will be thought about
I'm sure they look at it, but isn't it pretty obvious that some other teams do press the advantage? Presumably they've come to a different conclusion, so it must be debatable at least.
Do we know the stats on where on the field do teams elect to take certain options? Not stating anything with confidence, just exploring possible reasons.
-
Re Tavatavanawai.
I thought he was a chance at EOYT last year (think I said so ... have no proof) because of his robust tackle busting running. He wasn't the turnover guru he became this year.
I don't think he was picked for his t/os. He was picked for his physicality. If they pick him I reckon it will be as a power runner, not an extra openside.
-
@brodean said in All Blacks v France I:
Jordan takes plenty of risks. That's why he had the most turnovers conceded in Super Rugby this year.
Having said that I would prefer to see Jordan at fullback over Dmac.
As we know, stats don’t always tell the full story. I’d say generally speaking Jordan is less likely to run across the field, and is less likely to try a chip and chase than both BB and DMac.
-
@frugby said in All Blacks v France I:
is less likely to try a chip and chase than both BB and DMac.
I wouldn't be so sure - some more promising signs this year, but I wouldn't have included DMac there (think it'd be a struggle to find anyone in the world that chips more than BB, I'm pretty sure Faatonu Fili is retired).
-
@brodean said in All Blacks v France I:
Well Tavatavanawai did win more turnovers than Kirifi this SRP season but then again the Highlanders were probably defending more than the Canes
I get the point you're making, but I'd rather select the person whose job it is to play openside than a winger/ centre trying to do that role.
-
@booboo said in All Blacks v France I:
Re Tavatavanawai.
I thought he was a chance at EOYT last year (think I said so ... have no proof) because of his robust tackle busting running. He wasn't the turnover guru he became this year.
I don't think he was picked for his t/os. He was picked for his physicality. If they pick him I reckon it will be as a power runner, not an extra openside.
I reckon they have. All of the better teams have at least one backline player that puts extra pressure on when it hits the deck. We’ve had our fair share over the years too. His low centre of gravity is a great asset and he can get in under the cleaners hits.
-
I have a bit more hope for game 2. I don't think we knew at all what to expect in the first match and we now know that the French team can tactically kick and expose gaps ruthlessly.
They are far too good of a team for us to try and score off every possession, so I anticipate we'll bring a much more controlled game plan where by we try to execute the basics much better and reign in all the grubbers, chips and hospital passes.
One can only hope.
-
@Mr-Fish said in All Blacks v France I:
Good to see that Holland has instantly transformed into a Fern favourite.
I'm looking forward to seeing him grow, amazing how upset people are getting simply because I suggested he was underwhelming. Will dip out of this debate, clearly something I'm missing!
Mate in no way was I upset, just (same as you) giving my opinion of what I saw. I have no probs at all with you being underwhelmed, but I not sure he suddenly became a Fern favourite. I have sung his praises for a couple of years (but I am a nerd who watches young players etc). Plus I think a few Ferners who haven't seen him are posters who more watch their own teams a bit more, and a tight forward is not usually someone you notice in highlight packages. It is in no way suggesting(well from me personally) suggesting you shouldn't have a different opinion mate, but please give us the same right mate, none of us is definitely right or wrong just giving opinions.
-
@antipodean said in All Blacks v France I:
@brodean said in All Blacks v France I:
Well Tavatavanawai did win more turnovers than Kirifi this SRP season but then again the Highlanders were probably defending more than the Canes
I get the point you're making, but I'd rather select the person whose job it is to play openside than a winger/ centre trying to do that role.
Breakdown turnovers won out wide are actually more likely to result in a try if the team is good at counter-attacking because the defence is usually has more misalignment.
-
@brodean said in All Blacks v France I:
@antipodean said in All Blacks v France I:
@brodean said in All Blacks v France I:
Well Tavatavanawai did win more turnovers than Kirifi this SRP season but then again the Highlanders were probably defending more than the Canes
I get the point you're making, but I'd rather select the person whose job it is to play openside than a winger/ centre trying to do that role.
Breakdown turnovers won out wide are actually more likely to result in a try if the team is good at counter-attacking because the defence is usually has more misalignment.
Let's accept that statement as true for argument's sake, and the underlying premise that "out wide" means backs, you've just taken out a back to attack with.
It also means that it has to be a clear turnover, not a penalised offence.
But if all of that is true, then it obviously means you should select a backline of turnover specialists...
-
@Dan54 said in All Blacks v France I:
@Mr-Fish said in All Blacks v France I:
Good to see that Holland has instantly transformed into a Fern favourite.
I'm looking forward to seeing him grow, amazing how upset people are getting simply because I suggested he was underwhelming. Will dip out of this debate, clearly something I'm missing!
Mate in no way was I upset, just (same as you) giving my opinion of what I saw. I have no probs at all with you being underwhelmed, but I not sure he suddenly became a Fern favourite. I have sung his praises for a couple of years (but I am a nerd who watches young players etc). Plus I think a few Ferners who haven't seen him are posters who more watch their own teams a bit more, and a tight forward is not usually someone you notice in highlight packages. It is in no way suggesting(well from me personally) suggesting you shouldn't have a different opinion mate, but please give us the same right mate, none of us is definitely right or wrong just giving opinions.
I think it's been fairly obvious since he was 18 or 19 that he would be a 50+ cap All Black minimum.
He's always been a much bigger body than Darry and Lord with the extra weight.
Maybe he had to carry a bit more this game because Newell and De Groot were starting?
Might be better to start Tosi or Norris to have another close in carrier in the tight five? Though I guess Tuipulotu might be starting if the captain is injured?
-
@antipodean said in All Blacks v France I:
@brodean said in All Blacks v France I:
@antipodean said in All Blacks v France I:
@brodean said in All Blacks v France I:
Well Tavatavanawai did win more turnovers than Kirifi this SRP season but then again the Highlanders were probably defending more than the Canes
I get the point you're making, but I'd rather select the person whose job it is to play openside than a winger/ centre trying to do that role.
Breakdown turnovers won out wide are actually more likely to result in a try if the team is good at counter-attacking because the defence is usually has more misalignment.
Let's accept that statement as true for argument's sake, and the underlying premise that "out wide" means backs, you've just taken out a back to attack with.
It also means that it has to be a clear turnover, not a penalised offence.
But if all of that is true, then it obviously means you should select a backline of turnover specialists...
Elephant in the room. Defensive box kicks provide the opposition with turnover ball (50/50 on a good day), many times out wide, in your own half, and with defensive lines in disarray. They are consistently done by the ABs, puts them under pressure, and often leads to an opposition score. They seem not to be concerned about that kind of turnover ball and want to make the game exciting.
-
@Old-Samurai-Jack said in All Blacks v France I:
@antipodean said in All Blacks v France I:
@brodean said in All Blacks v France I:
@antipodean said in All Blacks v France I:
@brodean said in All Blacks v France I:
Well Tavatavanawai did win more turnovers than Kirifi this SRP season but then again the Highlanders were probably defending more than the Canes
I get the point you're making, but I'd rather select the person whose job it is to play openside than a winger/ centre trying to do that role.
Breakdown turnovers won out wide are actually more likely to result in a try if the team is good at counter-attacking because the defence is usually has more misalignment.
Let's accept that statement as true for argument's sake, and the underlying premise that "out wide" means backs, you've just taken out a back to attack with.
It also means that it has to be a clear turnover, not a penalised offence.
But if all of that is true, then it obviously means you should select a backline of turnover specialists...
Elephant in the room. Defensive box kicks provide the opposition with turnover ball (50/50 on a good day), many times out wide, in your own half, and with defensive lines in disarray. They are consistently done by the ABs, puts them under pressure, and often leads to an opposition score. They seem not to be concerned about that kind of turnover ball and want to make the game exciting.
The defensive line is more prepared for constestables. It's expected they will lose the ball some times. Losing the ball by a breakdown steal is more of a surprise.
Last year for example the Blues won the most ruck turnovers by backs.
-
@brodean said in All Blacks v France I:
@Old-Samurai-Jack said in All Blacks v France I:
@antipodean said in All Blacks v France I:
@brodean said in All Blacks v France I:
@antipodean said in All Blacks v France I:
@brodean said in All Blacks v France I:
Well Tavatavanawai did win more turnovers than Kirifi this SRP season but then again the Highlanders were probably defending more than the Canes
I get the point you're making, but I'd rather select the person whose job it is to play openside than a winger/ centre trying to do that role.
Breakdown turnovers won out wide are actually more likely to result in a try if the team is good at counter-attacking because the defence is usually has more misalignment.
Let's accept that statement as true for argument's sake, and the underlying premise that "out wide" means backs, you've just taken out a back to attack with.
It also means that it has to be a clear turnover, not a penalised offence.
But if all of that is true, then it obviously means you should select a backline of turnover specialists...
Elephant in the room. Defensive box kicks provide the opposition with turnover ball (50/50 on a good day), many times out wide, in your own half, and with defensive lines in disarray. They are consistently done by the ABs, puts them under pressure, and often leads to an opposition score. They seem not to be concerned about that kind of turnover ball and want to make the game exciting.
The defensive line is more prepared for constestables. It's expected they will lose the ball some times. Losing the ball by a breakdown steal is more of a surprise.
Last year for example the Blues won the most ruck turnovers by backs.
and the defensive cross-kick? Rieko didn't look very prepared for that one...
-
@reprobate said in All Blacks v France I:
@brodean said in All Blacks v France I:
@Old-Samurai-Jack said in All Blacks v France I:
@antipodean said in All Blacks v France I:
@brodean said in All Blacks v France I:
@antipodean said in All Blacks v France I:
@brodean said in All Blacks v France I:
Well Tavatavanawai did win more turnovers than Kirifi this SRP season but then again the Highlanders were probably defending more than the Canes
I get the point you're making, but I'd rather select the person whose job it is to play openside than a winger/ centre trying to do that role.
Breakdown turnovers won out wide are actually more likely to result in a try if the team is good at counter-attacking because the defence is usually has more misalignment.
Let's accept that statement as true for argument's sake, and the underlying premise that "out wide" means backs, you've just taken out a back to attack with.
It also means that it has to be a clear turnover, not a penalised offence.
But if all of that is true, then it obviously means you should select a backline of turnover specialists...
Elephant in the room. Defensive box kicks provide the opposition with turnover ball (50/50 on a good day), many times out wide, in your own half, and with defensive lines in disarray. They are consistently done by the ABs, puts them under pressure, and often leads to an opposition score. They seem not to be concerned about that kind of turnover ball and want to make the game exciting.
The defensive line is more prepared for constestables. It's expected they will lose the ball some times. Losing the ball by a breakdown steal is more of a surprise.
Last year for example the Blues won the most ruck turnovers by backs.
and the defensive cross-kick? Rieko didn't look very prepared for that one...
It seems to me that we have no clear plan when it comes to our kicking game. Many times it seems like the only player who knows a kick is coming, and where it's going, is the kicker themselves. Our box kicks are almost never contested, and it feels like the coaches have given BB, DMac and anyone else licence to chance their arm from anywhere. Hence the low percentage chip and grubber kicks
-
@reprobate said in All Blacks v France I:
@brodean said in All Blacks v France I:
@Old-Samurai-Jack said in All Blacks v France I:
@antipodean said in All Blacks v France I:
@brodean said in All Blacks v France I:
@antipodean said in All Blacks v France I:
@brodean said in All Blacks v France I:
Well Tavatavanawai did win more turnovers than Kirifi this SRP season but then again the Highlanders were probably defending more than the Canes
I get the point you're making, but I'd rather select the person whose job it is to play openside than a winger/ centre trying to do that role.
Breakdown turnovers won out wide are actually more likely to result in a try if the team is good at counter-attacking because the defence is usually has more misalignment.
Let's accept that statement as true for argument's sake, and the underlying premise that "out wide" means backs, you've just taken out a back to attack with.
It also means that it has to be a clear turnover, not a penalised offence.
But if all of that is true, then it obviously means you should select a backline of turnover specialists...
Elephant in the room. Defensive box kicks provide the opposition with turnover ball (50/50 on a good day), many times out wide, in your own half, and with defensive lines in disarray. They are consistently done by the ABs, puts them under pressure, and often leads to an opposition score. They seem not to be concerned about that kind of turnover ball and want to make the game exciting.
The defensive line is more prepared for constestables. It's expected they will lose the ball some times. Losing the ball by a breakdown steal is more of a surprise.
Last year for example the Blues won the most ruck turnovers by backs.
and the defensive cross-kick? Rieko didn't look very prepared for that one...
Given that he hasn't started on the wing in quite a few years it's no surprise. Kick receive or chase was never a strong suit of Rieko's anyway.
