All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.
-
@MN5 said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
Well, the Walrus has "taken to" Twitter to express his outrage.....
As far as I can tell the headline should be, "Stephen Jones slams all referees except NZ's as incompetent" or even "Stephen Jones calls for NZ refs to referee All Blacks".
If all the other countries' referees, including his countryman Nigel Owens, are so in awe of the ABs and so weak witted they bow down to them and give them favourable calls, then this is surely the only solution.
Since our refs don't referee the ABs , we're seemingly the only country not at fault.
-
@Marty said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
Again, other than vague references to taking the little ball he had to the line, when and where was he supposed to have taken control? It was the first half, the abs had scored 3 tries despite losing the collisions and missing too many tackles. Id be delighted to know what past legends would have done any differently? Dan Carter played in a shitload of games when the abs were down at half time despite being arguably the better team. Was he then not taking control of the game? Not being direct enough?
I'm all for fair criticism and fill your boots about the goal kicking thing, but this "take control" things appears to be based more on preconceived notions than anything that actually occurred during the game.
Dan Carter? Yes, he was regularly criticised for not taking control of the game especially towards the end of his career.
But you're right, 'control/influence' is a hard thing to quantify because there are no direct stats for it. And not made any easier in this case because Cruden wasn't a perfect comparison when he came on. But if I was to have a crack, it would be this:
Barrett played about 50 mins during which time ABs had 33% possession. Cruden played about 30 mins during which ABs enjoyed 37% possession, so a little more (and slightly better quality) but not a huge difference.
Barrett's kick-run-pass-metres run stats were 1-7-1-0. Cruden's were 7-15-6-27.
My interpretation is that one player is demanding the ball in his hands and trying to make things happen and the other isn't. I'm sure your interpretation is different. But I think it's more informative than pointing at the number of tries that were scored while each player was on.
Just to be clear, I think Barrett is deservedly our starting first -five. I just don't think his general performance this time was particularly dominant. But we're obviously never going to agree so I'll just leave it there.
It's ridiculous to compare players who are on the park at such vastly different stages of the game. The comparison is absolutely meaningless. Sorry to knit pick, but BB was hooked after 44 minutes, so Cruder essentially played the entire 2nd half.
Of course it wasn't his greatest performance, but you've still yet to pinpoint any stage of the first half when him demanding the ball and taking on the line would have made any difference to the result. You weren't claiming anything about a dominant performance, you claimed that this game was evidence that he was unable to control a game when the forwards were getting munched. Obviously I find that criticism to be more than a little unfair.
-
honestly why does anyone give any sort of a shit about what cheika says, about what the herald prints, about what kafer or kearns have said, or the smh printed in the past?
i just don't get it. isn't it the actual rugby that we're meant to be interested in?
-
-
@NTA Good article on the TMO. I'd just be happy to change the review so that it wasn't dependent on a conversion attempt.
While there I made the error of looking at the match thread. Hahaha holy fuck some people are in desperate need of mental health intervention.
-
shame that Pfitzy guy doesnt post here, seems pretty reasonable, instead we are stuck with the likes of @NTA and irrational spinners like him!
-
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Crucial said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
"I'll give BB benefit of the doubt due to illness but my fear of him not taking control in this type of game came to fruition. I understand the argument that he didm't get much ball to use but that could also mean that he didn't impose himself and demand it (as DC would have done in the past."
Comical post. I reckon he should have charged into the rucks and mauls (maybe lineouts and scrums too) to get his hands on the ball. Just watching that first half I'm at a loss as to what he was supposed to have done to take control. Oh yeah, he should have demanded more ball and run to the line. Or something...
RS, I'm sure you understand the game better than that.
As a 10 it is part of your job description to take control because you are in a prime position to influence. I haven't watched the game again and maybe you are correct regarding the lack of opportunities to take control that he had. It may even be the way the ABs now play that they aren't putting that traditional 'generalship' on the 10. I just know that usually if you are in an arm wrestle game the 10 should be looking to demand the ball whenever available and start directing the way things are going. Cruden's execution may have been poor at times but he immediately started looking to put the ball into spaces and change things up.
I just expect to see more game direction from a 10.
Again, could you please explain when and how he was supposed to have done this. They had fark all ball when he was on the park and the game opened up a shit load more after he was gone. I can't see what Carter would have done differently (other than kick goals of course) unless his very presence would have magically given the abs more possession.
This criticism is absolutely ridiculous. The abs were attacking pretty well when they had the pill. The issues were in defence and in tight. How Barrett was supposed to be the man to take control and fix that is beyond me.
All of the above... when we had the ball we scored tries in the first half, we just didn't hold onto it well enough the thing was Australia weren't capable of making us pay for how casual or affected by the 18th test we were.
We got the wobbles - embracing it didn't work for us as well as embracing the William Webb Ellis cup did last two RWC's.We are massively blessed to have Beaudy and Ben Smith at the moment, Cruden did made some truly bizarre choices - and TBH you can't compare what happened in the first half v. the second when we were able to reset and play better.
I keep referring to our bar-talk, but almost universally we said wait till the 60th minute and literally thats when the Aussies when balls-up.
One more thing, Cruden hardly had an influence either except to hand the ball back over really. Ben Smith was responsible for at least two of the second half tries, if he'd been at right wing for Dagg, and Beaudy was at fullback, I'm willing to wager Beaudy would've created the same tries too, hence our outlook on his performance is different.Couple of things, if BB did have an ear infection, why not start Cruden, bring BB off the bench, does Hansen now think a 75% BB is a better option than a 100% Cruden?
You'd love to have an honest convo with the selectors without the PC BS to ask, what exactly is the pecking order now? apart from kicking, what the heck else do we need BB to do better?
time in the saddle will give him a bit more authority to demand that ball more than 9 times in a half.
I'd wager 2004-2005 DC couldn't just demand the ball, but had to grow into it, although there were a lot of younger guys growing & establishing themselves at the same time back then.
My point is you can't judge BB in his first year as the full-time AB #10 - with DC as the full-time AB #10 in his last years.Speaking of which, thats some weird similarities - BB first year at full-time #10, B&I Lions next year. DC first year #10, Lions following year. As long as BB doesn't cop an injury in our RWC Quarter Final in 2019, we're good.
-
@Rocky-Rockbottom said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@NTA said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
I wrote a piece on the TMO Protocol on GAGR. Head over there and have a read.
Not much use heading over there. Match thread quickly locked. Didnt even last the weekend. Same as the World Cup Final thread. Hurriedly shut down after the loss. Nothing to talk about here. Never happened. I sense a recurring pattern.
Haha oh yes that was a goody wasn't it? Isn't there another forum where you can say what you like without threads getting closed or getting banned? Although being banned doesn't appear to be forever anymore, eh?
-
@antipodean said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@NTA Good article on the TMO. I'd just be happy to change the review so that it wasn't dependent on a conversion attempt.
While there I made the error of looking at the match thread. Hahaha holy fuck some people are in desperate need of mental health intervention.
Well that is almost uncanny! An incident happens at the weekend that some aussies font like.. and an article comes out proposing to change how the TMO works. Who would have thunk
-
@Voltron said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Rocky-Rockbottom said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@NTA said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
I wrote a piece on the TMO Protocol on GAGR. Head over there and have a read.
Not much use heading over there. Match thread quickly locked. Didnt even last the weekend. Same as the World Cup Final thread. Hurriedly shut down after the loss. Nothing to talk about here. Never happened. I sense a recurring pattern.
Haha oh yes that was a goody wasn't it? Isn't there another forum where you can say what you like without threads getting closed or getting banned? Although being banned doesn't appear to be forever anymore, eh?
I remember how GAGR was supposedly the place that wasn't going to ban anyone who delete comments. Oh well I guess they grew up.
-
@reprobate it's not shit, it's correct and is the law. You're just being obtuse if you think DHP was just "running a valid support line". He clearly went out of his way to obstruct Savea, even NTA can see this.
-
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
Well that is almost uncanny! An incident happens at the weekend that some aussies font like.. and an article comes out proposing to change how the TMO works. Who would have thunk
Almost as uncanny as you showing up on a thread, and making your first contribution a completely unfunny attempt at wit, combined with a high probability of failure to:
- Read the article mentioned
- Understand its context
- Contest any point relating to it, using anything remotely resembling intelligence, or coherence
-
@Bones said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@reprobate it's not shit, it's correct and is the law.
Is a correct interpretation of the Law.
You could also easily use the Law to go back to the other two other incidents.
Or the ruck where Crotty was kind of on his feet but kind of not.
Or the scrum where Moody's hand touched the ground twice.
Or Kepu for binding too high on Moody's arm.That's the grey areas for you in Rugby Laws - referee interprets, decides material effect or intent etc.
-
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Marty said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
Again, other than vague references to taking the little ball he had to the line, when and where was he supposed to have taken control? It was the first half, the abs had scored 3 tries despite losing the collisions and missing too many tackles. Id be delighted to know what past legends would have done any differently? Dan Carter played in a shitload of games when the abs were down at half time despite being arguably the better team. Was he then not taking control of the game? Not being direct enough?
I'm all for fair criticism and fill your boots about the goal kicking thing, but this "take control" things appears to be based more on preconceived notions than anything that actually occurred during the game.
Dan Carter? Yes, he was regularly criticised for not taking control of the game especially towards the end of his career.
But you're right, 'control/influence' is a hard thing to quantify because there are no direct stats for it. And not made any easier in this case because Cruden wasn't a perfect comparison when he came on. But if I was to have a crack, it would be this:
Barrett played about 50 mins during which time ABs had 33% possession. Cruden played about 30 mins during which ABs enjoyed 37% possession, so a little more (and slightly better quality) but not a huge difference.
Barrett's kick-run-pass-metres run stats were 1-7-1-0. Cruden's were 7-15-6-27.
My interpretation is that one player is demanding the ball in his hands and trying to make things happen and the other isn't. I'm sure your interpretation is different. But I think it's more informative than pointing at the number of tries that were scored while each player was on.
Just to be clear, I think Barrett is deservedly our starting first -five. I just don't think his general performance this time was particularly dominant. But we're obviously never going to agree so I'll just leave it there.
It's ridiculous to compare players who are on the park at such vastly different stages of the game. The comparison is absolutely meaningless. Sorry to knit pick, but BB was hooked after 44 minutes, so Cruder essentially played the entire 2nd half.
Of course it wasn't his greatest performance, but you've still yet to pinpoint any stage of the first half when him demanding the ball and taking on the line would have made any difference to the result. You weren't claiming anything about a dominant performance, you claimed that this game was evidence that he was unable to control a game when the forwards were getting munched. Obviously I find that criticism to be more than a little unfair.
If you read back a few pages (sorry, but I am one of those NH timezone posters now) I went and watched BB for the first 20 minutes or so.
He almost seemed to avoid taking the ball as much as possible. He just wasn't in the game. You could hardly see the guy in shot except when a static kick was required and he would jog into frame from a distance away.
I admit that it doesn't necessarily back up any view that he didn't impose himself when we were under pressure (as we weren't really under pressure then) but it did explain the different stats between he and Cruden. I don't know if it was a deliberate thing, something due to him not being quite onto things with his ear infection or what. Could have been a combo. I decided not to take it as evidence to back up my (still standing) concern.
I have simply never seen BB take control of a game other than looking for (and getting) breaks with ball in hand. -
@Crucial said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
I have simply never seen BB take control of a game other than looking for (and getting) breaks with ball in hand.
One of the Bled games he had it on a string - from boot, from hand, attacking the line. He was great.
-
@Crucial said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Marty said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
Again, other than vague references to taking the little ball he had to the line, when and where was he supposed to have taken control? It was the first half, the abs had scored 3 tries despite losing the collisions and missing too many tackles. Id be delighted to know what past legends would have done any differently? Dan Carter played in a shitload of games when the abs were down at half time despite being arguably the better team. Was he then not taking control of the game? Not being direct enough?
I'm all for fair criticism and fill your boots about the goal kicking thing, but this "take control" things appears to be based more on preconceived notions than anything that actually occurred during the game.
Dan Carter? Yes, he was regularly criticised for not taking control of the game especially towards the end of his career.
But you're right, 'control/influence' is a hard thing to quantify because there are no direct stats for it. And not made any easier in this case because Cruden wasn't a perfect comparison when he came on. But if I was to have a crack, it would be this:
Barrett played about 50 mins during which time ABs had 33% possession. Cruden played about 30 mins during which ABs enjoyed 37% possession, so a little more (and slightly better quality) but not a huge difference.
Barrett's kick-run-pass-metres run stats were 1-7-1-0. Cruden's were 7-15-6-27.
My interpretation is that one player is demanding the ball in his hands and trying to make things happen and the other isn't. I'm sure your interpretation is different. But I think it's more informative than pointing at the number of tries that were scored while each player was on.
Just to be clear, I think Barrett is deservedly our starting first -five. I just don't think his general performance this time was particularly dominant. But we're obviously never going to agree so I'll just leave it there.
It's ridiculous to compare players who are on the park at such vastly different stages of the game. The comparison is absolutely meaningless. Sorry to knit pick, but BB was hooked after 44 minutes, so Cruder essentially played the entire 2nd half.
Of course it wasn't his greatest performance, but you've still yet to pinpoint any stage of the first half when him demanding the ball and taking on the line would have made any difference to the result. You weren't claiming anything about a dominant performance, you claimed that this game was evidence that he was unable to control a game when the forwards were getting munched. Obviously I find that criticism to be more than a little unfair.
If you read back a few pages (sorry, but I am one of those NH timezone posters now) I went and watched BB for the first 20 minutes or so.
He almost seemed to avoid taking the ball as much as possible. He just wasn't in the game. You could hardly see the guy in shot except when a static kick was required and he would jog into frame from a distance away.
I admit that it doesn't necessarily back up any view that he didn't impose himself when we were under pressure (as we weren't really under pressure then) but it did explain the different stats between he and Cruden. I don't know if it was a deliberate thing, something due to him not being quite onto things with his ear infection or what. Could have been a combo. I decided not to take it as evidence to back up my (still standing) concern.
I have simply never seen BB take control of a game other than looking for (and getting) breaks with ball in hand.It was most likely tactics and keeping the opposition guessing rather than BB losing the plot due to the immense Aus pressure.
You've clearly never seen BB play if you believe that last statement. Either that or your definition of take control is Dan Carter or Grant Fox from some RWC game that bore no resemblance to the game just played. Just on that, I find it weird that a guy who has only made the run-on side this year is having his performances critiqued in comparison with alltime great displays from guys who had been established in that position for far longer.
I realise that we NZ fans are hard task masters, but pointing at this game as evidence that BB can't control a game or folds under pressure is straight out nuts.
-
@NTA said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
Well that is almost uncanny! An incident happens at the weekend that some aussies font like.. and an article comes out proposing to change how the TMO works. Who would have thunk
Almost as uncanny as you showing up on a thread, and making your first contribution a completely unfunny attempt at wit, combined with a high probability of failure to:
- Read the article mentioned
- Understand its context
- Contest any point relating to it, using anything remotely resembling intelligence, or coherence
I understand the context.... it is just an Aussie bleating the day after a loss.
-
@Rancid-Schnitzel Which is why I have spelled out clearly that I am not taking this game as evidence of my concerns.
How are those reading comprehension classes going? -
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
I understand the context.... it is just an Aussie bleating the day after a loss
LOL clearly you fucking don't.
But then, you're not that smart, anyway.
