• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

Twickenham stunner delivers powerful lesson

Gather App
I've watched a fair few Aviva matches, in the wet/mud they're shite but so are Super rugby matches in the wet. Given a dry day a fair few NH club sides can put on attacking exciting footy, just maybe not to the same extent as the Crusaders. It must be noted that the Crusaders could easily be the AB team with Kaino for Whitelock and Mealamu for Flynn. NH teams maybe aren't quite as skillful in the backs as SH teams a general rule, but to say their club rugby is boring is inaccurate to say the least.

Also I think the wet weather style helps the English in World Cups as games tend to tighten up a bit. Their experience at arm wrestle type games definitely help them, and I wouldn't be surprised to see them upset a few teams in the world cup because of it.
 
The problem with Bills is hes basing his opinion on one team, the Crusaders. I think its fair to say they're the best super rugby team especially in terms of talent. Could all SH teams play like Leinster, Clermont or Toulouse?

Theres no doubting the SH play a better brand of rugby and deserve to be the top ranking teams. Look at what Australia did to France. The French looked a bit bamboozled but on the other hand England beat Australia twice in a row by playing to their own strengths.
 
These generalizations between the hemispheres are pretty ignorant really, just look at the way SA play at international level especially in past year, it's hardly been exciting, attacking ball in hand rugby, even De Villiers states that's what works for them and that's what they will do at the WC. I think even England now plays a more expansive game than they do.

It's all down to the conditions, if your playing in slippery conditions most of the time you will adapt your game to suit, exactly how the Chiefs and Blues played when conditions dictated they couldn't spin the ball.
 
It is also very ignorant to pick South Africa's play in 2010 to prove your point. When the Stormers, Bulls and Sharks show in 2010 how exciting attacking rugby can be, that is a better view on things than Peter de Villiers who uses centres as wingers and wingers as scrum halfs ;)
 
I think it's a tad cheeky to claim that the Crusaders were playing a level of rugby that fairly depicts the level in which the S14 usually play at. Chiefs v Blues in wet conditions was hardly a stunner, and I think a majority of the Stormers games up untill this week, have been endless kicking and ruthless defense. There is no point in dealing with absolutes. At the moment, I can safely say in Wellington at least, we've had a great couple of months weather wise, so I can only imagine how good the weather is in Sydney or Cape Town.

The argument that the Crusaders were playing on a NH field is also ********. Twikenham is one of the greatest rugby grounds in the world, and the field is amazingly kept. The budget for looking after Twikenham would be somewhat greater than looking after the Stoop. The weather was unusually good.

Saying that, there is a much faster pace in the SH. I have quite a few Welsh friends, some whom I play rugby with, who notice that even in Premier levels of the clubs, the rugby is a lot faster than what they're used to, and the size of many of the Polynesian players is also different. From what I gather, there is a stronger emphasis on structured forward play as apposed to spreading the ball out wide as much, which makes a lot more sense when playing in conditions where it is often more wet, muddy and sometimes snowing. Also, keep in mind the seasons are far longer for professional players up North, than down South. In the Super 14, there are at least two players injured every week in the NZ conference alone. Imagine what it would be like if there were 32 weeks of club rugby? The pace just wouldn't be able to continue. The level of rugby picks up to a much higher standard when it comes to the H-Cup, as because each game is so vital, and the tops clubs from the NH are playing each other, the spectacle often becomes more enjoyable.

Articles like this are obviously inflamatory, so I think it's worth taking a while to note that it was written by one fairly ignorent man and not the collective opinions of an entire half of the earth.
 
I love SH rugby, all you guys said before it's all true (attacking style, approach to the match...)

But a "General wet-SH-match" got always smashed by "General wet-NH-match".
Most boring matches ever are the boring SH ones.

I remember a 6-6 tie (or 6-3) to Highlanders against Crusaders a couple of years ago, and I was asking God a gun to shot right to my knees, so I would have shout for pain without watching that horrible show!

And again the first 50 minutes of Bulls vs. Lions last saturday... (unfortunately when I switched off my PC they started to score tries :( )
 
TRF_nickdnz said:
I think it's a tad cheeky to claim that the Crusaders were playing a level of rugby that fairly depicts the level in which the S14 usually play at. Chiefs v Blues in wet conditions was hardly a stunner, and I think a majority of the Stormers games up untill this week, have been endless kicking and ruthless defense. There is no point in dealing with absolutes. At the moment, I can safely say in Wellington at least, we've had a great couple of months weather wise, so I can only imagine how good the weather is in Sydney or Cape Town.

The argument that the Crusaders were playing on a NH field is also ********. Twikenham is one of the greatest rugby grounds in the world, and the field is amazingly kept. The budget for looking after Twikenham would be somewhat greater than looking after the Stoop. The weather was unusually good.

Saying that, there is a much faster pace in the SH. I have quite a few Welsh friends, some whom I play rugby with, who notice that even in Premier levels of the clubs, the rugby is a lot faster than what they're used to, and the size of many of the Polynesian players is also different. From what I gather, there is a stronger emphasis on structured forward play as apposed to spreading the ball out wide as much, which makes a lot more sense when playing in conditions where it is often more wet, muddy and sometimes snowing. Also, keep in mind the seasons are far longer for professional players up North, than down South. In the Super 14, there are at least two players injured every week in the NZ conference alone. Imagine what it would be like if there were 32 weeks of club rugby? The pace just wouldn't be able to continue. The level of rugby picks up to a much higher standard when it comes to the H-Cup, as because each game is so vital, and the tops clubs from the NH are playing each other, the spectacle often becomes more enjoyable.

Articles like this are obviously inflamatory, so I think it's worth taking a while to note that it was written by one fairly ignorent man and not the collective opinions of an entire half of the earth.
Click to expand...

not this bloody nickdnz fella again its embarrassing how much you slag off people all the time your a downright nerd leave your fellow kiwis alone mate cos guess what there the only ones remotly close and the rest you please are further away than your thorts and einstiens
 
Ignoring the rather ignorant article in question...

I did a check up on the English media the day after the Saders/Sharks game, and everything i saw was praising the amazing game of rugby they had just witnessed. So full credit to the Sharks and Saders for giving the super15 a good name up north.

In reality, that was a 1 in 100 game. Perfect weather, two teams in prime form and an extremely well executed plan from both sides. The average super15 game is played in a similar fashion though, and if anything we needed such an amazing match to take place to even make an impression on the NH rugby community. Maybe they will take notice and look at adopting a few aspects of the SH game in the near future.

Likewise, during the WC the SH fans will have all eyes on many NH vs NH games.
 
dan the man nz said:
not this bloody nickdnz fella again its embarrassing how much you slag off people all the time your a downright nerd leave your fellow kiwis alone mate cos guess what there the only ones remotly close and the rest you please are further away than your thorts and einstiens
Click to expand...

Eh? All of nickdnz points were perfectly valid, what the hell are you on about?
 
By the looks of it, this Dan The Man character is either; drunk or 12 years old (maybe both). Either way i doubt he will have the ability to comprehend your query.
 
TRF_nickdnz said:
I think it's a tad cheeky to claim that the Crusaders were playing a level of rugby that fairly depicts the level in which the S14 usually play at. Chiefs v Blues in wet conditions was hardly a stunner, and I think a majority of the Stormers games up untill this week, have been endless kicking and ruthless defense. There is no point in dealing with absolutes. At the moment, I can safely say in Wellington at least, we've had a great couple of months weather wise, so I can only imagine how good the weather is in Sydney or Cape Town.

The argument that the Crusaders were playing on a NH field is also ********. Twikenham is one of the greatest rugby grounds in the world, and the field is amazingly kept. The budget for looking after Twikenham would be somewhat greater than looking after the Stoop. The weather was unusually good.

Saying that, there is a much faster pace in the SH. I have quite a few Welsh friends, some whom I play rugby with, who notice that even in Premier levels of the clubs, the rugby is a lot faster than what they're used to, and the size of many of the Polynesian players is also different. From what I gather, there is a stronger emphasis on structured forward play as apposed to spreading the ball out wide as much, which makes a lot more sense when playing in conditions where it is often more wet, muddy and sometimes snowing. Also, keep in mind the seasons are far longer for professional players up North, than down South. In the Super 14, there are at least two players injured every week in the NZ conference alone. Imagine what it would be like if there were 32 weeks of club rugby? The pace just wouldn't be able to continue. The level of rugby picks up to a much higher standard when it comes to the H-Cup, as because each game is so vital, and the tops clubs from the NH are playing each other, the spectacle often becomes more enjoyable.

Articles like this are obviously inflamatory, so I think it's worth taking a while to note that it was written by one fairly ignorent man and not the collective opinions of an entire half of the earth.
Click to expand...

I agree with what you say Nick ... in fact I said pretty much the same thing in less detail earlier :D

... also important to realise that "Dan the Man" and "Dan the Man NZ" are two different people
 
A weekend of nice weather in the Aviva Premiership:

Northampton 39 - 3 Wasps
Saracens 24 - 9 Newcastle
Bath 6 - 37 Leicester
Harlequins 53 - 15 Gloucester
London Irish 39 - 17 Exeter

Not exactly 6-3 is it?

Yes none of them were as good as the game at Twickenham, but it goes to show what difference the weather makes in this country.
 

Similar threads

T
Bryce Lawrence and the Culture That Sank New Zealand Rugby
Replies
1
Views
257
Don't Skip Leg Day
Don't Skip Leg Day
T
The collapse of rugby globally since the pandemic
Replies
1
Views
1K
tirawleybaron
T
Which Tyler
Proposed law changes - 2024 edition
Replies
9
Views
4K
AlRums
AlRums
C
Impact of no tests in 2020 for SA's RWC 2023 preparations.
Replies
6
Views
1K
SupportingOwnBodyWeight
SupportingOwnBodyWeight
T
Sustainable Rugby
Replies
16
Views
2K
tirawleybaron
T

Latest posts

Sponsored
UnlistMe
Back
Top