• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

[2014 EOYT] Scotland vs New Zealand

I think it's premature to say "dump Carter, bring back Cruden". From what I remember, Cruden isn't exactly Mr In-Form himself. And as a Crusaders fan I can tell you that Carter does take awhile to settle back in. I've previously thought "oh thats a shame, hes lost whatever he had" then a few weeks into regular game time he is back at his brilliant best. He just needs some continuity.

For me TJ's performance was bad. Like, Sione Luaki bad. Ellis and Weepu would have been proud of that slow ball, but I guess now he has had time to figure out what he needs to work on. if Aaron Smith gets injured in the World Cup, I'd be a little worried.

Personally I'd be tempted to reward Parsons and put him on the bench against Wales. Coles to start. Yes it was 'Scotland' but if one of our hookers gets injured next year then we need a 3rd choice who is not only good, but has some degree of experience in big matches.
 
In the scene of Scotland's try, since there was no close NZ defense, Seymour should have killed time in ingoal (such scene can be often seen in 7s).
 
I don't think Scotland were all that brilliant, the only reason they looked so good was because ABs were experimental and played like ****e.

Scotland played with more intensity I felt, they seemed the hungrier on the whole.

I think it's premature to say "dump Carter, bring back Cruden". From what I remember, Cruden isn't exactly Mr In-Form himself. And as a Crusaders fan I can tell you that Carter does take awhile to settle back in. I've previously thought "oh thats a shame, hes lost whatever he had" then a few weeks into regular game time he is back at his brilliant best. He just needs some continuity.

Personally I'd be tempted to reward Parsons and put him on the bench against Wales. Coles to start. Yes it was 'Scotland' but if one of our hookers gets injured next year then we need a 3rd choice who is not only good, but has some degree of experience in big matches.

Cruden is only out of form in his kicking, his running of the backline is 5x Carters based on the last 2 weeks. Carter hasn't played much and looks like he needs the confidence, but how much time do we give him given we are running out of games.

Parsons was interesting, delivered what you would expect from someone in his position, lineouts were not good but a reflection of his time in the team, didn't feel he was as busy around the field as he should have been.
 
Can I make this plea now that NZ'ers, can we give Scotland all the credit thats due from how they have played and not beliitle it with excuses like the ref or your team selection. Thanks

Who's belittling? Scotland played okay, but they only reason they got close was because this was very much an experimental side... credit where credit's due; they almost beat a very out of character ABs team.
 
Well done Scotland on running us close. Yes the All Blacks didn't play as cohesively as we would have liked, but credit is due to the Scots putting on some pressure.

I do feel the score could have been more comfortable if we didn't give an intercept away (no kidding) and DC's goal kicking was a bit more accurate in the early going. As for the result, I kinda predicted last night that they would give us a scare until the replacements came on. Looking at the bigger picture, it was always going to be messy. You've got a bunch of guys there who have never played together before, and the hit out will do them good. I think a few questions were answered. Romano looks like he should stay in the frame permanently, Parsons had a blinder for the time he was on and has quite possibly solidified himself as the 3rd choice hooker now (not just by default, but even if Harris was fit), yes Carter takes a long time these days to get back into his rhythm. The most disappointing and frustrating thing for me was TJ Perenara. The ball, even when cleanly presented, was far too slow. Way, way too slow. Everyone is entitled to a bad game, but yeah, that was poor.

The score is what it is. Both teams missed a lot of opportunities. For the most part, Scotland. Our problem was the recycle. Theirs was first-up tackles and knock ons.

I thought Parsons was poor at best. The lineout was a disaster when he was on the field, he offered little with ball in hand, and he and made a couple of errors too. He did force one turnover at the breakdown, but apart from that I thought he had a match to forget. At least he can tell his grandkids that he played one match for the AB's....

I agree regarding Perenara. I thought he had been showing some good signs in recent weeks, but his distribution was poor today. His service from his forward pack was far from ideal though....

How do you evaluate Scotland's performance? Can Scotland beat RSA to win the pool in the World Cup?

Poor-average.
No.

Overall I did not really enjoy that match. I didn't think either side played well. There were far too many unforced errors, and a lot of 'dumb' rugby. Scotland seemed to feel sorry for the AB's at one stage and were attempting to run everything out of their 22. While I admire their courage, a better side than the AB's were last night would have severely punished them for this. They didn't appear to have any real effective exit strategy at all - Laidlaw's box-kicking lacked any distance (and went well into touch).

Scotland's defense was very good, and they did have some good moments with ball in hand too. I feel that they too are a much better side than they showed this match.

Onto the AB's:

- The tight-five was poor overall. Apart from the first scrum the AB's had clear advantage at scrum-time though, which is something at least. The lineout was a disaster in the 1st half, but did improve in the 2nd once Coles came on. Moody and Faumuina weren't as prominent as they have been in recent weeks, and as I mentioned before I thought Parsons was poor. Thrush was one of the few AB's who had a strong match in my opinion. He had an impressive work-rate, disrupted a couple of Scotland's mauls, and was rewarded with a try. Bird had a few runs, but made too many handling errors.

- The loose-forwards were better, but not as dominant as they were last weekend. McCaw did some good work at the breakdown, but made a few errors in general play. Cane added his trademark physicality but was pretty quiet overall, while it was disappointing to see Vito go off injured after his outstanding individual try.

- As mentioned above I was disappointed by Perenara. Carter looked like someone who has played only a couple of games of rugby in the last year. Do people still think he should have started against England last weekend? He just looked completely out of touch - it was no coincidence that the backline functioned much better when Slade shifted to 10 as his handling and passing was just so much sharper. I'm certainly not saying Carter is past it or anything, I just think he needs to play a lot more rugby (a big ask for him given his injury concerns) before he is ready to start in the AB's 10 jersey...

- Was Crotty playing? He was uncharacteristically quiet. Barring one good run Fekitoa was well contained too.

- The outside backs all had limited space, but all played pretty solidly. Piutau looked physical, but wasn't quite at his best, Slade actually looked quite comfortable on the wing, while Ben Smith threatened but was well contained at fullback. Savea made a big impact when he came on with his power - it was great to see someone in the backline running straight and hard!
 
In the scene of Scotland's try, since there was no close NZ defense, Seymour should have killed time in ingoal (such scene can be often seen in 7s).

Why would anyone waste time 10min into a game
 
Good games from:
- Vito
- Piutau
- Slade (at 10)

Poor games from:
- Parsons
- Slade (at 14)
- Smith (given what we expect from him)
 
Let's not get ahead of ourselves and stay humble at least.. we're on a good run, let's see if we can beat Australia first.

Not getting ahead and by no means saying we automatically would win but after coming within a whisker to a better All Blacks last year and now all the squad knowing systems better and form being good I'd really fancy us to have a chance
 
Good games from:
- Vito
- Piutau
- Slade (at 10)

Poor games from:
- Parsons
- Slade (at 14)
- Smith (given what we expect from him)

I thought Slade was fine at 14. He made his tackles, caught the high ball well, and didn't make any mistakes (that I can recall?). He didn't offer much with ball in hand, but who in the AB's backline did?

Smith was well contained, but I wouldn't describe his performance as poor (but I would never describe his performance as poor ;) )
 
Last edited:
Not getting ahead and by no means saying we automatically would win but after coming within a whisker to a better All Blacks last year and now all the squad knowing systems better and form being good I'd really fancy us to have a chance

Ireland won't have much trouble with Wallabies at all IMO.
 
Guess I'm wrong on Parsons having a blinder then and might be jumping the gun. The lineout was poor, but thought his work around the field was pretty good. He swooped on to the ball and was pretty handy in those rucks. I'm sure I saw him do more around the park than just one turnover (in terms of other work). I hope he took away some goals to work on for the future because I reckon I saw some promise in certain areas. To be fair, I'm sure a debutant who didn't even expect to be there a few weeks ago can probably be forgiven for the odd bumble. Far more established players left a lot to be desired in parts.
 
Scotland were very, very poor. We were also very, very pool. We conceded 18 turnovers, they conceded 17. Scotland played a lot of football instead their own half and their scrum was absolutely monstered. I think Piutau and Thrush were the only starters to raise their stocks in that game.
 
Guess I'm wrong on Parsons having a blinder then and might be jumping the gun. The lineout was poor, but thought his work around the field was pretty good. He swooped on to the ball and was pretty handy in those rucks. I'm sure I saw him do more around the park than just one turnover (in terms of other work). I hope he took away some goals to work on for the future because I reckon I saw some promise in certain areas. To be fair, I'm sure a debutant who didn't even expect to be there a few weeks ago can probably be forgiven for the odd bumble. Far more established players left a lot to be desired in parts.

I thought Parsons lacked any physicality. His breakdown work was ok but on both attack and defence he was knocked around a fair bit. I don't think he did anything to suggest he should be picked again without showing a bit more in Super Rugby.

I thought Slade was fine at 14. He made his tackles, caught the high ball well, and didn't make any mistakes (that I can recall?). He didn't offer much with ball in hand, but who in the AB's backline did?

Smith was well contained, but I wouldn't describe his performance as poor (but I would never describe his performance as poor ;) )

Slade wasn't that bad really, no, I just thought he offered a lot more at 10. He did rush out on defence at one point on the wing which could've turned dicey if Scotland were a bit smarter.
 
Last edited:
I thought Parsons lacked any physicality. His breakdown work was ok but on both attack and defence he was knocked around a fair bit. I don't think he did anything to suggest he should be picked again without showing a bit more in Super Rugby.

That's the way I saw it too. He looked small. That's not so saw he is small - he's easily big enough for an international hooker - but I thought we was carrying the ball far too high, and was hence knocked back on several occasions. His match stats don't make impressive reading (only 1 completely tackle, and 1 missed tackle, in 46 minutes), but these stats will probably change once they reanalyze the match properly.

I forgot to mention in my initial analysis that I thought Messam played well off the bench.

EDIT: Updated stats suggest Parsons didn't make a single tackle in 46 minutes. hmmm...
 
Last edited:
back from the game, gutted we lost but atleast i got what i ask from scotland a fight for a chance and not get over 40 points, the all blacks i felt did test the scotland defence quite a bit and we were still very strong in defence and i have now been asking the question, what would happen if Laidlaw got his penalty to go into the lead with 10 minutes renaming, but overall, scotland have a bright future, atmosphere was class and the streaker ruined the game (if anyone saw it)
 
back from the game, gutted we lost but atleast i got what i ask from scotland a fight for a chance and not get over 40 points, the all blacks i felt did test the scotland defence quite a bit and we were still very strong in defence and i have now been asking the question, what would happen if Laidlaw got his penalty to go into the lead with 10 minutes renaming, but overall, scotland have a bright future, atmosphere was class and the streaker ruined the game (if anyone saw it)

It wasn't televised, but I heard the crowd go up for no apparent reason and actually thought to myself if that was a streaker. lol.
 
It wasn't televised, but I heard the crowd go up for no apparent reason and actually thought to myself if that was a streaker. lol.
if its was close to the end like 7 minutes to go then yes it was the streaker,
 

Latest posts

Top