[2014 TRC] Argentina v Australia in Mendoza (04/10/2014)

[Big Ewis]

not the strongest Pumas squad..

Wallabies by 51.

They have lost all their games against ABs, but according to the rugby experts, the ABs 2012/2014 are the best team in professionalism and probably the best team in rugby's history, you can't fight against it. In the WC you can only face once against them, and there the pressure will fall on the ABs and it can happen same thing that happened in 1991, 1995, 1999, 2003 or 2007.

* oh, and 2011. You forgot 2011.

 

[InsaneAsylum]

TBH everyone hates on Aus and England. But it's a love-to-hate kind of 'hate' for the most part. At least that's the way I see it.

Some of the comments in the thread for us against the boks were pretty bad. Sure we tanked the last 10 minutes but rather than kick us while we're down, how about giving credit to the boks, as a lesser team wouldn't have capitalised on the Wallabies running out of steam.

It was only a few weeks ago everyone was saying the boks are crap, picking old players and playing with an out dated game plan. they've obviously shown us otherwise.

by the way, none of the comments i'm talking about were made by you stormer2010

 

[Darwin]

I feel some people may be either underestimating Argentina or overestimating Australia. Since the start of the Rugby Championship there have been 5 matches played between the two sides. Australia have won all of them, but 4/5 have been by 7 points or less (the sole exception was the blow out in Rosario last season). Traditionally Argentina are very tough to beat at home, and given they pushed Australia in Australia they may well fancy their chances of an upset. Obviously Argentina have a few injuries (especially to their loose-forwards), but I would suggest their injury list pales in comparison to Australia's....

I certainly don't believe Argentina are favourites, but I think they are more than capable of pulling off the upset. It really depends how they play. If they play expansively - as they did versus the AB's - they will play directly into the Wallabies hands, and they could well receive a 20 point hammering. However if they play more conservatively and attempt to turn it into a slower, forward oriented contest they could cause Australia a lot of problems.

 

[Jaguares]

It really depends how they play. If they play expansively - as they did versus the AB's - they will play directly into the Wallabies hands, and they could well receive a 20 point hammering. However if they play more conservatively and attempt to turn it into a slower, forward oriented contest they could cause Australia a lot of problems.

That's the problem, the new coach Hourcade loves running rugby and he said it's better to lose with running rugby than lose with conservative rugby. He thinks that if we attack, one day we will win but if we dedicate ourselves to defend, we'll never be able to win in this tournament. He says that when the team is dedicated to defending, we are overcome in the last 20 minutes (for example, against ABs in WC 2011), then don't make sense, according to his thinking.

So Wobs by 20...

 

[psychic duck]

I feel some people may be either underestimating Argentina or overestimating Australia. Since the start of the Rugby Championship there have been 5 matches played between the two sides. Australia have won all of them, but 4/5 have been by 7 points or less (the sole exception was the blow out in Rosario last season). Traditionally Argentina are very tough to beat at home, and given they pushed Australia in Australia they may well fancy their chances of an upset. Obviously Argentina have a few injuries (especially to their loose-forwards), but I would suggest their injury list pales in comparison to Australia's....

I certainly don't believe Argentina are favourites, but I think they are more than capable of pulling off the upset. It really depends how they play. If they play expansively - as they did versus the AB's - they will play directly into the Wallabies hands, and they could well receive a 20 point hammering. However if they play more conservatively and attempt to turn it into a slower, forward oriented contest they could cause Australia a lot of problems.

Disagree as Argentina don't have anything near the base of players of Rugby Championship standard as the other three have. Injuries have seen Argentina field a pack with several players with no pedigree at this level. You could count the amount of starts at this level their #3, #6 and #7 in particular have at this level on one hand. There's a huge drop off from the first choice back row of Matera, JML, JMFL. How much better would Australia's second choice back row be than that Pumas one?

 

[Darwin]

Disagree as Argentina don't have anything near the base of players of Rugby Championship standard as the other three have. Injuries have seen Argentina field a pack with several players with no pedigree at this level. You could count the amount of starts at this level their #3, #6 and #7 in particular have at this level on one hand. There's a huge drop off from the first choice back row of Matera, JML, JMFL. How much better would Australia's second choice back row be than that Pumas one?

I wasn't really referring to the effect injuries have on their respective sides, solely on the injury lists (and there is no doubt Australia's lists is longer / more substantial). Obviously as you say each injury Argentina has may effect them more greatly due to their lack of depth, but Australia's depth is not infinite either, and they have a lot more injuries (Fainga'a was the 7th / 8th ranked hooker in Australia at the start of the season?). My point is simply that Argentina shouldn't use injuries as an excuse. I see little point in trying to ascertain which side is the most greatly effected by injury.

 

[psychic duck]

I wasn't really referring to the effect injuries have on their respective sides, solely on the injury lists (and there is no doubt Australia's lists is longer / more substantial). Obviously as you say each injury Argentina has may effect them more greatly due to their lack of depth, but Australia's depth is not infinite either, and they have a lot more injuries (Fainga'a was the 7th / 8th ranked hooker in Australia at the start of the season?). My point is simply that Argentina shouldn't use injuries as an excuse. I see little point in trying to ascertaining which side is the most greatly effected by injury.

Argentina were lucky not to get much injury in the first couple years, a pack without Albacete, Lobbe or Leguizamon gives their pack a much more green look to it than usual.

 

[Jaguares]

Kurtley Beale DROPPED for the Argentina Test.

Yet Wallabies coach Ewen McKenzie claims the dumping is NOT related to his argument on a plane with a team official.

So...

 

[Darwin]

Right. I'm going to call it. Argentina by 5.

 

[Jaguares]

Wobs by 20...

 

[Tony Manx]

Right. I'm going to call it. Argentina by 5.

Already said that on the Boks v Ab thread

 

[LittleGuy]

Right. I'm going to call it. Argentina by 5.

I'm not going to make any predictions, I'm just pleased at another succesful rain dance session on my end.

 

[Draggs]

I love seeing train wreck anthems.

"In joyful nnnn let hnnnn sing, ausvance audtralia faaaaaaaair"

 

[LittleGuy]

I really like the Argentina national anthem, not as much as the Italian or Russian one, but it's up there in my faves.

 

[Tony Manx]

Anyone got anything other than the one eyed Aussie commentators?

 

[TRF_Cymro]

Hammering a commin ...

 

[Draggs]

Anyone got anything other than the one eyed Aussie commentators?

You can call me up and I'll give it a shot.

 

[Tony Manx]

Looks like it if they defend like that!! Maybe case of if you score 40 we will score 41?

 

[LittleGuy]

Yeah that was poor scramble/chase defence. Pumas have looked poor in the opening five minutes of pretty much every game in the 2014 TRC.

 

[Jaguares]

Kuridrani is on fire again!