Yeah ummm your missing the point or being obtuse.
TBF he has a point NZ have a few times looked poor (relatively) against a minnow team in a World Cup, but against the bigger European sides they up there game tenfold (French excluded).
Yeah ummm your missing the point or being obtuse.
The problem NZ have is usual ones that worry us 6 nations times if they can put away the opportunities against Georgia how will they against a unit like Ireland? When they'll have less chances.
Yeah ummm your missing the point or being obtuse.
sure no problem, against lesser side you will get more chances to score than you do against top tier opposition. When you butcher a lot of chances against a tier 2 side like Georgia you start to worry about your finishing against top sides. We being the English will worry about us butchering chances against Scotland and Italy as when we play Wales, France or Ireland we need to make sure we take them when they come up.Sorry - can you explain this post?
Can someone explain to me how the 4uck a bloke that plays 50 mins in a team that loses by 33 points gets Man of the Match?
I'm sorry but that is sentimental bull5hit
Because NZ played like crap.
Sure NZ thrashed them but who put there hands up for them?
It's the Sergio Parisse argument as I think of it. The best player doesn't always win. If a LH prop scrummages both his opposite numbers off the pitch an plys all 80 minutes he's been outstanding regardless of which side of e scoreline he was on.Because he was the best player on the pitch?
Not sure that he was, mind, but i've never liked how MOTM only seems to go to the winners even if there was a better player on the losing side (with commentators saying "X would've got it if he weren't on the losing side")
Can someone explain to me how the 4uck a bloke that plays 50 mins in a team that loses by 33 points gets Man of the Match?
I'm sorry but that is sentimental bull5hit
Oh BooHoo.