[2020 RC/Tri Nations] Round 5: Argentina V New Zealand (28/11/2020)

[Kiwiwomble]

might as well kick this off

 

[FrenchFan]

Vamos Argentina !

 

[Kiwiwomble]

i have a feeling Fozzie will stick with a similar team to try and prove what he's been doing will work

 

[Al Bangor]

Vamos Argentina !

When it comes to International matches where my country isn't involved I always cheer for the underdog. I'm not positive, but I think Argentina is the underdog in this one so I hope they win. Go Pumas!

 

[Oliver Madden]

This is the big one!. I can't explain why but I want the ABs to win on Saturday. it might be something to do with Cheika. Imagine how smug he'll be if he helps plot the downfall of NZ again. I said on the Aus v Arg thread that the ABs would win by 25 points. It's only Monday and I'm getting twitchy about that prediction. The AB forwards really need to up their game this week, they've not dominated many games this year. Is Foster a gonner if NZ lose this?. Surely not but you never know. All Blacks by 8 points in a nervy game.

 

[Kiwiwomble]

This is the big one!. I can't explain why but I want the ABs to win on Saturday. it might be something to do with Cheika. Imagine how smug he'll be if he helps plot the downfall of NZ again. I said on the Aus v Arg thread that the ABs would win by 25 points. It's only Monday and I'm getting twitchy about that prediction. The AB forwards really need to up their game this week, they've not dominated many games this year. Is Foster a gonner if NZ lose this?. Surely not but you never know. All Blacks by 8 points in a nervy game.

no AB's coach has been fired that quick so big call, as recently as the 90's we've lost five in a season (98) and hart didn't get the sack.....has a decade of dominance changed things? maybe

if fozzie stick with a similar team...and it doesn't fire perfectly...he needs to start again

 

[Oliver Madden]

no AB's coach has been fired that quick so big call, as recently as the 90's we've lost five in a season (98) and hart didn't get the sack.....has a decade of dominance changed things? maybe

if fozzie stick with a similar team...and it doesn't fire perfectly...he needs to start again

I guess though that Hart had the form in 96 and 97 as his get out of jail card. There also wasn't social media back then with people ready to criticise every decision that you make. I think the fact there's even a debate about this is ridiculous but that's the world we live in unfortunately. Even if NZ lose on Saturday Foster should not be sacked. Only giving someone 6 tests would be ridiculous. He's at least got to be given until the end of 2021 when the two year contract is up. What people don't seem to realise is that the ABs were declining in the last two years under Hansen. The wins over SA and Ireland in the WC made people think that NZ were unbeatable again but all the frailties came back against England. Foster inherited a side who had been flatlining for some time. The ABs are in a transitional phase and the Kiwi public need to be realistic about where the team is at.

 

[Kiwiwomble]

I guess though that Hart had the form in 96 and 97 as his get out of jail card. There also wasn't social media back then with people ready to criticise every decision that you make. I think the fact there's even a debate about this is ridiculous but that's the world we live in unfortunately. Even if NZ lose on Saturday Foster should not be sacked. Only giving someone 6 tests would be ridiculous. He's at least got to be given until the end of 2021 when the two year contract is up. What people don't seem to realise is that the ABs were declining in the last two years under Hansen. The wins over SA and Ireland in the WC made people think that NZ were unbeatable again but all the frailties came back against England. Foster inherited a side who had been flatlining for some time. The ABs are in a transitional phase and the Kiwi public need to be realistic about where the team is at.

i feel like we're swapping arguments here...but

one of, if not his main selling point was continuity , he has been involved with the AB's and Junior AB's for 15 years.....so he doesn't get the same experimental time that someone completely new might get, he should already have a good feel for what the players can and cant do

 

[Alex Anghel]

. What people don't seem to realise is that the ABs were declining in the last two years under Hansen. The wins over SA and Ireland in the WC made people think that NZ were unbeatable again but all the frailties came back against England. Foster inherited a side who had been flatlining for some time. The ABs are in a transitional phase and the Kiwi public need to be realistic about where the team is at.

Most of us realize that the ABs were in decline in the last two years of Hansen's tenure, hence the appointment of Foster over Robertson should not have happened. Why go with this "succession/continuity" formula, since Foster was a big part of the problem? Why appoint someone that it's now obviously persisting with Hansen's errors, selection, and playing-wise? NZRU should have cleaned the house and start afresh, it's not enough to have the best pool of talents in the world if you do not appoint the right coach for nurturing and training that talent.

What I am really afraid is that the next year will be all the same (a couple of victories, some really good performances, and some really averaged ones), Foster's contract gets extended and all will implode when it matters the most, in a knockout game at the Word Cup. Just like it did last year in Yokohama.

 

[Felipe]

If I were Ledesma I would try to be as pragmatic as possible for this game against the All Blacks.
We beat the All Blacks a fortnight ago because of a great physical and mental freshness. Without it our defense system would never have performed at this level.
It is clear that Pumas cannot preserve this physical and mental freshness over time (who else could?). So my recommendation would be to play with some kind of B team.
My goal would be to make an honorable match but above all to give a lot of young players the opportunity to make a jump in their career by facing the All Blacks. I believe it would be bitterness in the short term but a huge investment for the 2022/2023 Pumas team.
Remember the rugby world has let the Jaguares down and Argentina no longer has a career boost for young talent.

 

[Umaga's Witness]

If I were Ledesma I would try to be as pragmatic as possible for this game against the All Blacks.
We beat the All Blacks a fortnight ago because of a great physical and mental freshness. Without it our defense system would never have performed at this level.
It is clear that Pumas cannot preserve this physical and mental freshness over time (who else could?). So my recommendation would be to play with some kind of B team.
My goal would be to make an honorable match but above all to give a lot of young players the opportunity to make a jump in their career by facing the All Blacks. I believe it would be bitterness in the short term but a huge investment for the 2022/2023 Pumas team.
Remember the rugby world has let the Jaguares down and Argentina no longer has a career boost for young talent.

An interesting argument but it's not going to happen. The pumas have a chance to win the trinations but that will be gone if the all blacks get a bonus point victory. I think the pumas will want to give themselves every chance to win the competition. Probably in hindsight they will look back and wish they did as you suggested, maybe not a b team exactly but giving half a dozen or so players a go.

this is the all blacks team I want to see for this game
Moody
Aumua
Laulala
Whitelock
Grace
A ione
Cane
Sotutu
Weber
Mckenzie
Clarke
Lienert brown
Ione
Jordan
Jordie Barrett

karl Taylor lomax tuipolotu savea Smith Mounga Laumape

 

[TheOvalBall]

All Blacks had a week rest. Will give them the win.

 

[Cruz_del_Sur]

Remember the rugby world has let the Jaguares down and Argentina no longer has a career boost for young talent.

Nah. They owe us nothing and that looks a lot like blame-shifting. And, as far as evidence goes, we reached two WC semis without that career boost and when we did have it, we couldn't even leave the group round.
UAR shot themselves in the foot when they screwed the likes of Diaz Bonilla. A LOT of the players stayed, sacrificing much higher salaries abroad because they were told that to play for the Pumas you had to play in UAR, Jaguares or another SR franchise. But when push came to shove, UAR broke their word. Sugarcoat it the way you want, but that is what they did. Diaz Bonilla (just as an example) showed up when most wrote him and the team off and filled in some pretty big shoes, diligently. Not a hero, but he exceeded expectations and went far and beyond what the overwhelming majority expected from him. It's not far stretched to argue his SR season was better than Sanchez's previous ones.
But, and here is the kicker (pun intended), when they had to select who was going to the world cup, they not only left him out but also called two people who played in Europe. I can see the case for Sanchez as he had played in Jags since day one, but Urdapilleta? **** no.

This has a tremendous impact and endless ramifications. Even if Jaguares were to remain in SR in some way, the incentives youngsters have to go abroad have grown tremendously. Say you are a coach in Arg and you have an up and coming talent. He comes for advice. Or someone like Cordero, who helps at his club when he is back in arg. What do you think they will tell him? "Stay, play for Jags, earn less, that's the way to go" or "Go away, make a fortune, your rugby career is short enough as it is and if you are good you'll get to play for the Pumas anyway. They'll backpedal on whatever they said and make a spot for you."
Dont even get me started on the exchange rate difference at the moment and how that will affect players' decisions.


Regarding the other issue, I see the point in the pragmatism argument. Field in our weaker (but very hungry) players, get a mega strong bench, field them 60 min. Losing without allowing them a bp would make sense. The problem is you have shown people the honey, now you've got to give them the pot. Beating them the first game and then going the second game with a lets-minimize-the-impact-of-defeat attitude would destroy what they stand for.

And from a strategic perspective, if we lose against NZ, the chances or winning the competition are slim to none as we would have to tear Aus a new one in the last game (due to point dif) and i don't see that happening. We can beat them, but not by the +/- 30 points we would need.
Our best and arguably only chance to get this is to grab the bull by the horns, take advantage of the pressure NZ has right now and go for broke. The clock will be our best ally.
High risk, high reward. You wanna beat the best? This is what it takes.

Probably in hindsight they will look back and wish they did as you suggested, maybe not a b team exactly but giving half a dozen or so players a go.

Not even. Say we field a B team, we get no injuries, no red cards, and lets also asume NZ doesnt get a bonus point. They beat us by 10. Ideal scenario for us, right? What would that mean, leading to round 6? It would mean we go there with a 0 point difference vs NZ's +36.
That means we would have to either
a) Beat Aus by 36 points
b) get a bonus point.

For the sake of the argument, lets assume b) is easier, which it is. Now, we have scored 1 try in 2 games. That try came from a play in which the ball bounced off the shin of a player and made two all-blacks bounce into each other leaving Sanchez with a bouncing ball in front of the posts. Point being, our defense has been phenomenal, but this team has not shown us a huge try-scoring capability which is what you need to get bonus points. And, let's not forget, during the game vs Aus, we spent 2,1% of the time in Aus's 22. Let me say that again: 2,1% of the time in Aus's 22. How on earth can you score tries with those numbers? Add that Pumas will have played 3 consecutive weeks, and that they would be facing a rested Australia.

Dont get me wrong, the strategy worked, at least so far, but we are now a bit cornered, and when you are you need to take chances.
We had several 1H outstanding performances over the years against NZ, World cup games included (we were winning in the WC game at Wembley!). We just ran out of gas. As counterintuitive as it sounds, i would take my chances with something like that. Sure, our depth is not that good, but pressure would be on our side.

/end rant.

 

[Umaga's Witness]

Nah. They owe us nothing and that looks a lot like blame-shifting. And, as far as evidence goes, we reached two WC semis without that career boost and when we did have it, we couldn't even leave the group round.
UAR shot themselves in the foot when they screwed the likes of Diaz Bonilla. A LOT of the players stayed, sacrificing much higher salaries abroad because they were told that to play for the Pumas you had to play in UAR, Jaguares or another SR franchise. But when push came to shove, UAR broke their word. Sugarcoat it the way you want, but that is what they did. Diaz Bonilla (just as an example) showed up when most wrote him and the team off and filled in some pretty big shoes, diligently. Not a hero, but he exceeded expectations and went far and beyond what the overwhelming majority expected from him. It's not far stretched to argue his SR season was better than Sanchez's previous ones.
But, and here is the kicker (pun intended), when they had to select who was going to the world cup, they not only left him out but also called two people who played in Europe. I can see the case for Sanchez as he had played in Jags since day one, but Urdapilleta? **** no.

This has a tremendous impact and endless ramifications. Even if Jaguares were to remain in SR in some way, the incentives youngsters have to go abroad have grown tremendously. Say you are a coach in Arg and you have an up and coming talent. He comes for advice. Or someone like Cordero, who helps at his club when he is back in arg. What do you think they will tell him? "Stay, play for Jags, earn less, that's the way to go" or "Go away, make a fortune, your rugby career is short enough as it is and if you are good you'll get to play for the Pumas anyway. They'll backpedal on whatever they said and make a spot for you."
Dont even get me started on the exchange rate difference at the moment and how that will affect players' decisions.


Regarding the other issue, I see the point in the pragmatism argument. Field in our weaker (but very hungry) players, get a mega strong bench, field them 60 min. Losing without allowing them a bp would make sense. The problem is you have shown people the honey, now you've got to give them the pot. Beating them the first game and then going the second game with a lets-minimize-the-impact-of-defeat attitude would destroy what they stand for.

And from a strategic perspective, if we lose against NZ, the chances or winning the competition are slim to none as we would have to tear Aus a new one in the last game (due to point dif) and i don't see that happening. We can beat them, but not by the +/- 30 points we would need.
Our best and arguably only chance to get this is to grab the bull by the horns, take advantage of the pressure NZ has right now and go for broke. The clock will be our best ally.
High risk, high reward. You wanna beat the best? This is what it takes.


Not even. Say we field a B team, we get no injuries, no red cards, and lets also asume NZ doesnt get a bonus point. They beat us by 10. Ideal scenario for us, right? What would that mean, leading to round 6? It would mean we go there with a 0 point difference vs NZ's +36.
That means we would have to either
a) Beat Aus by 36 points
b) get a bonus point.

For the sake of the argument, lets assume b) is easier, which it is. Now, we have scored 1 try in 2 games. That try came from a play in which the ball bounced off the shin of a player and made two all-blacks bounce into each other leaving Sanchez with a bouncing ball in front of the posts. Point being, our defense has been phenomenal, but this team has not shown us a huge try-scoring capability which is what you need to get bonus points. And, let's not forget, during the game vs Aus, we spent 2,1% of the time in Aus's 22. Let me say that again: 2,1% of the time in Aus's 22. How on earth can you score tries with those numbers? Add that Pumas will have played 3 consecutive weeks, and that they would be facing a rested Australia.

Dont get me wrong, the strategy worked, at least so far, but we are now a bit cornered, and when you are you need to take chances.
We had several 1H outstanding performances over the years against NZ, World cup games included (we were winning in the WC game at Wembley!). We just ran out of gas. As counterintuitive as it sounds, i would take my chances with something like that. Sure, our depth is not that good, but pressure would be on our side.

/end rant.

My hindsight remark was implying that if you end up losing both matches, which I think is likely, you might have wished you had fielded some less experienced players. I.e I am talking hindsight after both matches, I think you interpreted me as talking about hindsight after this one game.

 

[Gavin]

NZ are 19 point favourites with the bookies, so had to put money on Argentina with the handicap

 

[Kiwiwomble]

I would like to see a pretty strong team but one really focusing on "fixing" of the problems we've seen

havent sorted a full team just yet but i would have
6 Akira
7 Savea
8 Sotutu

Frizell on the bench as can cover lock too

right wing will either need to be Reiko or Jordan...you know, an actual wing, i watched a video where it showed how shallow RI runs...not a midfielders depth...a wingers depth, no intention of passing so when he has too he has no space

 

[Cruz_del_Sur]

I understood you correctly, i just dont care ending up 3rd as opposed to second. For me it's about winning or losing (this time).

 

[Kiwiwomble]

Argies should go all out, its a big opportunity

 

[mania]

Remember the rugby world has let the Jaguares down and Argentina no longer has a career boost for young talent.

yes well the RugbyWorld has been screwing over the pacific islands for much longer.
argentina have had their boost up. the rest is up to argentina. its time to do the same for Samoa, Fiji and Tonga

 

[Al Bangor]