Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
Forums
Rugby Union
International Test Matches
All Blacks V Wallabies, Hong Kong, October 30th
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Shaggy" data-source="post: 350848" data-attributes="member: 43400"><p>That's right, he did - any fringe player (and some of the established ones too) are going to be under the microscope and be judged/picked in future based on their performance ala Cruden & Vito ... that match was won, but they aren't in the squad now, are they? </p><p></p><p>QUOTE=Invictus;350838] 1) Australia should've won this game, as well as the last. The scariest thing for New Zealanders is that Australia have missed so many of their kicks - they should've been up 20-0. In both this game and the last had both teams kicked all their goals Australia would've won considerably - come World Cup I'm sure Oz will be kicking goals well, so we need to beat them in other ways.</p></blockquote><p></p><p>Australia should have won this game and did because they converted enough of their opportunities into points ... the All Blacks should have, and did win the last match for the same reason ... to say they should have won by more because they couldn't convert their penalty shots, is like saying the All Blacks should have won because if they hadn't thrown a forward pass or knocked the ball on, they would have scored a try.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>i think both teams were a little rusty, but I don't think they were out there to have fun - the AB's wanted to keep their winning record against the Wallabies for psychological reasons, and for the Wallabies, it's a huge Monkey off their backs winning this match ... you can tell how seriously both nations were taking this match by the fact that they fielded their strongest teams possible.</p><p></p><p>The lack of structure is a testament to the pressure both sides put upon one another.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Yes, you could argue that the whole team is responsible for the loss for that matter (and they are), but if you come on as a replacement and your team is leading when you come on, you are a fringe player with others at home closely contesting your place in the squad, and you make a tactical error that leads to the opposition scoring the try and conversion that wins the game, you are going to be one of the first players under scrutiny don't you think.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Yes there were times when NZ were through the defense as well, only to knock on or forward pass ... well done Australia for finishing the opportunity when it was presented to them ... i would argue that if you kick the ball to the opposition giving him time to build up momentum, it's a lot harder to make the tackles, than if Donald had kicked it out, making the Wallabies try to breach a structured defense from the resulting line out ... i'm afraid the players missing the tackles in an attempt to clean up a poorly judged kick (so it's their fault) doesn't really wash with me. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I don't think people will care to be honest - I think AB supporters will be saying thank God we finally won the RWC again, or they'll be looking for something to blame for why we dipped out again ... any win or loss will only be beneficial for what the AB's take out of it, how the players fix their errors, or who is retained or discarded as a result.</p><p></p><p></p><p> </p><p>I know you have directed this comment at SmartCooky - I am not a Donald fan, as I believe there are better candidates left at home for the 1st five position, but having said that, I was 100% behind the ABs selected, and I really wanted the likes of Donald to succeed ... Donald's kick may not have been the sole reason for the loss, but in the crucial position of 1st five, you expect that player to be both sound tactically and in execution. Why shouldn't he,like all of the other players, be subject to scrutiny?</p><p>[/QUOTE]</p>
[QUOTE="Shaggy, post: 350848, member: 43400"] That's right, he did - any fringe player (and some of the established ones too) are going to be under the microscope and be judged/picked in future based on their performance ala Cruden & Vito ... that match was won, but they aren't in the squad now, are they? QUOTE=Invictus;350838] 1) Australia should've won this game, as well as the last. The scariest thing for New Zealanders is that Australia have missed so many of their kicks - they should've been up 20-0. In both this game and the last had both teams kicked all their goals Australia would've won considerably - come World Cup I'm sure Oz will be kicking goals well, so we need to beat them in other ways.[/QUOTE] Australia should have won this game and did because they converted enough of their opportunities into points ... the All Blacks should have, and did win the last match for the same reason ... to say they should have won by more because they couldn't convert their penalty shots, is like saying the All Blacks should have won because if they hadn't thrown a forward pass or knocked the ball on, they would have scored a try. i think both teams were a little rusty, but I don't think they were out there to have fun - the AB's wanted to keep their winning record against the Wallabies for psychological reasons, and for the Wallabies, it's a huge Monkey off their backs winning this match ... you can tell how seriously both nations were taking this match by the fact that they fielded their strongest teams possible. The lack of structure is a testament to the pressure both sides put upon one another. Yes, you could argue that the whole team is responsible for the loss for that matter (and they are), but if you come on as a replacement and your team is leading when you come on, you are a fringe player with others at home closely contesting your place in the squad, and you make a tactical error that leads to the opposition scoring the try and conversion that wins the game, you are going to be one of the first players under scrutiny don't you think. Yes there were times when NZ were through the defense as well, only to knock on or forward pass ... well done Australia for finishing the opportunity when it was presented to them ... i would argue that if you kick the ball to the opposition giving him time to build up momentum, it's a lot harder to make the tackles, than if Donald had kicked it out, making the Wallabies try to breach a structured defense from the resulting line out ... i'm afraid the players missing the tackles in an attempt to clean up a poorly judged kick (so it's their fault) doesn't really wash with me. I don't think people will care to be honest - I think AB supporters will be saying thank God we finally won the RWC again, or they'll be looking for something to blame for why we dipped out again ... any win or loss will only be beneficial for what the AB's take out of it, how the players fix their errors, or who is retained or discarded as a result. I know you have directed this comment at SmartCooky - I am not a Donald fan, as I believe there are better candidates left at home for the 1st five position, but having said that, I was 100% behind the ABs selected, and I really wanted the likes of Donald to succeed ... Donald's kick may not have been the sole reason for the loss, but in the crucial position of 1st five, you expect that player to be both sound tactically and in execution. Why shouldn't he,like all of the other players, be subject to scrutiny? [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rugby Union
International Test Matches
All Blacks V Wallabies, Hong Kong, October 30th
Top