RWC: All Blacks - Canada (02-10-2011, 15:30)

[ranger]

Well thats it. Duties have to be shared. Carter is world class, he makes players inside and outside him look awesome. Cowan is looks crap when not playing along side Carter. NZ will continue to play an exciting brand of rugby and if things dont look good they will keep it tight with the forwards. The key is to know when to change tact.

He manages to get selected on performances without Carter in superrugby.. and he is one of the best tactical kickers round in response to one of your previous comments..

 

[CDN_Rugby]

I thought OUR Man Smith had a really good game excpet for one brutally missed tackle whcih resulted in an AB's try. I think he really surprised the Canadian rugby public with a fantastic RWC.

Overall he was pretty good, but I think its safe to say his tackling technique was poor against the AB's, as was Fairhurst's too. They need to get a lot lower otherwise big bruisers like Kaino will continue to bat their arm tackles away.

Oddly, I thought Monro's play suffered as the tournament went on too. Fantastic against France and Tonga, but left something to be desired against Japan (yeah he scored that crucial try and penalty, but other than that his general play was poor and his kicking could have cost us the match). Not a great showing against NZ either with a few handing errors and a brutal offside call.

As far as I'm concerned, here's how I rate Canada's play

Buydens- 7/10. Good in the scrum (save for the AB's game) and was always hungry to get his hands on the ball. The guy always makes the gainline too.

Riordan- 5.5/10. Seems like a great guy, but he wasn't great in the set piece, nor was he great in the loose. Probably had more unforced errors than any other player in the tight five too. Should wear the #16 jersey until someone better comes along, but Hamilton's time is now.

Marshall- 7/10. Performed pretty much the same as Buydens, but didn't make the gainline as much (oh, and didn't look to great when Woodcock folded him in half like a cheap lawnchair). I guess he impressed the right people as he got a contract in the Top 14.

Cudmore- 7.5/10. Did all that was asked of him. Tackled with ferocity and didn't let his famous temper get the better of him. Odds are he probably won't see much more (if any) tests in the Canadian jersey, but he was a fine example for a lot of our younger forwards. Our best lineout option too.

Sinclair- 7/10. For a guy who hasn't played a lot in the engine room, he acquited himself well. Always played hard, and from what I've seen, seems to be the ultimate team player. Best of luck to him this season with the London Irish. The kind of player that supporters love.

Kleeberger- 8.5/10. He was everywhere in defence and attack. His beard alone was worth ten points a game.

O'Toole- 6/10. Not what I exected from our top on form player coming into the RWC. Didn't seem to get stuck in like most good loosies, and had a few dumb mistakes that cost us points (like his knock on inside the 22 when we had an overlap in the opening seconds against Japan). I'll chalk his drop in form up to the injury he picked up against Tonga. He'll sort himself out this season with Ospreys and will be an impact player during the mid-year tests when we try and take a scalp against Italy at BMO Field.

Carpenter- 7/10. No complaints with Carpenter. Probably our most powerful runner and easily our second best loose forward during the RWC. Played like a warrior against Tonga but fatigue seemed to set in a bit later on.

Fairhurst- 6.5/10. Decent with the boot and was pretty quick with Monro. However, he wasn't any better than White. He's been a fine servant for Canadian rugby, but going forward White and J.Mackenzie will be the answer.

Monro- 6.5/10. Good games against France and Tonga, but had a nightmare against Japan only to redeem himself in the last ten minutes. Still, his lack of a boot was probably the reason we lost to Japan. Some questionable/predictable tactical kicking in the later games too. Could have played better, but could have been worse.

Mackenzie- 7.5/10. Our second most dangerous back played pretty good and scored a beauty against Japan. Had a few defensive mix ups, but other than that was pretty solid.

Smith- 6.5/10. Same as Monro and Fairhurst, could have played better, but could have been worse. Made the gainline regularily and stuck most of his tackles, but Smith clearly doesn't have the foot speed to be an international centre anymore. Had a few nice passes to spring DTH free.

DTH- 8.5/10. Was in on pretty much every try we scored and is clearly a class above the rest. Boy am I glad he was capped for Canada before he qualified for Scotland on residency grounds or went back to South Africa, otherwise he could be wearing a Scotland or Springbok jumper.

Trainor- 7.5/10. Definately the future at 12 and had a hell of a game playing on the wing against the AB's where he scored two tries (only bad thing I saw was his poor job collecting the ball that led to the AB's first try). I'm sure he'll be a hero when he lines up for Western against Brock next week in the OUAA.

Pritchard- 7/10. Was his usual good stuff save for having a tough time with the boot. I hope he can make a cameo appearance in 2015.

Hamilton- 6/10. Nothing spectacular, but he was probably better than Riordan. Needs to work on his lineouts, but when that comes, he'll be a fine hooker. Still young, and will be our starter come 2015.

Franklin- 6.5/10. The scrum wasn't quite as solid as it was when Buydens and Marshall were in, but Franklin held his own. Pretty much what I expected of him.

Hotson- 6.75/10. Fared well when he came on, but didn't have the presence that Sinclair and Cudmore had. His inclusion certainly didn't hurt us.

White- 6.5/10. White played a lot better than he did during the Churchill Cup and is the obvious heir to Ed's throne. Good effort.

------------------------
Pretty hard to get a read on the other players considering they didn't get a whole lot of game time. Overall though, I think the lads played pretty good, 2011 was an improvement over 2007 in my book.

 

[rusty_lock]

I have always rated Cowan but have to admit that he looked terrible v. Canada. He appeared disinterested to me. Weepu is unquestionably the form 9 in NZ right now. Put Cowan on the bench and if Slade is cracking under the pressure you can slide Weepu out one and bring in Cowan at scrum half. Throwing Cruden in now is only a recipe for failure for him. He has had no buildup or preperation and to suddenly expect him to step in against ARgentina or SA/Aus and perform at the level necessary is unreasonable. You gotta dance with the girl you brought.

 

[ranger]

The way i see it, Weepu is the best 9 and the best 10.
Cowan is the next best 9.
Slade is the next best 10 (because Cruden hasn't been in the squad..).

Cowan is better at 9 than Slade is at 10.

Therefore,

Cowan 9, Weepu 10.

 

[rusty_lock]

Overall he was pretty good, but I think its safe to say his tackling technique was poor against the AB's, as was Fairhurst's too. They need to get a lot lower otherwise big bruisers like Kaino will continue to bat their arm tackles away.

Oddly, I thought Monro's play suffered as the tournament went on too. Fantastic against France and Tonga, but left something to be desired against Japan (yeah he scored that crucial try and penalty, but other than that his general play was poor and his kicking could have cost us the match). Not a great showing against NZ either with a few handing errors and a brutal offside call.

As far as I'm concerned, here's how I rate Canada's play

Buydens- 7/10. Good in the scrum (save for the AB's game) and was always hungry to get his hands on the ball. The guy always makes the gainline too.

Riordan- 5.5/10. Seems like a great guy, but he wasn't great in the set piece, nor was he great in the loose. Probably had more unforced errors than any other player in the tight five too. Should wear the #16 jersey until someone better comes along, but Hamilton's time is now.

Marshall- 7/10. Performed pretty much the same as Buydens, but didn't make the gainline as much (oh, and didn't look to great when Woodcock folded him in half like a cheap lawnchair). I guess he impressed the right people as he got a contract in the Top 14.

Cudmore- 7.5/10. Did all that was asked of him. Tackled with ferocity and didn't let his famous temper get the better of him. Odds are he probably won't see much more (if any) tests in the Canadian jersey, but he was a fine example for a lot of our younger forwards. Our best lineout option too.

Sinclair- 7/10. For a guy who hasn't played a lot in the engine room, he acquited himself well. Always played hard, and from what I've seen, seems to be the ultimate team player. Best of luck to him this season with the London Irish. The kind of player that supporters love.

Kleeberger- 8.5/10. He was everywhere in defence and attack. His beard alone was worth ten points a game.

O'Toole- 6/10. Not what I exected from our top on form player coming into the RWC. Didn't seem to get stuck in like most good loosies, and had a few dumb mistakes that cost us points (like his knock on inside the 22 when we had an overlap in the opening seconds against Japan). I'll chalk his drop in form up to the injury he picked up against Tonga. He'll sort himself out this season with Ospreys and will be an impact player during the mid-year tests when we try and take a scalp against Italy at BMO Field.

Carpenter- 7/10. No complaints with Carpenter. Probably our most powerful runner and easily our second best loose forward during the RWC. Played like a warrior against Tonga but fatigue seemed to set in a bit later on.

Fairhurst- 6.5/10. Decent with the boot and was pretty quick with Monro. However, he wasn't any better than White. He's been a fine servant for Canadian rugby, but going forward White and J.Mackenzie will be the answer.

Monro- 6.5/10. Good games against France and Tonga, but had a nightmare against Japan only to redeem himself in the last ten minutes. Still, his lack of a boot was probably the reason we lost to Japan. Some questionable/predictable tactical kicking in the later games too. Could have played better, but could have been worse.

Mackenzie- 7.5/10. Our second most dangerous back played pretty good and scored a beauty against Japan. Had a few defensive mix ups, but other than that was pretty solid.

Smith- 6.5/10. Same as Monro and Fairhurst, could have played better, but could have been worse. Made the gainline regularily and stuck most of his tackles, but Smith clearly doesn't have the foot speed to be an international centre anymore. Had a few nice passes to spring DTH free.

DTH- 8.5/10. Was in on pretty much every try we scored and is clearly a class above the rest. Boy am I glad he was capped for Canada before he qualified for Scotland on residency grounds or went back to South Africa, otherwise he could be wearing a Scotland or Springbok jumper.

Trainor- 7.5/10. Definately the future at 12 and had a hell of a game playing on the wing against the AB's where he scored two tries (only bad thing I saw was his poor job collecting the ball that led to the AB's first try). I'm sure he'll be a hero when he lines up for Western against Brock next week in the OUAA.

Pritchard- 7/10. Was his usual good stuff save for having a tough time with the boot. I hope he can make a cameo appearance in 2015.

Hamilton- 6/10. Nothing spectacular, but he was probably better than Riordan. Needs to work on his lineouts, but when that comes, he'll be a fine hooker. Still young, and will be our starter come 2015.

Franklin- 6.5/10. The scrum wasn't quite as solid as it was when Buydens and Marshall were in, but Franklin held his own. Pretty much what I expected of him.

Hotson- 6.75/10. Fared well when he came on, but didn't have the presence that Sinclair and Cudmore had. His inclusion certainly didn't hurt us.

White- 6.5/10. White played a lot better than he did during the Churchill Cup and is the obvious heir to Ed's throne. Good effort.

------------------------
Pretty hard to get a read on the other players considering they didn't get a whole lot of game time. Overall though, I think the lads played pretty good, 2011 was an improvement over 2007 in my book.

Pretty good synopsis

I might not be quite as hard on Munro and I'm a little higher on Carpenter but besides that I agree with just about everything you said. You didn't mention Evans but he was a bit of a disapointment to me. I will attribute that to his lack playing time over the last couple of years. He has had a torrid time of injuries so hopefully he can stay healthy and play himself back into form. Wherever he ends up. Watch for Hirayama going forward at Flyhalf. He is going to get lots of playing time with the national 7's team and he is only going to get better with age. He is only 23.

 

[james5000]

The way i see it, Weepu is the best 9 and the best 10.
Cowan is the next best 9.
Slade is the next best 10 (because Cruden hasn't been in the squad..).

Cowan is better at 9 than Slade is at 10.

Therefore,

Cowan 9, Weepu 10.

Weepu is a much better 9 then 10. On current form he's miles better than Cowan.
Is Weepu really much better than Slade at 10? Not really, the only difference being he's a better goal kicker, but he can still kick goals playing 9.

I don't rate Slade but I'm hoping he can grow in the next few games. He's got the opportunity of a life time really, you never know he might play better than expected. That's what i'm hoping for. Plus it's still a team sport, he has 14 mates to help him out. If everyone does their job we should be all right.

There's no point in moaning about it because we all know barring injury Slades going to be the 10 for the rest of the campaign

 

[ranger]

Weepu is a much better 9 then 10. On current form he's miles better than Cowan.
Is Weepu really much better than Slade at 10? Not really, the only difference being he's a better goal kicker, but he can still kick goals playing 9.

I don't rate Slade but I'm hoping he can grow in the next few games. He's got the opportunity of a life time really, you never know he might play better than expected. That's what i'm hoping for. Plus it's still a team sport, he has 14 mates to help him out. If everyone does their job we should be all right.

There's no point in moaning about it because we all know barring injury Slades going to be the 10 for the rest of the campaign

?

The only difference is that one can run a backline and one can't. Weepu was creating space with the pass and directing play so well that the Canadians had no idea of how to defend him. Slade only shovelled or took advantage of lax defense (which will become less and less of an effective tactic as the tournament progresses.

The goalkicking is a total afterthought!

Also, its not as simple as saying its a team sport and as long as everyone else does their job things will be fine.. Hes in a pivotal decision making role. If the 10 doesn't do his job well, then the entire backline cant do anything.

 

[CDN_Rugby]

Pretty good synopsis

I might not be quite as hard on Munro and I'm a little higher on Carpenter but besides that I agree with just about everything you said. You didn't mention Evans but he was a bit of a disapointment to me. I will attribute that to his lack playing time over the last couple of years. He has had a torrid time of injuries so hopefully he can stay healthy and play himself back into form. Wherever he ends up. Watch for Hirayama going forward at Flyhalf. He is going to get lots of playing time with the national 7's team and he is only going to get better with age. He is only 23.

Yeah, I forgot about Evans and Hearn.

For me, Evans gets a 6/10. He's still young and is only going to improve, but he has to make sure his kicks find touch. Other than that, he did what I expected for a guy coming off injury.

Hearn, however, gets a 5.5/10. He's ok in defence, but we could put Dan Pletch on the wing and see the same amount of flair. Just doesn't have that instinct that successful wingers have.

And the only time I noticed Hirayama on the pitch was the last bit against the AB's. From that he looked impressive (especially with his kicks to touch), but I figured that wasn't enough time to rate him.

 

[Icemn]

poor Dan Carter i feel for the man....

What crap did Cowan catch on in that game.... my word.... was he sober??? the scrum looked better...but maybe it was Canada's scrum making us look good

Guys....Dagg looks like a natural 1st five-eight :? why not try him on flyhalf

if not why don't they bring Luke McAllister in??? instead of Cruden.... Luke plays a similar game to carter and he has a massive boot...

 

[james5000]

?

The only difference is that one can run a backline and one can't. Weepu was creating space with the pass and directing play so well that the Canadians had no idea of how to defend him. Slade only shovelled or took advantage of lax defense (which will become less and less of an effective tactic as the tournament progresses.

The goalkicking is a total afterthought!

Also, its not as simple as saying its a team sport and as long as everyone else does their job things will be fine.. Hes in a pivotal decision making role. If the 10 doesn't do his job well, then the entire backline cant do anything.

If that's what you want to believe, Weepu and Slade have produce practically identical results. The score didn't just explode when Weepu went on.
Weepu supposed control didn't just overwhelm the Canadians. I think your talking Weepu up a bit here. He basically did the same job as Slade, they both only produced 1 try assist, they were both shovellers. Thats all that was asked of them. What has Weepu ever done in the 10 jersey?

I think Henry would be foolish to play Weepu out of position, he's the best and most creative 9 we have. He has great experience, he would improve Slade. Slade never had quality ball to look good. Cowan was terrible, he would have made Dan Carter look like a mortal.

Slade is the only option that makes sense, he's been with the squad since day 1, he must be learning something by now. He can only improve after yesterdays performance, you never know he might surprise you. He did a few good things yesterday.

He just needs to make smarter decisions, the coaches can surely help mentor him. He's got some of the best people in the world to get advice from, with heaps of experience around him.

 

[ranger]

If that's what you want to believe, Weepu and Slade have produce practically identical results. The score didn't just explode when Weepu went on.
Weepu supposed control didn't just overwhelm the Canadians. I think your talking Weepu up a bit here. What has Weepu ever done in the 10 jersey?

I think Henry would be foolish to play Weepu out of position, he's the best and most creative 9 we have. He has great experience, he would improve Slade. Slade never had quality ball to look good. Cowan was terrible, he would have made Dan Carter look like a mortal.

Slade is the only option that makes sense, he's been with the squad since day 1, he must be learning something by now. He can only improve after yesterdays performance, you never know he might surprise you. He did a few good things yesterday.

He just needs to make smarter decisions, the coaches can surely help mentor him. He's got some of the best people in the world to get advice from, with heaps of experience around him.

All you have to do is use your eyes son. Weepu was actually moving the ball around and putting guys in space. He showed that he was willing and able to execute every option. The lateness of some of his passes bordered on reckless, but they came off and he was able to throw indecision into the defensive scheme. They didn't know if they should rush, or when, or who to target. The couldn't mark any single option out of the game because Weepu was so unpredictable, causing them to lose their shape altogether.
Obviously the All Blacks were able to score in a variety of different ways, but Weepu's play making seems like the best option against more stringent defences.

I don't think i'm talking Weepu up really, as much as identifying an area at which he excels. As for what has he ever done in the 10 jersey, i could ask the same about Slade don't you think haha?
But sure, Weepu played all his secondary schools rugby for Te Aute at first five, and has probably played just as much 10 as Slade has over his career at the Canes and Lions. He has also been practicing up seen as he is being seen at 10 predominantly by the Blues.. Its not stellar, but its just as much of a claim as Slade has.

The real issue is, its not a case of "worse" and "better". Players aren't given a rating out of 100 that improves with coaching. Slade isn't, and has never, shown a real knack for controling a team, and he has never shown that he can handle pressure situations. His style of play doesn't change by being in the All Blacks camp longer.
Slade shovels and looks for his own gaps, his secondary position is wing ffs

 

[james5000]

All you have to do is use your eyes son. Weepu was actually moving the ball around and putting guys in space. He showed that he was willing and able to execute every option. The lateness of some of his passes bordered on reckless, but they came off and he was able to throw indecision into the defensive scheme. They didn't know if they should rush, or when, or who to target. The couldn't mark any single option out of the game because Weepu was so unpredictable, causing them to lose their shape altogether.
Obviously the All Blacks were able to score in a variety of different ways, but Weepu's play making seems like the best option against more stringent defences.

I don't think i'm talking Weepu up really, as much as identifying an area at which he excels. As for what has he ever done in the 10 jersey, i could ask the same about Slade don't you think haha?
But sure, Weepu played all his secondary schools rugby for Te Aute at first five, and has probably played just as much 10 as Slade has over his career at the Canes and Lions. He has also been practicing up seen as he is being seen at 10 predominantly by the Blues.. Its not stellar, but its just as much of a claim as Slade has.

The real issue is, its not a case of "worse" and "better". Players aren't given a rating out of 100 that improves with coaching. Slade isn't, and has never, shown a real knack for controling a team, and he has never shown that he can handle pressure situations. His style of play doesn't change by being in the All Blacks camp longer.
Slade shovels and looks for his own gaps, his secondary position is wing ffs

Slades done well at age grade level as a 10 and he has won a Provincial ***le at 10, he's shown he can control and direct a team at super 15 level.
That's more than Piri ever did at 10

I'm not going to say that Piri is a better or worse option than Slade at 10, but he is clearly the best 9 going around.
Piri has shown he can direct a team at 9, he's great at directing his forwards around, and he provides good ball service to the back line.

Cowan\Ellis-Weepu < Weepu-Slade

IMO putting Weepu at 10 is turning a strength in to a weakness.

If Slade wasn't capable of playing at 10 why was he ever picked in the squad?
Cruden would have been a better option, but thats not going to happen.

It really is Slades opportunity to make a name for himself.

*Do you really think that coaches can't improve players?

 

[ranger]

Slades done well at age grade level as a 10 and he has won a Provincial ***le at 10, he's shown he can control and direct a team at super 15 level.
That's more than Piri ever did at 10

No he hasn't! Whenever he has really been under pressure to direct a team he has crumbled. He put in such shocking performances at 10 a few seasons ago that he was pushed out of the squad and only returned on the wing.. The wing is not where controlling players play.

I'm not going to say that Piri is a better or worse option than Slade at 10, but he is clearly the best 9 going around.
Piri has shown he can direct a team at 9, he's great at directing his forwards around, and he provides good ball service to the back line.

Cowan\Ellis-Weepu < Weepu-Slade

Cowan had an off game, but he has consistently been a top performer for the All Blacks, and had a leading role in the Highlanders resurgence. He marshalled the Highlanders pack around the park better than any other 9 was able to do. Hes a proven performer and if you gave me the option of Cowan or Slade in my squad i would pick Cowan every time.

IMO putting Weepu at 10 is turning a strength in to a weakness.

How is Weepu a weakness at 10

If Slade wasn't capable of playing at 10 why was he ever picked in the squad?

Graham Henry himself said that Slade made it over the line ahead of Cruden because of his versatility. He said Carter will start every game and Slade was a better bench option. Cruden=10, Slade=10/14/11/15/12. Notice he didn't say because Slade was a good firstfive.

*Do you really think that coaches can't improve players?

Coaches can improve players but they can't change how they play and what their strengths are. Its not like a videogame where you can throw a coach on a guy and his 'overall' rating ticks up. Weepu's natural instincts make him a better playmaker. Thats just how he plays, you can't coach instincts like that into a guy

 

[james5000]

No he hasn't! Whenever he has really been under pressure to direct a team he has crumbled. He put in such shocking performances at 10 a few seasons ago that he was pushed out of the squad and only returned on the wing.. The wing is not where controlling players play.

This isn't even worth commenting on, he arguably showed enough this year. This is 2011 buddy

Cowan had an off game, but he has consistently been a top performer for the All Blacks, and had a leading role in the Highlanders resurgence. He marshalled the Highlanders pack around the park better than any other 9 was able to do. Hes a proven performer and if you gave me the option of Cowan or Slade in my squad i would pick Cowan every time.

Cowan's been average the whole world cup, have you just noticed? He is now the third stringer

How is Weepu a weakness at 10

Since when was Weepu a good 10? He has never shown anything at 10. Did you watch the game yesterday? He didn't impress as much as you make him out too. When did these magical plays happen? When did all these gaps get found? I think you will find that Slade few a good few passes too.
Weepu is a world class halfback nuff said

Graham Henry himself said that Slade made it over the line ahead of Cruden because of his versatility. He said Carter will start every game and Slade was a better bench option. Cruden=10, Slade=10/14/11/15/12. Notice he didn't say because Slade was a good firstfive.

Is this the same Henry that is saying Slade is now the number 1 first five. That's right it is!!!

Coaches can improve players but they can't change how they play and what their strengths are. Its not like a videogame where you can throw a coach on a guy and his 'overall' rating ticks up. Weepu's natural instincts make him a better playmaker. Thats just how he plays, you can't coach instincts like that into a guy

Slade has shown an ability to put people in gaps, he can also spot a gap for himself and then distribute ala Guilfords try yesterday. The problem is he has also shown an ability to throw intercept passes and hospital passes. At the moment he does as many good things as he does bad and thats not good enough. Coaches must teach him how to take better options, or even make plays where he has better options.

I noticed yesterday he got caught out a few times with the rush defense, he seemed to panic and just shovel the ball on. Experience will help him make better decisions as will some mentoring on the coaches behalf

 

[nickdnz]

This isn't even worth commenting on, he arguably showed enough this year. This is 2011 buddy



Cowan's been average the whole world cup, have you just noticed? He is now the third stringer



Since when was Weepu a good 10? He has never shown anything at 10. Did you watch the game yesterday? He didn't impress as much as you make him out too. When did these magical plays happen? When did all these gaps get found? I think you will find that Slade few a good few passes too.
Weepu is a world class halfback nuff said

Is this the same Henry that is saying Slade is now the number 1 first five. That's right it is!!!

Slade has shown an ability to put people in gaps, he can also spot a gap for himself and then distribute ala Guilfords try yesterday. The problem is he has also shown an ability to throw intercept passes and hospital passes. At the moment he does as many good things as he does bad and thats not good enough. Coaches must teach him how to take better options, or even make plays where he has better options.

I noticed yesterday he got caught out a few times with the rush defense, he seemed to panic and just shovel the ball on. Experience will help him make better decisions as will some mentoring on the coaches behalf

1. When did Slade prove he's a capable 10 this year? He played like two or three games for the Highlanders in between broken jaws.
2. Weepu has shown plenty at 10. He has looked like he can control a game very well and very smoothly at 10, even at the All Blacks level. In fairness, he's played just as many first class games at 10 as Slade has, over several ITM Cups and a few S14/15 games. Slade has only played 10 consistantly during one ITM Cup, the rest of the time he has been moved around to make way for Carter/Brett. I don't think anyone is saying that Slade should not have a future at 10 for the All Blacks, it's just now does not seem like the right time to give him a shot, seeing as he's looked poor against Japan and Canada.

 

[james5000]

1. When did Slade prove he's a capable 10 this year? He played like two or three games for the Highlanders in between broken jaws.
2. Weepu has shown plenty at 10. He has looked like he can control a game very well and very smoothly at 10, even at the All Blacks level. In fairness, he's played just as many first class games at 10 as Slade has, over several ITM Cups and a few S14/15 games. Slade has only played 10 consistantly during one ITM Cup, the rest of the time he has been moved around to make way for Carter/Brett. I don't think anyone is saying that Slade should not have a future at 10 for the All Blacks, it's just now does not seem like the right time to give him a shot, seeing as he's looked poor against Japan and Canada.

1) Notice the Arguably in there, who are we to criticize the great Lord Henry. He said Slade was awesome.

2) Weepu has not achieved as much as Slade as a 10, Slade has actually won something, he was a major influence in that victory too.

I don't want to make this a who is better Slade or Weepu argument because they both have their merits.

What is the best for the team though, it has to be the Weepu-Slade combination.
Weepu is the best half back we have and that's not arguable. Slade has a better track record as a 10, he deserves the opportunity and always was the number 2

 

[ranger]

This isn't even worth commenting on, he showed enough this year. This is 2011 buddy[/I]

Haha he has shown enough this year? HE WAS INJURED ALL YEAR. You can count how many games he played in 2011 on your hands buddy.

Cowan's been average the whole world cup, have you just noticed? He is now the third stringer

Cowans a big game player. He will step up when the pressures on. He did time and time again in the super 14 this year and lets not forget, the year is 2011 buddy.

Since when was Weepu a good 10? He has never shown anything at 10. Did you watch the game yesterday? He didn't impress as much as you make him out too. When did these magical plays happen? When did all these gaps get found? I think you will find that Slade few a good few passes too.

Its in his general play everytime he touches the ball. Its not all about highlight plays, he doesnt break the line every time, but he commits and confuses the defence.Unlike Slade was able to do. Its not magic, its just good play making. He thinks 2 rucks in advance, He mixes up the length, speed and direction of his passes everytime (like on one occasion he wound up like he was throwing a cutout and popped it short instead, resulting in a big gain. The same tactic resulted in Corey Janes try last week. Its just subtle things that prove invaluable.

I encourage you to watch the game again and focus on how Weepu marshals the team and creates compared to Slade. Its night and day.

Is this the same Henry that is saying Slade is now the number 1 first five. That's right it is!!!

Of course Slade is the number 1 first five now. He was chosen in the squad based on his versatility and now he has to be the backup 10. You can infer from Henrys comments that Slade may not be in this position if Carter was injured before the cup..

Slade has shown an ability to put people in gaps, he can also spot a gap for himself and then distribute ala Guilfords try yesterday. The problem is he has also shown an ability to throw intercept passes and hospital passes. At the moment he does as many good things as he does bad and thats not good enough. Coaches must teach him how to take better options, or even make plays where he has better options.

I noticed yesterday he got caught out a few times with the rush defense, he seemed to panic and just shovel the ball on. Experience will help him make better decisions as will some mentoring on the coaches behalf

Intercept passes are not the problem by a long stretch! Freak plays aren't something you focus on. Sure he can spot a gap for himself, no one has ever contested that. What he hasn't shown the ability to do is fix the defence and create for someone else.
Also you bring up the fact that he panics against the rush, that was against Canada in a non consequential game in which the team had already qualified. But a weeks coaching and he will be absolutely fine in the do or die knockout rounds?
When Weepu came on, Canada dropped the rush.
If South Africa play the umbrella defense against Slade. We lose.

 

[ranger]

Christ, Slade doesn't have a track record. And so what if he won something? How many Super 12 ***les did Christian Cullen win? If winning compeitions has a bearing on selection, why not pick the entire Canterbury team. Get rid of that clown Kaino, George Whitelock actually won something.

 

[james5000]

Haha he has shown enough this year? HE WAS INJURED ALL YEAR. You can count how many games he played in 2011 on your hands buddy.



Cowans a big game player. He will step up when the pressures on. He did time and time again in the super 14 this year and lets not forget, the year is 2011 buddy.





Its in his general play everytime he touches the ball. Its not all about highlight plays, he doesnt break the line every time, but he commits and confuses the defence.Unlike Slade was able to do. Its not magic, its just good play making. He thinks 2 rucks in advance, He mixes up the length, speed and direction of his passes everytime (like on one occasion he wound up like he was throwing a cutout and popped it short instead, resulting in a big gain. The same tactic resulted in Corey Janes try last week. Its just subtle things that prove invaluable.

I encourage you to watch the game again and focus on how Weepu marshals the team and creates compared to Slade. Its night and day.



Of course Slade is the number 1 first five now. He was chosen in the squad based on his versatility and now he has to be the backup 10. You can infer from Henrys comments that Slade may not be in this position if Carter was injured before the cup..





Intercept passes are not the problem by a long stretch! Freak plays aren't something you focus on. Sure he can spot a gap for himself, no one has ever contested that. What he hasn't shown the ability to do is fix the defence and create for someone else.
Also you bring up the fact that he panics against the rush, that was against Canada in a non consequential game in which the team had already qualified. But a weeks coaching and he will be absolutely fine in the do or die knockout rounds?
When Weepu came on, Canada dropped the rush.
If South Africa play the umbrella defense against Slade. We lose.

I forgot to put the arguably in there so, you took it to literally I suppose. I was meaning Henry thought he was good enough to be in there with limited game time.

As for Jimmy, he was in a team getting progressively worse as the season went on, and he was progressively getting worse. **** he might not be able to pick the ball up soon.

Weepu was on when Ellis came on. The rush was still happening the pass just got to him quicker. Weepu was inconsequential he did nothing special. He's a much better halfback than 10.

You think Slade wasn't under pressure, Dan Carter just got injured. The expectations on him were huge. It was his first game as THE MAN I'm sure he will be better for it

 

[james5000]

Christ, Slade doesn't have a track record. And so what if he won something? How many Super 12 ***les did Christian Cullen win? If winning compeitions has a bearing on selection, why not pick the entire Canterbury team. Get rid of that clown Kaino, George Whitelock actually won something.

Yeah look what happened to Cullen when he played out of position. Obviously winning domestic ***les doesn't mean everything but he is a halfback not a 10.