Reds v Blues, Round 11 2013, Attack of the Attack?

[Sully]

Photos are up. http://www.greenandgoldrugby.com/exclusive-photo-gallery-reds-v-blues/

 

[Rassie]

While it is good that the NZ Conference is clearly the weakest I cast my mind back to the early 2000's when the Soap Dodgers were pretty ordinary and easily beaten. This was prior to us getting done in Bill 2003.

Form matters for nothing between RWC's.

Are the Darkness playing mind games with us with their weak conference this year?

I have to disagree. In the attacking sections the Kiwi teams lead the way. Its just the pressure of them having to play pass pass pass pass rugby for 80 minutes to keep sponsors and others a like happy that is getting to some of them. You can throw it around but if the defense is up to it then the pressure create a error and the opposition do not have far to go to capitalize on it. But from Blues to Highlanders the Kiwi teams look scary on attack. Its just some have that missing part in the engine while the others do not adapt as well. Chiefs and Reds are the best too at adapting and hence they are the last two winners of it.

Australia needs to play their style to sell rugby in Australia. NZ needs to play their way to sell rugby to the world for the IRB. Especially getting the Americans involved. They play a exciting brand that is very markable. Newer guys coming in will find the pressure hard in the beginning and they will make mistakes.

 

[Ruggo]

The Reds have to be one of the favorites for the title after withstanding that assault.

Rene Ranger and Luatua should be shoe-ins for the AB squad, and perhaps even the starting 15.

Rene deserves that AB jumper though the problem for him and any outside back in NZ is the sheer level of depth you have out wide. Luatua and the blindside for the Cheetahs are miles ahead as the best blindsides in the comp this year. The sky seems to be the limit for Luatua in coming years and the prospect of him forming an AB back row with McCaw and Reid just blows the mind.

After some turbulent years at the Blues this years crop looks to play with the pride that those dominant Blues sides of the past played with. Kirwin is doing a bloody good job by the look of it.

 

[Scotty]

I'd almost have the Blues as favourites, might be one year too early though.

 

[Lee Grant]

The Reds have to be one of the favorites for the title after withstanding that assault.

Rene Ranger and Luatua should be shoe-ins for the AB squad, and perhaps even the starting 15.

The Reds are looking good aren't they? I like watching them play as I did the Brumbies when Larkham was in his pomp.

The Reds are notionally in the lead because the Brumbies haven't played as I write this. The standard table is a poor indication sometimes, but especially when some teams have had byes and some haven't.

When I bother to look at a table I try to calculate what the teams have lost to date.

For example: the Reds have lost 10 points with their two losses and a draw but made up 3 with bonus points to make them minus 7 on the LG table.

The Brumbies have lost 8 points as I write this, from a loss and two draws, but have made up 3 to make them minus 5 on the LG table.

Minus 5 is better than minus 8. And so on - and if I wanted to be anal about it I'd figure that if team A has played more games than team B and are on the same amount of minus points they should be ranked higher because teams will always have a net minus for any game, on average.

So I'd tweak the LG table by dividing table points lost by the number of games played - if I ever did one. No bye points would be given, by the way.


Where was I - I digressed.

On the All Blacks' candidates. Isn't Ranger going to Montpellier - or isn't that confirmed yet? If he's staying he would be a strong chance at centre because, with Conrad Smith having a break and Kahui going back to Japan (IIRR), NZ are not exactly stocked with good players wearing the 13 jersey. (And the same with the 2 jersey).

He would be at longer odds to play on the wing as I think they will want to try Piutau there now and then, or from the bench, to get test match experience.

First thing though - Ranger will have to get his handling right both as a passer and receiver. Passing is more important at centre than on the wing because the 13 has to be a facilitator and be able to pass the golden ball to wingers and fullback.

Luatua? Yeah I've written elsewhere that he should be on an All Black bench, at least, this year. He wasn't as noticeable last night as he was at the Cake Tin where he terrorised half of the Hurricances team, but he was still good.

I reckon Messam will still start for a while whilst Luatua is eased in. Luatua probably has to show more in the tight stuff as Kaino did, and break defensive lines like him, because you don't as many semi-open spaces in Super Rugby as in test matches - as Adam Tompson found out.

Though he is still very raw, Piutua could be on a bench sometime this year, but probably not at fullback yet. His eye for the gap, that is not there sometimes before he makes it, and his leg drive when stopped, are considerable attributes for a young bloke to have.

Not quite to the point but I thought that Retallick was one of the best in the Blues' team last night. He doesn't have the skill set of cousin Brodie, the All Black, but he's improved a lot in 2013 - and he has picked up some of Ali's sly play.

It probably rubbed off from Ali after packing down in so many scrums together.
.

 

[liquor box]

So I'd tweak the LG table by dividing table points lost by the number of games played - if I ever did one. No bye points would be give, by the way.
.

I have been contemplating a way to set a goal for what I want my team to achieve to somewhat ensure a spot in the finals.

I figure if you win 3/4 against SA teams and 3/4 against NZ teams and then 6/8 against Australian teams then you should make it to the finals. It may only be 6th spot but it is a spot. Bunus points make projections hard to make, especially when combined with a draw that allows some teams to play poor defensive teams more than others.

 

[Rassie]

Yeah this 4 point thing for doing nothing should be disbanded. You get the same points as a team who played their hearts out for 80 minutes

 

[Sully]

It makes absolutely no difference how many point you get for a bye. It evens out over the season.

Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF700T using Tapatalk HD

 

[qwerty51]

It makes absolutely no difference how many point you get for a bye. It evens out over the season.

Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF700T using Tapatalk HD

Never understood people who complain about that, it's not as if teams are getting a different amount of points per game. However if the goal is to make the table look more accurate, I'd make byes worth 2 not 4.

 

[Sully]

Yeh it doesn't matter which way you go it's not going to look right. 2 points seems like a good compromise though.

Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF700T using Tapatalk HD

 

[Scoey]

Just because the ref didn't penalise, doesn't mean there wern't offenses. Last week the brums did what they had to do to get as many points as they could, this week the reds played similarly. If Joubert started calling all the ruck stuff there would have been cards this week, heaps just got let go. Not saying that the reffing was unfair, that's just what reds supporters said last week.

From where we were watching it appeared the Reds were lying all over the ball, but whatever
Funny how we all watch the same game and see different things.

The only similarities between the Reds this week and the Brumbies last week was the scoring being dominated by 3 pointers.
The 'cynical' barbs last week must've really stung because at the first possible chance you try to label the Reds as cynical. Your boys deliberately offended, time after time after time whenever we got close to the line. That is the very definition of cycnical. The Brumbies last week was done to death. If you can point me to some examples of deliberate foul play by the Reds on the weekend to stop tries being scored then I'll consider your position, but in all honesty, I think you'll struggle to find them.

 

[TOCC]

stats from the weekends game

http://www.theblues.co.nz/News/2013-4-29/Blues-v-Reds-Stats.aspx

anyone know how you embed the infographics in a thread?

 

[Bullrush]

The only similarities between the Reds this week and the Brumbies last week was the scoring being dominated by 3 pointers.
The 'cynical' barbs last week must've really stung because at the first possible chance you try to label the Reds as cynical. Your boys deliberately offended, time after time after time whenever we got close to the line. That is the very definition of cycnical. The Brumbies last week was done to death. If you can point me to some examples of deliberate foul play by the Reds on the weekend to stop tries being scored then I'll consider your position, but in all honesty, I think you'll struggle to find them.

I reckon the Reds were playing off-side in those last few mins BUT I don't want to point to that as to why we lost. I haven't even had a chance to watch the game properly yet but from what I saw of those last mins, the Reds were off-side.

I don't know if that's cynical or not but I understand where the Brumby fans are coming from. Basically, players don't think, 'I'm gonna start playing cynically now', they are just doing everything they can to stop the opposition from scoring. Afterwards, we look at at and call it 'cynical' or 'clinical' or what ever else we want to tag on to it.

 

[Scoey]

I wouldn't disagree with that Bullrush Personally I thought the offside line was pretty loose all night for both teams. When that happens teams will inevitably 'creep' up a bit.

 

[Bullrush]

I wouldn't disagree with that Bullrush Personally I thought the offside line was pretty loose all night for both teams. When that happens teams will inevitably 'creep' up a bit.

I reckon I must be getting old cos I look at things like that now (the Reds off-side) and I know that you win those sometimes and sometimes you don't. If you're good enough, 9 times out of 10 you will win no matter what bad calls you get. And if you're good enough, you'll put yourself in a position to be on the better side of those calls one day when it counts.

I guess being an All Black fan for all those losing RWC campaigns hasn't completely been all a bad thing.....LOL.

 

[ACT Crusader]

I wouldn't disagree with that Bullrush Personally I thought the offside line was pretty loose all night for both teams. When that happens teams will inevitably 'creep' up a bit.

So were they creeping 'cynically', 'deliberately' or was it 'just happening' as a result of what was happening in the game?

 

[tranquility]

So were they creeping 'cynically', 'deliberately' or was it 'just happening' as a result of what was happening in the game?

All right, I'll chime in.

Playing to the edge of the refs wits with regards to offside and the breakdown are part of the professional game. All sides do it.

To deliberately impede the endeavor of the other side, by repeatedly infringing against the rules of the game is still probably within the referees discretion to enforce.

However, if players or an entire team keep infringing in a manor that is purposeful to halt the momentum of the other-side in a manor that is against the fabric of the game, despite being penalised - I think you are then moving into the realms of cynical play. Or rather, if your instincts are to stop the other team playing rather than playing yourself, your actions are in fact cynical to the foundations of the game.

When Greg Chappell instructed Trevor Chappell to bowl the infamous underarm delivery at the MCG in 1981, he was stopping the contest by not allowing the other team the ability to 'play'. While technically legal at the time, his motives and actions for the delivery and outcome of the contest were cynical.

I believe with this logic applied the same conclusions can be drawn from how the Brumbies played last week.

But at the end of the day, we are merely talking about ethics, which is for all intents and purposes philosophy and semantics. It is the referees job to enforce the 'ethics and rules' of the game, and he attempted to do that, albeit with a distinct flavour of inexperience and I'm sure he would referee the match differently in hindsight.

The Brumbies aren't a dirty outfit, they just did what was necessary to keep themselves in the contest, which is the hallmark of a champion side. Jake White is one of the most street smart coaches in world rugby, and it is the very reason that he is a champion that drags success with him wherever he goes.

While it was not entirely ethical, the overlap between professional sport and ethics is rightfully or wrongfully non-existent.

 

[Scoey]

So were they creeping 'cynically', 'deliberately' or was it 'just happening' as a result of what was happening in the game?

I was going to reply to this but then I realised that Tranquility had already said what I was going to, almost word for word! What are the odds! ;-)

All right, I'll chime in.

Man I wish I could communicate as eloquently as you. Nice one Tranquility!

 

[Rassie]

It makes absolutely no difference how many point you get for a bye. It evens out over the season.

Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF700T using Tapatalk HD

You get your bye when your direct opponent in the conference face the Kings at home and they get their bye when you are facing the Crusaders in Christchurch. Does it still seems even?

 

[RugbyReg]

You get your bye when your direct opponent in the conference face the Kings at home and they get their bye when you are facing the Crusaders in Christchurch. Does it still seems even?

Reds are the only team that have to play a game on their bye.