• Welcome to the Green and Gold Rugby forums. As you can see we've upgraded the forums to new software. Your old logon details should work, just click the 'Login' button in the top right.

New Zealand v Wallabies, Eden Park, Sat 22nd October

Status
Not open for further replies.

The sage

Vay Wilson (31)
I think mistakes and poor tackling was the most costly aspect of the wallabies performance. Up until the 55th minute the wallabies were in the best position in three decades. Even the ab's had that look of vulnerability about them. In the past and fairly infrequently, this has been times when they can lose a match.

However their fitness, basic skills around the park and will to win overcame that short term worry


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

bigmac

Billy Sheehan (19)
My thought on the Wallabies:-
The good:-
1) to my single and only watching it seemed the defensive pattern changed without having to shuffle the backline about to cover the dual playmaker rubbish. The defensive line was also far less compressed from the start and managed usually to have better set numbers wide.
2) Amazing - who'd have thought it, having a balanced backline in terms of skills would result in more fluent attack. It didn't pay off but that was the best attack the Wallabies have put together this year. As I've said I don't give a rats arse who starts but select one of Foley or Cooper and be done with it. I don't think the situation would be better with either Beale or To'omua fit. Pick a 12 at 12.
3) As with point 2 - very good to see a balanced backrow. Every player had an impact for their role. Was that the first lineout the Wallabies managed to steal all year? Our lineout was still under pressure but was better than it had been. To all those still bashing Mumm, the ABs couldn't get a single maul moving largely due to the efforts of Mumm to disrupt it. There hasn't been an Australian backrower able to execute that ability consistently since Ben Mowen. Apart from Fardy being so far out form it is why I think Mumm is picked over him and Timani at 6. The Lineout and the maul defence.
4) Phipps had a pretty good game I thought, but he should have been replaced after 50 as he was blown.
5) The attack structure - gone was the constant recycle of Larkham, Finally FFS. The Wallabies actually look to something with the ball, helped by some actually go forward from the forwards, provided by Timani, Kepu and the locks and close support for them, allowed by Point 3.
6)The scrum, starting and finishing tight 5s were good.

The bad:-
1) Hodge. I am unconvinced. A big bloke with no leg drive, not much pace and falls off too many tackle. Don't get me wrong I thought overall the Wallabies backline was the best it has been this year having somebody actually play 12, but I am not convinced Hodge is the man. The best game the Tahs played all year was with Horne in his natural position at 12, maybe he could be a solution, or from left field Tapuai, that's if my preference of Kerevi to 12 is unfavoured. The charge down. DHP has been in the side all year and is yet to make a single clearing kick that I can remember. He has a very good boot, why not use it and have two or three options at the back to keep the opposition guessing as to where the clearance is coming from? No lets be smart and telegraph it so he can show how good he is under pressure.
2) Speight - he has never been a good defensive winger (await Brumby fan abuse), but he is one of few top grade wingers in the country with genuine speed.
3) Skills - as usual the skills just are not up to scratch, BUT I think they may be improving.

Overall (scoreline ignored) the Wallabies performed far better than I expected and I'm happier for that. I did predict a 5 to 1 tries scored unfortunately but the actual performance was far better than anything else they put on at any time this year. I won't say anything at all about the ABs, as I've said it before, nothing has changed.
Good point re mumm. He has his critics but was very strong last night in the tight.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk
 

tragic

John Solomon (38)
Its in Quade's game as well. I'm not biased either way, as I've said time and time again, I don't care which is picked but only one, no more two playmaker crap, as we saw last night the Wallabies can actually attack far better with a single "playmaker" at 10.

I deliberately didn't mention Quade as i was just trying to focus on the glaring issue with Cheikas obvious preference at 10.
Quades kicking in general play is superior to Foleys and if he was the incumbent there would be other flaws I'd be focusing on.
But a 10 just has to be able to kick from hand.
If Cheika doesn't think Quades the answer then he needs to get creative quickly. Otherwise it's just ground hog day.
 

teach

Trevor Allan (34)
So it looks to me that Retalick was offside pulling Mumm away from joining the ruck and was sorted/pushed away, Mumm certainly pays no attention after breaking away and joins the ruck late. Reatlick takes a dive like Sanchez or Julian Savea.

Probably not a dive. He is concussed and now in doubt for the game against Ireland in Chicago.
 

Dan54

Tim Horan (67)
On that point why is the anthem (like South Africa) allowed to be sung in two languages, surely one is enough, like everyone else? Do we need to sing the Australian national anthem in Greek Italian or Chinese?



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The South African national anthem is done in a number of languages because that is the official national anthem of SA FFS!!
 

Dan54

Tim Horan (67)
Just for interest, Beugan's brother Jordie has been selected in the NZ EOYT party as an apprentice (whatever TF that means) , and Scott is travelling as injury cover for Whitelock. Neither of them are named in the actual touring party though.

Actually much like Leroy Houston was with the Wallabies a few years back, it's picking promising players that are seen to have a future and start giving them experience in the team.
 

Gnostic

Mark Ella (57)
I deliberately didn't mention Quade as i was just trying to focus on the glaring issue with Cheikas obvious preference at 10.

Quades kicking in general play is superior to Foleys and if he was the incumbent there would be other flaws I'd be focusing on.

But a 10 just has to be able to kick from hand.

If Cheika doesn't think Quades the answer then he needs to get creative quickly. Otherwise it's just ground hog day.


Too true, it then becomes a balancing act with other selections to cover the deficiencies until Byrne can attempt to work some magic since no other coach in Australia has spent any time on skills development.

In any event if Foley is selected as I've said I do not understand why DHP and Hodge are not in position to provide a kick option and get occasionally used to be a realistic option. No instead we have a tactic where we see a single option in position for the kick, the ball is released slowly and the kicker is under enormous pressure. It isn't just the fault of Foley/Hodge getting charged, its a matter of tactics and is another example of how we have become a dumb rugby nation.
 

Gnostic

Mark Ella (57)
Probably not a dive. He is concussed and now in doubt for the game against Ireland in Chicago.



He looked like he was shot by a sniper and failed his arms about like an Argentine Footballer and was back in the game 30 seconds later.

Add to the fact that he was offside illegally pulling a player to stop him from engaging the breakdown. Not at all like scumbag Franks attacking somebody's face to prevent them contesting the maul. Bit of a pattern there.

Mumm didn't even look back after freeing himself from Retalick, not as if there was intent if there was even an strike. No doubt though Mumm will be found guilty just as Franks wasn't even cited.
 

tragic

John Solomon (38)
In any event if Foley is selected as I've said I do not understand why DHP and Hodge are not in position to provide a kick option and get occasionally used to be a realistic option. No instead we have a tactic where we see a single option in position for the kick, the ball is released slowly and the kicker is under enormous pressure. It isn't just the fault of Foley/Hodge getting charged, its a matter of tactics and is another example of how we have become a dumb rugby nation.

That's what I meant by getting creative.
If he feels there is no other option than foley at 10 then he needs to play Hodge and DHP as dual first receiver options when we are defending in our half and the kick is on.
Shunt foley out to the wing.
It's not ideal but it's better than gifting a rampaging AB backline counter attacking opportunity in our half.
 
A

All Black Magic

Guest
I think mistakes and poor tackling was the most costly aspect of the wallabies performance. Up until the 55th minute the wallabies were in the best position in three decades. Even the ab's had that look of vulnerability about them. In the past and fairly infrequently, this has been times when they can lose a match.

However their fitness, basic skills around the park and will to win overcame that short term worry


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well said and spot on.
The best position for many years.
If you can control for 65 minutes you have only
15 minutes to find.
that's why I said earlier on - the Australian attitude is
right and time will do the rest.
 

tragic

John Solomon (38)
Sweet, now let's discuss how Dane Coles was robbed of a fair try by Foley! No? ..I'll just be going.
IMG_4840.JPG
 

Kenny Powers

Ron Walden (29)
Probably not a dive. He is concussed and now in doubt for the game against Ireland in Chicago.

He continued to play on until the 79th minute. If he was concussed that is disgusting regard for player welfare by Steve Hansen and his management team.

Or is it just this spinning the storyline for the citing committee and the media.

Seriously how Mumm can get cited and Owen Franks not completely blows me away.
 
A

All Black Magic

Guest
Just watched a replay of the try in question
It started on the 22 line so a huge amount of track
to make a tackle.
Sorry but didn't realise earlier it was so far away
from the touch line .
Definite no try.
 

KOB1987

Rod McCall (65)
Call me a cynic but I suspect the concussion will miraculously subside after the hearing.

He continued to play on until the 79th minute. If he was concussed that is disgusting regard for player welfare by Steve Hansen and his management team.

Or is it just this spinning the storyline for the citing committee and the media.

Seriously how Mumm can get cited and Owen Franks not completely blows me away.

Yes. He was up 30 seconds later showing remarkable mobility for someone who'd just been knocked out and not even taken off for a concussion test.
 

Ruggo

Mark Ella (57)
A good can of harden the fuck up wouldn't go astray.
Right the way through the Australian rugby community that is.

Watching Australian rugby as opposed to NZ rugby is like watching wine tasters vs Bricky's laborers.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top