• 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.

Wallabies v France - June 14 Etihad Stadium

Status
Not open for further replies.

Braveheart81

Will Genia (78)
Staff member
I find it surprising that White has been given as much credit as he has after kicking 1 from 4. I'd have docked him a point for that in the player ratings (likewise if he'd kicked well he would gain a point).

I thought he was pretty good around the field and his running game was one of the better things we had on attack. He went the wrong direction a couple of times when we were attacking in their 22.

Given he did the majority of the general play kicking he needs to shoulder some of the blame for it not being particularly effective. That said, he kicked better than To'omua who was our other main kicker.
 

EatSleepDrinkRuck

Larry Dwyer (12)
I fail to see how you can have a kicking/territory oriented game plan that doesn't involve any up and unders.


Agree 100% - they needed to put up the centrefield bomb with Izzy chasing to get the french fullback centred and close to the line. Then put the long corner kicks in to get both wings dropped back. Once you've got the three at the back you have numbers and get crazy with your back line.
 

Mr Doug

Dick Tooth (41)
I like this post-match comment from Link, (in this morning's GAGR email):

"A lot of teams scrum for penalties, we scrum to get the ball out and play with the back line"!
 

KOB1987

Rod McCall (65)
White is second worst on the player ratings to the right here >>>
only Foley below him.

Bit of a discrepancy between that and Ch 10!
 

Viking

Mark Ella (57)
Agree 100% - they needed to put up the centrefield bomb with Izzy chasing to get the french fullback centred and close to the line. Then put the long corner kicks in to get both wings dropped back. Once you've got the three at the back you have numbers and get crazy with your back line.


Agreed. The All Blacks use the up and under so effectively. I'm not sure why we aren't doing the same especially with Falou in the team.
 

Richo

John Thornett (49)
White is second worst on the player ratings to the right here >>>
only Foley below him.

Bit of a discrepancy between that and Ch 10!


Those rankings are fine, but more an exercise in displaying perception than actually getting a good picture of how most players played. How To'omua is at 7 with a +200 differential is beyond me. He's been great his last few games, but was rather sub-par on Saturday. He should be at the bottom of the list, right above Foley. It's like half the voters don't watch the game! (But then again, I'm probably wrong).

At least Kepu and Slipper have the ranks they deserve.
 

ChargerWA

Mark Loane (55)
White is second worst on the player ratings to the right here >>>
only Foley below him.

Bit of a discrepancy between that and Ch 10!

But that's certainly not the norm. I feel those ratings >>>> usually mirror the general consensus.

It probably more goes to show what a bastard of a game it was.
 

Pfitzy

George Gregan (70)
Yeah fuck its like a game or rugby, viewed through the lens of a thousand different eyes, produces a different opinion on each player in almost everyone.

o_O
 

Slim 293

Stirling Mortlock (74)
Indeed...........

Fardy has received plenty of points in the MOTM thread, was the second highest rated player in the Tele, and only one of two Aussies in Fairfax's team of the week.......

But only received a 5 and a pretty poor review in the ratings article on G&GR..........
 
T

Train Without a Station

Guest
Did he deserve higher? If so, why? I will admit I didn't watch the game closely as I was having beers and talking crap with my mates there, but I didn't notice him as above average.
 

barbarian

Phil Kearns (64)
Staff member
Indeed.....

Fardy has received plenty of points in the MOTM thread, was the second highest rated player in the Tele, and only one of two Aussies in Fairfax's team of the week...

But only received a 5 and a pretty poor review in the ratings article on G&GR....

Ah, so I should have rated him high because everyone thinks he had a great game? OK.

Should I have panned Nic White like everyone else as well?

It all comes down to opinion in the end, not really worth getting too stressed about.
.
 

Slim 293

Stirling Mortlock (74)
Ah, so I should have rated him high because everyone thinks he had a great game? OK.

Should I have panned Nic White like everyone else as well?

It all comes down to opinion in the end, not really worth getting too stressed about.
.

Don't worry, I'm not having a go..........

Just reinforcing Pfitzy's comments about polarising opinions...........

Certainly Nic White is the case example with people regarding him anywhere in between MOTM to the worst player on the field.........

But yes, you should've rated Fardy higher......... don't do it again. ;)
 

Hawko

Tony Shaw (54)
Different style?

Not really, better opposition, yeah.

The French defended really well and stopped Aus getting the pigs over the advantage line. When any team stops the front foot ball, then the backs have to ensure the game is played at the other end of the field. So it becomes a kicking fest and you just can't run complicated back line moves behind the advantage line.

Not sure of your vintage FP, but in the sixties, seventies and early eighties the Wallaby pack never had front foot ball. But we still were able to run complicated backline plays behind the gain line instead of kicking it away. Those plays were our forte as a rugby nation. Granted we didn't often win, we weren't good enough, but we were still able to play good running rugby. You can run slow ruck ball and be successful, but it requires a different mindset and different coaching skills.

Just because most coaches have read in the manual that if you don't have front foot ball you must kick, it doesn't mean that its THE truth. Its just the truth of the coaches that believe it. Randwick teams in the 60's and 70's used to say that if they could get 40% possession (of any type, good or bad) they were bound to win.

I hope Cyril Towers didn't watch McKenzie's offering from up in heaven. He would have had something to say about last Saturday.
 

formerflanker

Ken Catchpole (46)
Not sure of your vintage FP, but in the sixties, seventies and early eighties the Wallaby pack never had front foot ball. But we still were able to run complicated backline plays behind the gain line instead of kicking it away. Those plays were our forte as a rugby nation. Granted we didn't often win, we weren't good enough, but we were still able to play good running rugby. You can run slow ruck ball and be successful, but it requires a different mindset and different coaching skills.

Just because most coaches have read in the manual that if you don't have front foot ball you must kick, it doesn't mean that its THE truth. Its just the truth of the coaches that believe it. Randwick teams in the 60's and 70's used to say that if they could get 40% possession (of any type, good or bad) they were bound to win.

I hope Cyril Towers didn't watch McKenzie's offering from up in heaven. He would have had something to say about last Saturday.

Excellent point.
My vintage allows me to remember fondly sending mere slips of prop forwards up against the man mountains of South Africa and still competing with flair and style in the backs.
Unless its a case of the older I am, the better we were........
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top