Wallabies v Springboks Saturday 9th Sept NIB Stadium

[KAOPointman]

I thought the segment on our attacking breakdown problems on Kick and Chase last night was pretty good.

They highlighted how too often our backs in particular should have been committing to the breakdown they were near but instead ran elsewhere to re-align.

There were also a couple of instances where McMahon and other forwards were in logical places to hit the breakdown to secure our ball and instead stood off and we got punished.

Yep...perfect eg was bled 2 when on attack, Foley slipped over after a 1st phase set play move, was easily the closest player to the ruck....which ended up being lost.....but he then stands up and points accusingly to the players 10ms away for not cleaning out!
That to me is the "basics" of rugby not being performed sufficiently!

 

[Braveheart81]

Yep.perfect eg was bled 2 when on attack, Foley slipped over after a 1st phase set play move, was easily the closest player to the ruck..which ended up being lost...but he then stands up and points accusingly to the players 10ms away for not cleaning out!
That to me is the "basics" of rugby not being performed sufficiently!

Rugby must be really unpleasant for you to watch given it seems your entire focus is trying to find things wrong with one specific player.

 

[Derpus]

Yep.perfect eg was bled 2 when on attack, Foley slipped over after a 1st phase set play move, was easily the closest player to the ruck..which ended up being lost...but he then stands up and points accusingly to the players 10ms away for not cleaning out!
That to me is the "basics" of rugby not being performed sufficiently!

Wonder how often BB, Jantjies, Sanchez, Farrell etc. hit rucks to clean out?Never doesn't sound unreasonable.

 

[Brumby Runner]

Genia poor? Huh. Even sooo.havnt heard of the young brumby star coming through hey...he's very good.
Totally agree about Robertson...I've asked a million times what that guy does good to get picked and never heard a decent response. He's small, slow and unimpressive in all facets.
As for Speight and Hodge...I think u watched a diff game...they had good games with some exceptions running lines and great metres gained!
And Foley..well nothing knew there...if he kicks well...he at least gets one thing right a game!
As for Hooper having a crap game...you lost me there biiig time....

I agree. Hodge ran some excellent lines when given the ball and never looked like being bundled into touch. Henry was all over the field looking for the ball or offering a dummy run to confuse the defense, and when he ran he invariably took a couple of defenders to stop him. He also hit a lot of rucks with purpose and strength. The wingers certainly don't have to answer for the failure to win the game.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

This is why the most likely options at number 8 next year are Pocock or an uncapped option, most likely Naisarani. Holloway could put himself in the frame if he has a stellar Super Rugby season but he'd seem to be a long shot.

It is a reasonable bet that the uncapped, not currently eligible Naisarani will be the best option at some point next year. That's a pretty poor position to be in but it is certainly the reality.

Everyone is critical of playing both Pocock and Hooper but the reality is that both are consistently amongst our best players and the games that Pocock did play at number 8 were better than any true number 8s have provided for us as an alternative on a consistent basis.

It's a case of compromising by picking someone who isn't a specialist in that position or by compromising and picking someone who just isn't particularly good.

Naisarani at least playing like someone who could grow into a top world class 8 when eligible next year if he keeps on the current improvement trajectory he has shown over the last two years.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[KAOPointman]

Rugby must be really unpleasant for you to watch given it seems your entire focus is trying to find things wrong with one specific player.

Incorrect.....I LOVE rugby.....havnt missed watching a super game in many years, and GanGR is not the only place I discuss rugby.....but the "topic" your referring too just never gets any discussion here! The blindness of the casual rugby community has been proven many times with reasonably fair critical assessments of said player over what is now an entire season of poor performances! And when punters choose him in their top 3....it becomes comical!

 

[cyclopath]

Incorrect...I LOVE rugby...havnt missed watching a super game in many years, and GanGR is not the only place I discuss rugby...but the "topic" your referring too just never gets any discussion here! The blindness of the casual rugby community has been proven many times with reasonably fair critical assessments of said player over what is now an entire season of poor performances! And when punters choose him in their top 3..it becomes comical!

Because you write something repeatedly doesn't make it proven , it just makes it repeated. And plenty of people critique Foley, and many others, around here. Reading a few threads would demonstrate that pretty clearly. So you're hardly a beacon of light. When you only ever critique one player, it sounds like an obsession, rather than ground-breaking analysis.

 

[KAOPointman]

Because you write something repeatedly doesn't make it proven , it just makes it repeated. And plenty of people critique Foley, and many others, around here. Reading a few threads would demonstrate that pretty clearly. So you're hardly a beacon of light. When you only ever critique one player, it sounds like an obsession, rather than ground-breaking analysis.

Plenty of people hey.....that's a laugh! I don't claim to be anything other then what I right in my comments!
I back up my comments with facts...and occasionally shoot down others....with facts....(like the wild claim that Reece Hodge had a shocker last week despite him having arguably his best game all year). And by your logic you have no right to critique me....unless that is of course you can prove my comments wrong! Which you can't.....because cheap shots seem easier. Why can't you just leave it about RUGBY instead of making it personal?

 

[cyclopath]

Plenty of people hey...that's a laugh! I don't claim to be anything other then what I right in my comments!
I back up my comments with facts.and occasionally shoot down others..with facts..(like the wild claim that Reece Hodge had a shocker last week despite him having arguably his best game all year). And by your logic you have no right to critique me..unless that is of course you can prove my comments wrong! Which you can't...because cheap shots seem easier. Why can't you just leave it about RUGBY instead of making it personal?

You know that just writing "facts" a few times doesn't make anything you write necessarily a fact?
Your last sentence is a delicious irony.

 

[dru]

@Cyclo, your giving this bloke a hard time, is it overdone a bit? No of course repeating something doesn't make it fact, and yes he comes across fixated on Foley.

But you know none of that means he must be wrong. AND he does put up after games with the details he is seeing about the guy. And that includes where he sees good.

So you don't think he backs up with what you are prepared to accept as "facts". Surely though you must see that he provides detail. AD nauseam perhaps, but detail nonetheless.

 

[cyclopath]

@Cyclo, your giving this bloke a hard time, is it overdone a bit? No of course repeating something doesn't make it fact, and yes he comes across fixated on Foley.

But you know none of that means he must be wrong. AND he does put up after games with the details he is seeing about the guy. And that includes where he sees good.

So you don't think he backs up with what you are prepared to accept as "facts". Surely though you must see that he provides detail. AD nauseam perhaps, but detail nonetheless.

I didn't say he must be wrong. I don't understand why anyone puts so much energy into slating one player, as I stated above. It seems over the top to me. And frankly, it's tedious.