Bledisloe 2 - Wallabies vs All Blacks, Wellington, 27 August 2016

[Inside Shoulder]

The meeting never happened. Cheika is lying or badly misinformed.

"Although he did meet with Jaco Peyper in Wellington, who'd refereed the previous Saturday's test in Sydney and was a touch judge at Westpac Stadium.
"It's quite sad that that's come out, because it's not true. Unless you say 'g'day Romain' in the morning [constitutes a clandestine meeting], he stayed here at this hotel," Hansen said on Sunday.
"But I did have a meeting with Jaco Peyper this week, at his request. Crono [All Blacks scrum coach Mike Cron] and I both got asked by him to review some of the stuff that he had seen in our game."

http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/...-refuted-australias-claims-of-secret-meetings

Given the all encompassing powers of an AR at this level how is a meeting with one OK, whoever calls it?
I agree that if Cheika is wrong about a meeting with Poite he's creating a serious credibility issue for himself, which will be compounded when (if) we don't cite franks.
Maybe Peyper bugged the meeting so he would know which Aussies to ping: that's the only way he'd get close to having any idea.

 

[dru]

Anyway interesting watching the replay at moment to watch all the dirty play by All Blacks and chuckling that noone has mentioned the shoulder charge by Moore (without the ball) in the leadup to Daggs first try, or even Hoopers latish hit with seems to be a bit of a swinging arm on Smith that was late. Personally fellas I don't think either team was overly clean or dirty, just a couple of teams getting stuck in!!

I think the Wobblies came at it with uncontrolled aggression that was plain dirty where they stepped too far. In some ways its more reprehensible.

The ABs however are working around the rules to intentionally cheat in an organised intentional system. I wouldnt call that dirty, but it is highly questionable especially in terms of setting standards as the flag bearer to i ternational rugby. What is baffling is that they have mo need to do it. They'd still be #1.

 

[Pedrolicus]

No the defence was not better. It was as bad. The structures remain bad. The intensity lifted is all, and the ABs dropped more pill. The Wallabies conceded 4 tries instead of 6 on a wet night. It was not better or worse, technically just as bad.

Don't you think the all blacks dropping the ball more might have been related to the increased intensity of defence?

 

[Gnostic]

Don't you think the all blacks dropping the ball more might have been related to the increased intensity of defence?

No. Have a look at the instances they dropped it, to say that is giving too much credit to the Wallabies defence. They still missed 30+ tackles. Is that an improvement on 30+ and 6 tries last week.

edit:- the lift in intensity makes it appear better is all. They looked lazy last week and got hammered for it. They tried hard in a poor system. Some players were technically poor as well as individuals but the defensive system that concedes consistently that number of tackles is simply crap.

 

[Gillys_ghost]

for next week i would like to see:

1. Sio
2. Polota-Nau
3. Kepu
4. Douglas
5. Coleman
6. Fardy
7. Pocock
8. Timani
9. Genia
10. Cooper
11. Morohan
12. To'omua/Kerevi/Hodge
13. Kuridrani
14. Mitchell
15. Folau

16. Moore 17. Slipper 18. Robertson 19. Mumm 20. Hooper 21. Phipps 22. Foley 23. Hodge/ DHP

 

[KOB1987]

At the very least World Rugby or even the ARU need to explain why the Franks incident doesn't warrant a citing. If another angle shows there's nothing in it or Douglas said so then fine, but from the angle we've all seen the only people who think there is nothing in it are Poite, Hansen and some kiwis supporters. If it just gets let go the ARU looks incompetent and WR (World Rugby) looks biased given the Lavanini/Retallick incident seemed exactly the same and warranted a 9 week ban.

 

[Beefcake]

Pretty interesting dynamic in all this.
I've only seen the second half at this stage, but Poite's indifference to Pocock's injury makes hi unfit to referee at any level by reason of the simple fact that Pocock justified a concussion test and head Knocks are the number one IRB policing issue with player safety: his behaviour tells the watching world that head injuries to players on the lesser of 2 teams are not as important.
Secondly, whether Franks gouged or not Poite clearly eyeballs him making deliberate contact with head of a player: again the #1 IRB no no of the moment: so that's a penalty if not a card. Again the issue is the potential for serious head or other injury but the clown couldn't give a flying fuck because it's an Aussie.
Not speaking to our captain is less serious but given the cozy up mid week with Shags in breach of another IRB protocol suggests the basis for his arrogant Gallic dismissiveness is a well documented bias.
Does the guy know there were Aussies, indeed wallabies, on the Western Front too?
Finally we have no choice but to cite Franks as a result of Cheika's comments: if we don't we're just beaten whiners.

Ahhh, so is this is why the wobs played poorly? Or why the darkness won?

Addressing Poites' issues or any refereeing issues in general doesnt in any way nullify the shortcomings of the wobs.

Yes, the wobs are the true victims here.

Maybe they should have an advocate at the IRB, wait a minute...

 

[dru]

More like 25%

And of course, 25% of a Beauden, in an Aus 10, right now, is no bad thing.

 

[KOB1987]

Your kidding aren't you. The Wallabies will be lucky to win against Argentina in Australia. I give them at best a 30% chance against the Bok in Brisbane and no chance at all in SA or Arg.

did you watch the game? Have a look at the Boks stats from their first 2 games, they aren't markedly better than ours and they were playing Argentina, we were playing NZ. They've got their own share of issues too and if we just slightly fix up a few of our own we are more than a live chance in Brisbane. If we were to win there we will actually leapfrog them into #3 on the rankings.

 

[Strewthcobber]

Poite destroyed our scrum against England last time- so maybe we have improved in that area? Although with him refereeing everything seems to be a lottery

Fundamentally, we didn't get any clean ball at the back of the scrum until the 75th minute.

We can blame refs, we can blame cheating opposition, but it really doesn't matter in the end.

Got to take them out of it at international level

 

[KOB1987]

Ahhh, so is this is why the wobs played poorly? Or why the darkness won?

Addressing Poites' issues or any refereeing issues in general doesnt in any way nullify the shortcomings of the wobs.

Yes, the wobs are the true victims here.

Maybe they should have an advocate at the IRB, wait a minute.

In fairness IS has been quite vocal about how shite the Wallabies are at the moment.

 

[Quick Hands]

The Wallabies need to cut out the "all the refs hate us" line. It's not true and while I can understand posters on internet threads running with it, it's not something that the ARU or the coach should be adopting.

Almost all referees react that same way to Stephen Moore when he approaches them, and have done for at least 2 years. I think there's a message there.

In terms of the Owen Franks incident - certainly looked bad and I would have thought that an immediate penalty would have been the best way of handling it. The lack of on-field reaction from Douglas and the Wallabies (and the captain), suggest that there's not as much in it as some would like to think. It's open to the ARU to cite Franks and produce photos of Douglas' eyes/face to support their case. If this isn't done, then it's time to move on.

The alleged clandestine meeting between Poite and Hansen is the reddest of red herrings. If we've descended to that as a factor in what occurred on the field, then we have completely lost the plot.

 

[Pedrolicus]

No. Have a look at the instances they dropped it, to say that is giving too much credit to the Wallabies defence. They still missed 30+ tackles. Is that an improvement on 30+ and 6 tries last week.

edit:- the lift in intensity makes it appear better is all. They looked lazy last week and got hammered for it. They tried hard in a poor system. Some players were technically poor as well as individuals but the defensive system that concedes consistently that number of tackles is simply crap.

My bad, the players put in more effort making them appear to defend better.

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

As if he would admit to it

Sent from my SM-G928I using Tapatalk

So TGC accuses a senior match official of misconduct, a senior player of the foulest of foul play, produces zero evidence of the first, his employers don't back him up on the second, yet it's Hansen who has the credibility problem?

Promise me you'll never change, Shiggins, you should DEFIANTLY maintain the rage.

 

[Shiggins]

So TGC accuses a senior match official of misconduct, a senior player of the foulest of foul play, produces zero evidence of the first, his employers don't back him up on the second, yet it's Hansen who has the credibility problem?

Promise me you'll never change, Shiggins, you should DEFIANTLY maintain the rage.

What about last week? Nz did the exact same thing with the bug. On game day. They set up cheika. Now he hits back and he is the problem. Please

Sent from my SM-G928I using Tapatalk

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Ahhh, so is this is why the wobs played poorly? Or why the darkness won?

Addressing Poites' issues or any refereeing issues in general doesnt in any way nullify the shortcomings of the wobs.

Yes, the wobs are the true victims here.

Maybe they should have an advocate at the IRB, wait a minute.

That's he beauty of the criticism.
We are so bad that no ref would make any difference. That doesn't man we should settle for less than mediocrity - that's how we got to here.

 

[KOB1987]

So TGC accuses a senior match official of misconduct, a senior player of the foulest of foul play, produces zero evidence of the first, his employers don't back him up on the second, yet it's Hansen who has the credibility problem?

Promise me you'll never change, Shiggins, you should DEFIANTLY maintain the rage.

how do you know he has produced zero evidence? He has lodged an official complaint. Re the second issue, it's only midday here and they are probably on a plane.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

So TGC accuses a senior match official of misconduct, a senior player of the foulest of foul play, produces zero evidence of the first, his employers don't back him up on the second, yet it's Hansen who has the credibility problem?

Promise me you'll never change, Shiggins, you should DEFIANTLY maintain the rage.

It's not surprising as an all black supporter that you overlook the fact that, in this country, there's always something happening in rugby that at minimum maintains the rage

 

[Shiggins]

how do you know he has produced zero evidence? He has lodged an official complaint. Re the second issue, it's only midday here and they are probably on a plane.

Also from what i have read it came from the aru first. Not cheika

Sent from my SM-G928I using Tapatalk

 

[Gnostic]

did you watch the game? Have a look at the Boks stats from their first 2 games, they aren't markedly better than ours and they were playing Argentina, we were playing NZ. They've got their own share of issues too and if we just slightly fix up a few of our own we are more than a live chance in Brisbane. If we were to win there we will actually leapfrog them into #3 on the rankings.

Yes I did, and they actually have a functional attack within their usual parameters and defensive system. Add to that a good lineout and reasonable scrum (given they were against the Pumas) they have their basics covered. As fore "slightly fix up", Mr Grey your easy to fix defensive issues conceded another four tries to nil and 30 tackles missed. Please.....