Grant NZ
Bill Watson (15)
You fucking what? Fuck this shit, I'm out of here.
New Zealand v Wallabies, Eden Park, Sat 22nd October
- Thread starter KOB1987
- Start date
- Status
You fucking what? Fuck this shit, I'm out of here.
As innocuous as it looked, an elbow flush on the chin is more than enough to knock someone out, and I think it's drawing a very long bow to suggest Retallick was bunging on a Sanchez.
It does seem odd, however, if he was actually knocked out or dazed that standard protocols did not seem to be enacted. That looks like a big stuff-up on someone's part.
But let it go.
It does seem odd, however, if he was actually knocked out or dazed that standard protocols did not seem to be enacted. That looks like a big stuff-up on someone's part.
But let it go.
dru
David Wilson (68)
The thread is utterly depressing. I cant be bothered with anything given the way it has devolved. Lets hope we do better than this in future. Much better.
ForceFan
Peter Fenwicke (45)
Ruck Involvements – All Blacks v Wallabies – Bled 3 - Auckland
The final score line (AB 37:10 Wallabies) was almost the repeat of Bled 1 despite the Wallabies having 65% Possession and 68% of the Territory. Once again the ABs were very effective on making best use of their possession and scoring off the counter-attack.
For 50 minutes the Wallabies were in this game, showing better line speed in defence and consistent support for their ball carriers. However, the pace of the ABs attack continues to put the Wallabies defence under pressure.
Some key aspects are still unchanged throughout Bled 2016:
Both teams were standing off about 40% of Defence Rucks.
I have no TOW data.
Remember:
1. Early means 1st or 2nd of player’s team AFTER the ball carrier has been tackled and brought to ground.
2. Impact means active engagement: strong physical contact, changed shape of ruck, clean-out, protecting ball etc. (more than hand on someone’s bum or arriving after the hard work has been done). Yes it’s subjective - but as I collect all data at least it’s consistent.
3. Impact DOES NOT equate to Effectiveness. I’ve concluded that coming up with an effectiveness measure is just too hard in the time that I have available – but open to suggestions.
50% of ABs Defence Ruck Involvements by Retallick, Todd, Coles and Read.
50% of Wallabies DRIs by Coleman, Hooper & Timani.
Coleman was also leading tackler for the Wallabies (10/10), followed by Mumm (7/7) and Moore (7/7).
Wallabies Front Row strongly supported the Wallabies ball carriers with minimal involvement in Defence Rucks.
Coleman, Hooper, Timani, Kepu, Sio and Arnold showed their highest rucking work rate for 2016.
The post below includes each player’s average Ruck Involvements/80 minutes for Tests in 2016.
Ruck Involvements over Time
The Wallabies upped the intensity after half time but lost some momentum after the disallowed Speight try (45 min).
Crockett (7 tackles) had the biggest impact from off the bench.
The post below includes some additional data.
The final score line (AB 37:10 Wallabies) was almost the repeat of Bled 1 despite the Wallabies having 65% Possession and 68% of the Territory. Once again the ABs were very effective on making best use of their possession and scoring off the counter-attack.
For 50 minutes the Wallabies were in this game, showing better line speed in defence and consistent support for their ball carriers. However, the pace of the ABs attack continues to put the Wallabies defence under pressure.
Some key aspects are still unchanged throughout Bled 2016:
- The ABs continue to have almost double the Off Loads of the Wallabies (28 v 15);
- The ABs were more prepared to kick the ball (19 v 6); and
- The ABs have consistently shown a tackling efficiency of about 90%; the Wallabies about 75%.
Both teams were standing off about 40% of Defence Rucks.
I have no TOW data.
Remember:
1. Early means 1st or 2nd of player’s team AFTER the ball carrier has been tackled and brought to ground.
2. Impact means active engagement: strong physical contact, changed shape of ruck, clean-out, protecting ball etc. (more than hand on someone’s bum or arriving after the hard work has been done). Yes it’s subjective - but as I collect all data at least it’s consistent.
3. Impact DOES NOT equate to Effectiveness. I’ve concluded that coming up with an effectiveness measure is just too hard in the time that I have available – but open to suggestions.
50% of ABs Defence Ruck Involvements by Retallick, Todd, Coles and Read.
50% of Wallabies DRIs by Coleman, Hooper & Timani.
Coleman was also leading tackler for the Wallabies (10/10), followed by Mumm (7/7) and Moore (7/7).
Wallabies Front Row strongly supported the Wallabies ball carriers with minimal involvement in Defence Rucks.
Coleman, Hooper, Timani, Kepu, Sio and Arnold showed their highest rucking work rate for 2016.
The post below includes each player’s average Ruck Involvements/80 minutes for Tests in 2016.
Ruck Involvements over Time
The Wallabies upped the intensity after half time but lost some momentum after the disallowed Speight try (45 min).
Crockett (7 tackles) had the biggest impact from off the bench.
The post below includes some additional data.
ForceFan
Peter Fenwicke (45)
Both teams showed a similar distribution of Ruck Involvements over the main player groups.
The ABs tight 5 are generally more involved than their Wallabies counterparts.
The Wallabies Back Row and Backs usually make up the difference.
The usual picture of the ABs Front Row more involved in DRIs than their Wallabies counterparts.
Wallabies Back Row the most involved player group in DRIs.
Ruck Involvement averages/80 minutes over the 10 Tests so far in 2016.
Players require at least one start to be included.
Strewthcobber
Simon Poidevin (60)
Couldn't reply earlier Reg but espn satas are available for this one
http://www.espn.com.au/rugby/playerstats?gameId=268581&league=268561
Why would you need them though with ForceFan around!
Brumby Runner
Jason Little (69)
I think the kicking stats are remarkable. Six kicks in general play of which presumably three led directly to ABs' tries. That being the case, there is a very loud alarm bell ringing somewhere that needs to be taken seriously by our coaching staff. Either the kicks are poor or the chase is poor, or maybe both. In any case, it seems we need to sharpen up our kicking skills and our defensive efforts and structures when the opposition run the ball back at us.
Scrubber2050
Mark Ella (57)
In the alternative have a magical attacking team (that scores more points than the other mob)
Mr Doug
Dick Tooth (41)
So many here were willing to overlook Quade's public, and very damaging "toxic" comments.
So many here were ready to crucify Beale without knowing the facts.
So many here are willing to forgive their favourite players anything, or find a reason to bring another down.
Folau is the best fullback in the world on form. Right now, he doesn't have form. You don't crucify a bloke because his form drops.
And where is your cutoff? Are we talking points-per-dollar? Like if Genia gets $100K to come back for 5 tests, are we expecting perfection?
Well yeah, but you only get one fullback on the field at a time
I meant ditching him from the Wallabies squad, Pfitzy, (as in replacing Folau with 4 other layers in different positions @ $500k each on the 'roster')!! [But then, maybe you don't get much of a player for $500k per year for three years, these days]?
I don't know the current wages/salaries structure of the national squad, whereas, someone else here may.
Anyway, its clear that many here don't hold such high expectations for Folau, [after 48 tests], as I do, so until the next test, that's all from me on Mr Folau, other than to say that I still think he and Haylett Petty should swap positions, and that I hope he has a blinder in each and every test on the EOYT, (as I wanted him to do at Eden park on Saturday).
I have to say that my expectations of "Rookies": Coleman, Arnold, Timani, and Kerevi were certainly met, and I felt Foley had a strong game.
I've settled down from the "events" in Auckland on Saturday, and will now devote my energies to the EOYT, and supporting Michael Cheika and his players!!
Mr Doug
Dick Tooth (41)
Not really, Rugbybloke123.
Read my reply to Pfitzy's post #1018, which may explain my case.
Scrubber2050
Mark Ella (57)
Folau, on his day is the best fullback in the world.
We have very high expectations on the bloke, because we have all seen what he can do.
But he has not had a dominant, world's best fullback performance for 12 months (inclusive of RWC). His form by his standards is poor.
By other standards he may be playing just OK.
We have very high expectations on the bloke, because we have all seen what he can do.
But he has not had a dominant, world's best fullback performance for 12 months (inclusive of RWC). His form by his standards is poor.
By other standards he may be playing just OK.
wamberal
Phil Kearns (64)
With respect to you and all the commentators who routinely pick Folau as the world's best full-back, I have to demur.
Great full-backs can kick. Usually from the spot as well as the hand, but absolutely from the hand. Long raking kicks that find touch safely 50 metres up the field.
Great full-backs can kick. Usually from the spot as well as the hand, but absolutely from the hand. Long raking kicks that find touch safely 50 metres up the field.
Highlander35
Steve Williams (59)
Ben Smith is the obvious fullback standout, given his more or less complete lack of weaknesses.
Folau is probably the best of the rest, all of whom have some sort of "significant" (see: exploitable) flaw, typically related to kicking, defence, or high ball skills.
Folau is probably the best of the rest, all of whom have some sort of "significant" (see: exploitable) flaw, typically related to kicking, defence, or high ball skills.
Do you have any evidence that Folau is on $2 million / year? I must admit I've never seen it written anywhere yet you keep saying it? Have I missed something?
bosindicus
Frank Row (1)
So long out of the game i forgot about forums and went to a posted article, but had been thinking talking to a mate about scrums in the last game. Given how big of angle nz was feeding the ball in scrums yet we decided not to, was it a tactic to keep long scrums going and tire the dynamism out of the abs?
- Status