i think i saw Quade make about 3 tackles throughout the match, didnt see him miss any either
He ran away from the tackle area very effectively, thus negating the need to actually tackle. Much.
I am fishing.
i think i saw Quade make about 3 tackles throughout the match, didnt see him miss any either
Do you feel they will embiggen their chances of winning the 6N, these selections?
I don’t think this is about embiggening the Garlic Munchers tilt at the 6N, quite the opposite in fact. One could almost consider this a 6N disembiggermentarianism move by Lièvremont. Experimentation by Lièvremont - yes, but I feel it is a horses for courses selection by him. He has decided that the schwerpunkt is Quade Cooper and has selected a team of big ugly bastards to achieve that.
If he can get schadenfreude by targeting QC (Quade Cooper) with his monsters, then he will unmotivate Dingo to keep him in the RWC11 Squad. As our mercurial gamebreaker, if Lièvremont can get QC (Quade Cooper) disincluded in the Wobs RWC squad, then it will be to the betterment of all RWC teams less the Wobs. As an unpredictable player, QC (Quade Cooper) poses danger and presents discertainty for opposition coaches, making it harder for them to develop their game plans. Most textbook defenders struggle to deal with the saccade like jinking runs of QC (Quade Cooper) on attack. Much easier for the opposition if Dingo is deincentivised from including QC (Quade Cooper) in the RWC squad.
Weak inside backs are not characteristic of 6N, but the Garlic Munchers are likely to come up against these at RWC. Lièvremont is simply trying to experiment with his cattle to give him more options and flexibility in his RWC11 squad. The likely opposition and NZ conditions suggest that a capability grab bag approach will be needed in the squad to give the selectors and coaches the flexibility and options they will need.
You know, it was fantastic to see Robbo come back into form. But we still only maybe got parity in the forwards. The French backline was incredibly horrible, and I'm not sure how much to take out of this game.
Maybe the French backs were just too embiggened for their neural synapses to cope with, and they were unable to control their limbs enough to tackle, pass, run properly...
Maybe Livermong (stole that off the live call, like it) was using a policy of encrapulentarianism to fool everyone that France are no show for RWC 2011, and then will pull his dis-encrapulated team out of his colon to once again embitter the Dark ones to the east of us?
I find it surprising that a lot of people are crediting Robinson for a turnaround in the scrum. It seemed to me that the greatest improvement was made because Slipper moved to tighthead. Surely he deserves more credit? (Particularly when there was a free kick and penalty awarded against Robinson, and I don't think there was one of either against Slipper.)
Ignoring the scrums I think we dominated all other aspects of forward play. Better rucking and counter rucking, better line-out, better drive in the tight. And a much greater commitment in defense.
Pocock is the exception to that rule of forwards running up right though. He makes metres every time he touches it. He is very useful as the first hit up man off a lineout deep in our half as well. They often go to him to set up for a clearance kick after the ruck. He always hits it hard and straight and makes ground which then gives time and space to Cooper, Mitchell, Barnes to get it down town.
Sharpe is good for most of the game but sometimes just gets caught bolt up right and driven back, same with McCalman. Elsom needs to see even more ball in open spaces to use his fend and athleticism. Luckily we have seen more of it this Tour. He destroyed Ouedraogo a few times during the game.