Highlanders v Waratahs. Invercargill.
- Thread starter Lee Grant
- Start date
- Status
C
chriscullen
Guest
I gained a bonus point on the gagr tipping comp by picking highlanders by 16 pts,it moved me up from 75th to 57th place. Sad as it may be this will probably be my highlight of the weekend.
P
PhucNgo
Guest
PhucNgo said:
I know this isn't good form, but,hhm, I rest my case your honour. (Hhm = I am so pissed off I can't speak properly.)
Thankyou Mister Hickey. Like that wasn't predictable. Tahs like to think they've got plenty of ticker, which they probably have, but they have no brains and no mongrel.
Just a request for the Tahs administration. As part of the halftime bruhaha during the Hurricanes match, can we organise a foot race between Tom Carter and nominees from each Sydney club, of their slowest player, and see who comes last. Man that guy is slow.
Jethro Tah
Bob Loudon (25)
I was out and about so missed the coverage, and glad I did by the sounds of it. Who would get 3-2-1 if the rating was judged on responsibility for the loss? I expect Hickey would get a 4 because of his inability to put any willingness in the players.
Cheers,
Cheers,
rsea
Darby Loudon (17)
Waugh calls the shots, Waugh should take the blame. Hickey hasn't had any effect on the Tahs since he showed up and might as well not be there.Paris Tah said:
Breakdown was a disaster so I guess the pack
Halangahu for not taking control
Holmes was pretty bad tonight apart from one nice ball, but no worse than Burgess
Mitchell made some mistakes with the boot
What a mess
Hawko
Tony Shaw (54)
Biffo said:
Based on tonight's performance, the punishment is fair.
Can I just say in my defense that I suggested that Ducka Caldwell might have been a good man to have in the team for a game like this. Wouldn't have changed the result but he might have tackled with a bit of venom and made me feel less disappointed. Long time since the Waratah pack has been smashed like that, tacklers were going backwards faster than they ran forwards to engage.
Can I also just mention that other wise men from this forum (and this thread, even) now look nearly as foolish as I do.
Grandmaster Flash
Johnnie Wallace (23)
One question: Palmer is rated quite highly as an emerging tighthead. Why was he and Baxter (who started life as a loosehead) not swapped for this match if both were starting?
Lee Grant
John Eales (66)
There will be a lot of angst amongst Tahs fans and during the week there will be a lot of discussion and criticism of this back or that about being to slow, or too fat, or can't pass and can't kick, or can't tackle or can't whatever. Hair styles may rate a mention also.
Reading the above comment people may go to keyboards and protest they were correct to write such things since Blind Freddy could see this or that. They may even have some stats and post some videos from YouTube or whatever they call it. I wouldn't be surprised.
It doesn't matter if these people are right about the backs. It doesn't matter if they are wrong either. What is relevant and always has been, is now, and ever will be, is the performance of the forwards.
If the same Tahs forwards dominate the ruck and pick and go next week as the Clan forwards did in Invercargill, just as many people will be praising the same backs they criticised this week and there will some of them who won't be able to work out why they improved so much in such a short time.
I'm not saying the backs played well ; I'm asking why we expected them to play well when their own forwards were back-pedalling when they had the ball, and why, if that is the case, did they not make the Clan forwards back-pedal as many times when they had it.
One reason I would like to entertain if folks can be distracted from talking about which back should be dumped for next week, is a lack of participation.
When the Clan had the pill they took it up close to the ruck on pick and goes time after time. They were like well drilled soldiers. The Tahs forwards didn't commit enough to the breakdown and hello, here's another pod of three smashing through because they got superior force at a weak point. 20 minutes later they were doing the same thing and the Tahs were still looking surprised. They were looking at what was happening a metre or so away then chasing the intruders.
It seemed clear to this old rugby head that they needed a couple of guys behind the ruck and not so many wider. When the Tahs were trying the same thing with their pick and goes they were attacked by defensive pods almost before they got going.
I thought the Clan forwards gave rugby a little win tonight. It showed that clever dick defences that spread out to try to suffocate attacks wider out can be punished by going up the guts if you did that how the Clan did it - time and time again, and with accuracy of retention and an overwhelming belief in each other.
If you have that it your repertoire you can drag defenders into the centre of gravity of play and then whip it out to the backs who will start looking good. Then I will grind my teeth reading - wow didn't number (put in any number 9 or above) play well? Mark my words, he's going to be a Wallaby - you read it here first.
End of rant. Good night and good luck.
Reading the above comment people may go to keyboards and protest they were correct to write such things since Blind Freddy could see this or that. They may even have some stats and post some videos from YouTube or whatever they call it. I wouldn't be surprised.
It doesn't matter if these people are right about the backs. It doesn't matter if they are wrong either. What is relevant and always has been, is now, and ever will be, is the performance of the forwards.
If the same Tahs forwards dominate the ruck and pick and go next week as the Clan forwards did in Invercargill, just as many people will be praising the same backs they criticised this week and there will some of them who won't be able to work out why they improved so much in such a short time.
I'm not saying the backs played well ; I'm asking why we expected them to play well when their own forwards were back-pedalling when they had the ball, and why, if that is the case, did they not make the Clan forwards back-pedal as many times when they had it.
One reason I would like to entertain if folks can be distracted from talking about which back should be dumped for next week, is a lack of participation.
When the Clan had the pill they took it up close to the ruck on pick and goes time after time. They were like well drilled soldiers. The Tahs forwards didn't commit enough to the breakdown and hello, here's another pod of three smashing through because they got superior force at a weak point. 20 minutes later they were doing the same thing and the Tahs were still looking surprised. They were looking at what was happening a metre or so away then chasing the intruders.
It seemed clear to this old rugby head that they needed a couple of guys behind the ruck and not so many wider. When the Tahs were trying the same thing with their pick and goes they were attacked by defensive pods almost before they got going.
I thought the Clan forwards gave rugby a little win tonight. It showed that clever dick defences that spread out to try to suffocate attacks wider out can be punished by going up the guts if you did that how the Clan did it - time and time again, and with accuracy of retention and an overwhelming belief in each other.
If you have that it your repertoire you can drag defenders into the centre of gravity of play and then whip it out to the backs who will start looking good. Then I will grind my teeth reading - wow didn't number (put in any number 9 or above) play well? Mark my words, he's going to be a Wallaby - you read it here first.
End of rant. Good night and good luck.
Langthorne
Phil Hardcastle (33)
Reddy! said:
I haven't been criticising Hynes' speed, but if I'm pretty sure most of the comments related to his pace compared to other wingers.
There are a few other considerations that are generally taken into account when discussing potential Wallaby backs: passing, catching, kicking, defence, strength in the tackle, tactical astuteness...the list goes on....if we are comparing Hynes and Beale I'd say Hynes is ahead in pace and defence.
Beale was one of the few Waratahs who played well against the Highlanders. I would add TPN, Palmer (considering what limited opportunities he has had), Turner, Mitchell, and Waugh as having OK matches.
My long rant about the negatives didn't get published, needless to say there were many, but LG has it pretty well covered when he points to the lack of forward movement from the forwards. I would also add that general ball security in contact, and control at the breakdown were critical issues.
I though Phil Waugh's comment that they were out 'willed' was pretty right (which is not to say the coach is off the hook, although he isn't the one on the field...).
Godfrey
Phil Hardcastle (33)
Whoever said the Waratahs looked like they only needed to turn up to win really hit the nail on the head. The most important aspect of the loss, more so in my opinion than any of the Tahs' peformances, was that the Highlanders played very good, very hungry football. They had some absolute standouts in that pack.
Pfitzy
Nathan Sharpe (72)
^
What Lee said. At the start of the second half the Clan were 36 pick n go to 2 by the Tahs. It was wet, passing was hard, and stupid offloads create havoc because getting forwards there is difficult on a heavy track. They kept up with these tactics and the Tahs didn't even try to disrupt that through poor tactics and leadership.
No need IMHO. Palmer was actually good at scrum time, but the Clan props got smarter in the second half. See, once he's found the distance to the hit, Palmer settles into a routine where his shoulders and hips are perfectly level, allowing him to be one of the best technical THPs we've got, and a pretty handy Loosehead too.
In the second half, the Clan THP would pull back just a touch on the engage. The result is Palmer would over-extend, get his shoulders below his hips at the point of contact. He didn't adjust to this, and the scrum didn't talk to Phil to get in the ref's ear about a closer setup.
One thing I am shitty about is the scrum we had in their 22 during the second half, where they just stepped around the corner and Lawrence called it a change of feed. Worst decision of the night... well besides leaving Caldwell out.
What Lee said. At the start of the second half the Clan were 36 pick n go to 2 by the Tahs. It was wet, passing was hard, and stupid offloads create havoc because getting forwards there is difficult on a heavy track. They kept up with these tactics and the Tahs didn't even try to disrupt that through poor tactics and leadership.
Grandmaster Flash said:
No need IMHO. Palmer was actually good at scrum time, but the Clan props got smarter in the second half. See, once he's found the distance to the hit, Palmer settles into a routine where his shoulders and hips are perfectly level, allowing him to be one of the best technical THPs we've got, and a pretty handy Loosehead too.
In the second half, the Clan THP would pull back just a touch on the engage. The result is Palmer would over-extend, get his shoulders below his hips at the point of contact. He didn't adjust to this, and the scrum didn't talk to Phil to get in the ref's ear about a closer setup.
One thing I am shitty about is the scrum we had in their 22 during the second half, where they just stepped around the corner and Lawrence called it a change of feed. Worst decision of the night... well besides leaving Caldwell out.
- Status