• Welcome to the forums of Green & Gold Rugby.
    We have recently made some changes to the amount of discussions boards on the forum.
    Over the coming months we will continue to make more changes to make the forum more user friendly for all to use.
    Thanks, Admin.

IF NZ and Aust meet ........

Status
Not open for further replies.

Hawko

Tony Shaw (54)
This thread is not a good sign of a healthy understanding of how knockout tournament rugby works. The winner has to play three games in three weeks in which the team has to perform at virtually 100%. All sorts of extraneous issues can interdict the best team doing that, from weather, injury, refereeing through just to plain old bounce-of-the-ball bad luck.

Given this, it is highly unlikely that the two favourite teams will meet in the final. History shows that it is rarely the two favourite teams that go through - look at the past cups. Arguably at least half of them did not have the two pre-tournament favourites in the final. On the balance of history therefore, the chances of Australia and New Zealand meeting in the final, although not negligible, are certainly not likely.

Ergo this thread is all about something that probably won't happen. Daydreaming speculation is just that!
 

Pfitzy

Nathan Sharpe (72)
Pfitzy, The locks, Read as an 8, McCaw over Hooper, and 9,11,13,14.
If you disagree with my assessment of these positions feel free to give your opinion (that was 8 positions not 15, you do comprehend?).

I comprehend. But do you understand how mathematics works?

Let's start with basic addition. Your words were - and I quote:

Forward set-piece; not much between them
Forward open-play; front row NZ more ruck involvement, locks NZ a class above Aust, Vito/Kaino v Fardy I dunno?, Read easily best 8; Pocock best 7 playing at 8, McCaw over Hooper
Backs; NZ a class above Aust, especially 9, 11, 13, and 14
IMO

So that is 2 locks, Read, McCaw, and the entire backline (7 players) - that's 11 positions of a possible 15 on a rugby field, by my count. Not yours, apparently.

AND you're saying "class above" which is probably the most poorly worded thing I've read on GAGR since the RWC. That would imply that the Wallabies can't go with the Kiwis in any of those positions, despite the fact that both teams have lost ONE Test Match this year, to each other, on respective away grounds.

So, really?

Look, I know how this works: any time the All Blacks lose its because they played shit. And any time they win, its because they're the fucking BOMB and the opposition couldn't even get into the game because of their awesomeness. Right? Amiright?

Yet, whenever the Wallabies win e.g. England and Wales the last two weeks, NZ in Sydney earlier in the year, its because the opposition were shit. Never because the Wallabies didn't let them into the game. Something about portions of NZ rugby fandom have turned into IHA (I Hate Australia) whenever we're doing well, and even when we're not.

So let's look at the realities:

The Kiwi scrum is getting lessons from Georgia, so I wouldn't be kneeling down to smoke any of that T5's pole right now. Particularly as the Wallabies dished them up in two games this year at scrum time. Around the field they're still alright but its not going to help if the French scrum and lineout buttfucks the everloving shit out of them and they spend most of the game jogging backwards or watching penalties sail over from their ineptitude.

The Franks boys in particular have been getting more and more shit now they realise lifting truck engines for fun is useless when you're just going to fall on your face and chew grass because you can't hit anyone at scrum time.

And your saviour at loosehead is Wyatt Crockett?

giphy.gif




Let's go to the backs for a second: Smith - undeniable talent, Carter - experienced but fragile, NMS is a revelation, but at least knows what it is to lose a game this early in his career, and Ben Smith has had an indifferent year as an AB after a stellar Super season.

Savea is playing like a fat, lazy fuck who would rather be somewhere else. Conrad Smith as a 13 is barely incisive at the moment and far from his best. In fact, the guy playing pretty well - Nonu - at 12 is probably ahead of Giteau at the moment but doesn't even rate a direct mention in your paragraph of random.

If SBW plays 12 he seems to do well, except against Australia based on the evidence put forward so far. But putting both he an Nonu in the centres is a defensive recipe for disaster - better off starting Nonu and Snake, then bringing SBW off the bench somewhere.

Fekitoa is a far better 13 than any of them right now, I might add, but Conrad's experience gets him over the line this year. Fekitoa is going to be a stellar centre for the ABs moving forward, I might add.

Fardy would walk into that Kiwi team at blindside, combining lineout prowess, defensive nous, hard edge, ruck theft, and the singular ability to niggle the fuck out of anyone, Kiwis included. Pocock speaks for himself and would challenge either McCaw or Read for their spot.

But the two of them might not create the right balance at 6/7 or 7/8 with either Read or McCaw, and that's the thing you have to remember in these analyses.

As for the locks - yeah Brodie is a fucking top unit, and Whitelock handles the lineouts.

But go watch Douglas rip the shit out of the Welsh or English. We were supposed to get bossed by the Pommy pack but Douglas - and indeed our entire forward pack - absolutely double-fisted them and were still going hard at the final whistle when the fat fucks in white had capitulated, with the reserves icing the cake.

Using "class above" is just rubbish. I'll bet the players don't think that, and neither should the fans.

Comprehensive enough?
 

Dewald Nel

Cyril Towers (30)
This thread is not a good sign of a healthy understanding of how knockout tournament rugby works. The winner has to play three games in three weeks in which the team has to perform at virtually 100%. All sorts of extraneous issues can interdict the best team doing that, from weather, injury, refereeing through just to plain old bounce-of-the-ball bad luck.

Given this, it is highly unlikely that the two favourite teams will meet in the final. History shows that it is rarely the two favourite teams that go through - look at the past cups. Arguably at least half of them did not have the two pre-tournament favourites in the final. On the balance of history therefore, the chances of Australia and New Zealand meeting in the final, although not negligible, are certainly not likely.

Ergo this thread is all about something that probably won't happen. Daydreaming speculation is just that!


The last tournament which had both the most likely teams to go through was arguably 1995 - maybe not even. So you make an excellent point.
 

notapatrioticboneinme

Sydney Middleton (9)
I comprehend. But do you understand how mathematics works?

Let's start with basic addition. Your words were - and I quote:

So that is 2 locks, Read, McCaw, and the entire backline (7 players) - that's 11 positions of a possible 15 on a rugby field, by my count. Not yours, apparently.

Pfitzy, LOL, my math seems to be better than your math.
2+1+1+4 ( the 9,11,13, and 14) = 8

And Pfitzy you obviously didn't comprehend, because you've repeated, "and the entire backline", which if you comprehend rugby union a baclline consists of 9,10,11,12,13, 14 and 15.

And I haven't got past your first 3 sentences of your rant.
 

notapatrioticboneinme

Sydney Middleton (9)
AND you're saying "class above" which is probably the most poorly worded thing I've read on GAGR since the RWC. That would imply that the Wallabies can't go with the Kiwis in any of those positions, despite the fact that both teams have lost ONE Test Match this year, to each other, on respective away grounds.
So, really?

Not rapt in your poorly worded, "can't go" either; my understanding of, "class above" obviously not the same as yours. Mine is that if I picked a combined Aust/NZ team then these NZ positions (the locks and the 9,11,13 and 14) would easily be selected over their Australian counterparts. Please note Pfitzy that's 6 positions I am referring to now.
So "can't go", I gather you mean 'can not compete'; I certainly don't think that.
What's the sample size we're talking about here, number of tests played "this year" between Aust and NZ?
 

Viking

Mark Ella (57)
This thread is not a good sign of a healthy understanding of how knockout tournament rugby works. The winner has to play three games in three weeks in which the team has to perform at virtually 100%. All sorts of extraneous issues can interdict the best team doing that, from weather, injury, refereeing through just to plain old bounce-of-the-ball bad luck.

Given this, it is highly unlikely that the two favourite teams will meet in the final. History shows that it is rarely the two favourite teams that go through - look at the past cups. Arguably at least half of them did not have the two pre-tournament favourites in the final. On the balance of history therefore, the chances of Australia and New Zealand meeting in the final, although not negligible, are certainly not likely.

Ergo this thread is all about something that probably won't happen. Daydreaming speculation is just that!


Except we weren't favourite. England and NZ were. ;)
 

notapatrioticboneinme

Sydney Middleton (9)
Look, I know how this works: any time the All Blacks lose its because they played shit. And any time they win, its because they're the fucking BOMB and the opposition couldn't even get into the game because of their awesomeness. Right? Amiright?
Yet, whenever the Wallabies win e.g. England and Wales the last two weeks, NZ in Sydney earlier in the year, its because the opposition were shit. Never because the Wallabies didn't let them into the game. Something about portions of NZ rugby fandom have turned into IHA (I Hate Australia) whenever we're doing well, and even when we're not.

I'm 100% with you with this one; annoys the bejesus out of me
 

notapatrioticboneinme

Sydney Middleton (9)
So let's look at the realities:
The Kiwi scrum is getting lessons from Georgia, so I wouldn't be kneeling down to smoke any of that T5's pole right now. Particularly as the Wallabies dished them up in two games this year at scrum time. Around the field they're still alright but its not going to help if the French scrum and lineout buttfucks the everloving shit out of them and they spend most of the game jogging backwards or watching penalties sail over from their ineptitude.

Yep certainly the scrum against the French, I will be ecstatic if the Aust scrum can get on top of the Darkness ("If both are good enough and fortunate enough to get to the final'); didn't realise the AB's lineout was in trouble?


The Franks boys in particular have been getting more and more shit now they realise lifting truck engines for fun is useless when you're just going to fall on your face and chew grass because you can't hit anyone at scrum time.

And your saviour at loosehead is Wyatt Crockett?
I love Sio
 

notapatrioticboneinme

Sydney Middleton (9)
Let's go to the backs for a second: Smith - undeniable talent, Carter - experienced but fragile, NMS is a revelation, but at least knows what it is to lose a game this early in his career, and Ben Smith has had an indifferent year as an AB after a stellar Super season.

Savea is playing like a fat, lazy fuck who would rather be somewhere else. Conrad Smith as a 13 is barely incisive at the moment and far from his best. In fact, the guy playing pretty well - Nonu - at 12 is probably ahead of Giteau at the moment but doesn't even rate a direct mention in your paragraph of random.

Again, i said 9, 11,13, and 14. You would pick the Australian before the NZ in these positions?
I can't agree Nonu over Giteau, so different skill sets, both so good; that's why I didn't mention the 12; same as the 10, not as obvious, to me, as the 9, 11, 13 and 14.
 

notapatrioticboneinme

Sydney Middleton (9)
Fardy would walk into that Kiwi team at blindside, combining lineout prowess, defensive nous, hard edge, ruck theft, and the singular ability to niggle the fuck out of anyone, Kiwis included.
This I find difficult to believe, not his attributes. I can't see either Aust or NZ being dominant at the 6, that's why I said, "I dunno" in Opost
 

notapatrioticboneinme

Sydney Middleton (9)
Pocock speaks for himself and would challenge either McCaw or Read for their spot.

Aust certainly owes a debt of gratitude to both Namibia and Argentina.

I'd take Read over anyone, including Pocock and the Frenchman, at 8.


But the two of them might not create the right balance at 6/7 or 7/8 with either Read or McCaw, and that's the thing you have to remember in these analyses.
Yep
 

notapatrioticboneinme

Sydney Middleton (9)
As for the locks - yeah Brodie is a fucking top unit, and Whitelock handles the lineouts.
100%


But go watch Douglas rip the shit out of the Welsh or English. We were supposed to get bossed by the Pommy pack but Douglas - and indeed our entire forward pack - absolutely double-fisted them and were still going hard at the final whistle when the fat fucks in white had capitulated, with the reserves icing the cake.
It was beautiful to watch, and re-watch .......
You can check my earlier posts where I was defending Douglas against the nay-sayers earlier this year
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top