New Zealand Rugby Team Watch

[Braveheart81]

It's interesting that some journalists have pointed to the All Blacks as being the perfect RWC squad in terms of selection decisions. I really don't think that's the case.

Clearly they're the strongest team with the most depth so their squad is always going to look great. I don't think it has particularly less holes than other teams though.

We've discussed this a reasonable amount already but the gaps are certainly at lock, fullback and wing combinations in my opinion.

If Ben Smith is injured, is Milner-Skudder the backup 15 or is it Barrett/Slade? None of those seem like ideal options and highlights the risk of not picking Piutau.

There's been a bunch of discussion about wing combinations and whether Naholo and Savea would have some substantial weaknesses in defence if used together. Savea's form and the lack of experience of NMS and Naholo could also cause concern.

Lastly, having only three locks who will presumably be in the matchday 23 for all the key games is something of a risk. If one of the locks got injured before a key game, does Kaino go from being the starting 6 to being the bench lock? Certainly far from ideal.

 

[Viking]

It's interesting that some journalists have pointed to the All Blacks as being the perfect RWC squad in terms of selection decisions. I really don't think that's the case.

Clearly they're the strongest team with the most depth so their squad is always going to look great. I don't think it has particularly less holes than other teams though.

We've discussed this a reasonable amount already but the gaps are certainly at lock, fullback and wing combinations in my opinion.

If Ben Smith is injured, is Milner-Skudder the backup 15 or is it Barrett/Slade? None of those seem like ideal options and highlights the risk of not picking Piutau.

There's been a bunch of discussion about wing combinations and whether Naholo and Savea would have some substantial weaknesses in defence if used together. Savea's form and the lack of experience of NMS and Naholo could also cause concern.

Lastly, having only three locks who will presumably be in the matchday 23 for all the key games is something of a risk. If one of the locks got injured before a key game, does Kaino go from being the starting 6 to being the bench lock? Certainly far from ideal.

All Blacks are pretty lucky that they have such a weak group which I think will certainly help reduce injury risk. It's basically 3 warm-up matches and a bit of a Test against Argentina.

 

[Braveheart81]

All Blacks are pretty lucky that they have such a weak group which I think will certainly help reduce injury risk. It's basically 3 warm-up matches and a bit of a Test against Argentina.

Not so sure.

Last RWC we were decimated by injury against the USA.

Beale did his groin, Palu got injured and left the tournament, Rob Horne broke his cheekbone and left the tournament, Pat McCabe further injured his shoulder. Anthony Fainga'a got knocked out.

Then against Russia, Drew Mitchell tore his hamstring.

 

[Viking]

Not so sure.

Last RWC we were decimated by injury against the USA.

Beale did his groin, Palu got injured and left the tournament, Rob Horne broke his cheekbone and left the tournament, Pat McCabe further injured his shoulder. Anthony Fainga'a got knocked out.

Then against Russia, Drew Mitchell tore his hamstring.

well that pretty much destroys my theory then!

Seems to be a good idea by Cheika then to play an entirely different 15 against Uruguay. Hope our guys stay injury free against Fiji.

 

[teach]

Look at how long it took for B.Smith to displace Dagg. He had to easily be the top Super Rugby fullback in the country for years, and then endure getting shifted about the test backline before he could displace a favourite.

We were bloody lucky he stuck around for so long. His debut was 2009 for god's sake. It wasn't till Jane's injury in 2013 that he got a decent crack.

 

[ACT Crusader]

Not so sure.

Last RWC we were decimated by injury against the USA.

Beale did his groin, Palu got injured and left the tournament, Rob Horne broke his cheekbone and left the tournament, Pat McCabe further injured his shoulder. Anthony Fainga'a got knocked out.

Then against Russia, Drew Mitchell tore his hamstring.

With all those injuries, to me the Wallabies got as far as they could in 2011. They played one hell of a test vs the Boks and then came up against the hosts at a ground that had not been kind to them for many years. All things considered, the Wallabies had a pretty good tournament.

 

[qwerty51]

Yeah I think so too. We only conceded 1 try in that semi and I put down the performance mainly due to fatigue from the SA game, we defended all game against the big Saffers, had to have been toiling on the body after 5 games in a row. Given we easily beat Wales later on twice that year who had a very good tournament i think we were a comfortable 2nd in the world then. Not sure what happened, it seemed to go to shit from there on, Quade's injury probably the biggest factor.

 

[Dan54]

http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/...-done-as-an-all-black-yet-vows-to-bounce-back

Like to see this from a player, missed the WC but hasn't dropped his lip!!

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

With Charlie Faumuina having now gotten through two part-games for Auckland (& saying he'd like a third on Wednesday night before flying out Thursday) I guess we can assume he'll start v Argentina & provided he gets through that OK most of the big games thereafter.

Shag has said he'll put his strongest-possible 23 out v Argentina, which IMO would be:

1. Woodcock 2. Coles 3. Faumuina 4. Retallick 5. Whitelock 6. Kaino* 7. McCaw 8. Read 9. A Smith 10. Carter 11. Savea 12. Nonu 13. C Smith 14. Milner-Skudder 15. B Smith 16. Taylor 17. Crockett 18. B Franks 19. Romano 20. Cane 21. Perenara 22. Fekitoa 23. Barrett

* Vito was great in Bledisloe 2 & Kaino looked out of sorts prior but I think they'll regard that as an aberration & that Vito's role will be to cover/ rest Read & play lock v one or more minnow.

I still have no idea how they're gonna resolve the Savea/ Naholo thing except to say I don't believe they'll have them both in a starting XV & since neither has utility value that rules out having both in a 23. What may work in Savea's favour is selectorial loyalty plus conservatism: would they really risk having two wings with >12 caps between them starting a Cup Semi or Final?

 

[zer0]

I still have no idea how they're gonna resolve the Savea/ Naholo thing except to say I don't believe they'll have them both in a starting XV & since neither has utility value that rules out having both in a 23. What may work in Savea's favour is selectorial loyalty plus conservatism: would they really risk having two wings with >12 caps between them starting a Cup Semi or Final?

Barring injury, Hansen will start them both come the knockout matches. He pretty much has to. He's selected Naholo whilst being unfit, and has said this about him:

"What are the rewards of taking Waisake? Well, he is a try-scoring machine, he has X-factor and he brings something to the team that others in the group don't bring. ..... We can't win this World Cup by just having the ordinary, we have got to have something different and he (Naholo) provides that."

http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/...winger-waisake-naholo-for-the-rugby-world-cup

Justifying his selection in that manner and then not playing him in the major matches would be odd -- to say the least -- and should rightfully lead to some questions over his selections. Though I wouldn't hold out much hope of that happening.

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

^^^^^^^ he does have an out tho as he can simply leave Naholo out on the grounds that whereas he's fit he's not quite fit enough compared to Savea..... yeah, OK, that presupposes that Savea is fit himself which right now he looks anything but.

As you may have noticed I so want you to be wrong about an 11. Savea 14. Naholo scenario: in 42 years of AB-following I'm struggling to think of an incumbent selectorial group who've made such a radical change from a structure that's worked so well for so long.

Put another way: if the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over & over but expecting a different result,,what do you call doing something different for the sake of doing something different & expecting the SAME result?

 

[Dan54]

I think any team has to change to try and keep ahead of chasing packs etc, regardless of where you are on the ladder you have to keep a chanhing team pattern.

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

^^^^^^ I'd agree IF the two fullback structure were failing us or at least in clear & obvious danger of doing so. Sure, certain players e.g. Dagg & Jane are no longer the best options to be part of the system but whats wrong with the system per se that requires such a drastic change? Esp one that hasn't even been trialled in a big-match environment.

 

[zer0]

As you may have noticed I so want you to be wrong about an 11. Savea 14. Naholo scenario: in 42 years of AB-following I'm struggling to think of an incumbent selectorial group who've made such a radical change from a structure that's worked so well for so long.

So do I. It's just what all the evidence logically points to, unfortunately.

Put another way: if the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over & over but expecting a different result,,what do you call doing something different for the sake of doing something different & expecting the SAME result?

Reckless.

 

[zer0]

I think any team has to change to try and keep ahead of chasing packs etc, regardless of where you are on the ladder you have to keep a chanhing team pattern.

As below.

^^^^^^ I'd agree IF the two fullback structure were failing us or at least in clear & obvious danger of doing so. Sure, certain players e.g. Dagg & Jane are no longer the best options to be part of the system but whats wrong with the system per se that requires such a drastic change? Esp one that hasn't even been trialled in a big-match environment.

Change for the sake of change is often pointless. Why not play Woodcock at halfback and Slade at lock? They would be pretty radical and unexpected changes to team patterns. It'll never happen as A) we have no need to replace our incumbent players or models with such radically different alternatives; and B) it's just flat out stupid.

If they were going to make a useful and logical change, then they could consistently stop with the rope-a-dope nonsense at the breakdown, and get the tight five back doing their main role of shifting bodies at the breakdown instead of wobbling around as the worlds most over-sized and cumbersome midfield. That one sensible change alone would go a ways to fixing many of the existing problems.

 

[Dan54]

Sorry fellas, I probably wasn't clear what I was trying to say, I not thinking of changing the whole pattern for the sake of it, but what players do with in the pattern. Although i would of picked Dagg, I think if you feel the need to change players because of form injury whatever, surely you would tweek the game plan to suit the players you have?

 

[Dan54]

As you may have noticed I so want you to be wrong about an 11. Savea 14. Naholo scenario: in 42 years of AB-following I'm struggling to think of an incumbent selectorial group who've made such a radical change from a structure that's worked so well for so long.

Just a question WOB, do we take it you been following ABs for 42 years because that is your age?? Just wondering because if so you would of been at Waiopehu at same time as my son, and one of other posters on this forum!!

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

I was at Waiopehu 1977-81 & my earliest AB experience was going watch them v the "Awful Aussies" at Athletic Park on my 8th birthday (so it's actually 43 years of AB following). I was pretty much hooked from that day on except for a brief flirtation with (don't tell anyone, OK) the 13-man game toward the end of Grizz's coaching tenure.

I hear what you're saying about tweaking a game-plan to suit the players available but in this case they're potentially adopting a whole new strategy when there's no real need: Smith is probably the second-best fullback in the world right now & there's several guys who can play the second fullback role (one of whom actually got selected ). Playing Savea & Naholo together v anyone with a decent long kicking game, kick-chase & strong set piece is just madness IMO.

 

[zer0]

Sorry fellas, I probably wasn't clear what I was trying to say, I not thinking of changing the whole pattern for the sake of it, but what players do with in the pattern. Although i would of picked Dagg, I think if you feel the need to change players because of form injury whatever, surely you would tweek the game plan to suit the players you have?

It's not a case of tinkering though. It's a complete rewind to the pre-2009 model of two strike wingers. The same model that failed in both 2003 and 2007.

Naholo isn't a fullback, or, should I say, lacks the skills of a fullback. As does Savea. Neither are in the same class as Piutau, Jane or Dagg when it comes to security under the high ball, and neither have the required kicking skills. Insecurities in the former results in those excruciating 2009 Springbok tests, while deficiencies in the latter lead to the kind of situation the Waratah's found themselves in against the Highlanders.

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

Charles Piutau will spend 2015/16 at Wasps before heading to Ulster from 2016/17:

http://www.planetrugby.com/story/0,25883,3551_78074,00.html

I guess that solves the problem of not having a Super Rugby contract for next year.