New Zealand v Australia - Auckland - 23 August 2014

[Bullrush]

It's definitely a balancing act and a trade off. Crockett has the highest work rate of the props in NZ in terms of tackles, hitting rucks, and the best line speed defensively. Plus his height and long levers do help with the lift at LO time.

With Ben Franks he is a more natural tighthead but was our versatlie prop for a few years before the 8 man bench came in. Given Woody and Faumauina were out were were fortunate to be able to have him cover there given we have more promising up and coming tighteads in NZ at the moment.

It would have to be pretty close between him and Ben Franks who can really put in a lot of work around the ground.

 

[BDA]

In any event Hansen's argument seems to be isolated to one or two occasions when Peyper gave the wallabies a free kick, presumably for an alleged early engage or something? Seems like whatever point Peyper conceded (if any) had nothing to do with the wallabies not competing properly in the scrums. But the way Hansen pussy-foots around the issue seems to be designed to give the impression that Peyper conceded more than that (i.e. an impression that Peyper in fact conceded that the wallabies were getting away with infringements in the scrum)

 

[Quick Hands]

It's definitely a balancing act and a trade off. Crockett has the highest work rate of the props in NZ in terms of tackles, hitting rucks, and the best line speed defensively. Plus his height and long levers do help with the lift at LO time.

I'm surprised that the ABs have followed the Deans/Hickey thinking in picking props who are good around the park, rather than on scrummaging ability.

 

[ACT Crusader]

Was just stirring the kiwis in the office stating how really all the PRESSURE is on the AIG this weekend. (actually quite hilarious. considering I may not have much to annoy them with next week..)

Every kiwi on the planet EXPECTS the AIG to take it out this weekend - and the %s weigh in their favour.

But REALISTICALLY this just increases the PRESSURE on the homeside - Links's boy will have nothing to hold back from - fearlessly pushing the boundaries on what appears (weather forecast) to be a dry, cool track.

The PSI levels would reverse though if the wallabies find themselves in the hunt and. big question.. will they have the coolness of mind to finish the job.

3days to go.

But OZ are favourites aren't they. No Nonu, means OZ have the better midfield. No Kaino, means Fardy will roam as free as a bird. No Carter or Dagg so our kicking / territory game is sorely lacking. No Woodcock, therefore no (legal) scrum . All this and we haven't even mentioned the tiring, old, two steps behind, can't pilfer any more McCaw.

And remember it's just another patch of grass on Reimers Ave in Auckland. So all the stars have aligned perfectly for the Wallabies. It's destiny. Better not stuff it up aye cobbers.

 

[Redsman]

I personally liked the bit where Hansen "barked" - it conjured images like one of those sort of kiwi elephant seals...

I think Hansen's feeling the heat and even though not too much said in the media I'd think they'd be all extremely dirty at missing the record winning streak especially after Tahs victory...

 

[Inside Shoulder]

In any event Hansen's argument seems to be isolated to one or two occasions when Peyper gave the wallabies a free kick, presumably for an alleged early engage or something? Seems like whatever point Peyper conceded (if any) had nothing to do with the wallabies not competing properly in the scrums. But the way Hansen pussy-foots around the issue seems to be designed to give the impression that Peyper conceded more than that (i.e. an impression that Peyper in fact conceded that the wallabies were getting away with infringements in the scrum)

Hansen's all over the shop - because one of the errors allegedly conceded relates to Crockof being offside: that wasn't a scrum

 

[Quick Hands]

In any event Hansen's argument seems to be isolated to one or two occasions when Peyper gave the wallabies a free kick, presumably for an alleged early engage or something? Seems like whatever point Peyper conceded (if any) had nothing to do with the wallabies not competing properly in the scrums. But the way Hansen pussy-foots around the issue seems to be designed to give the impression that Peyper conceded more than that (i.e. an impression that Peyper in fact conceded that the wallabies were getting away with infringements in the scrum)

Let's face it, half of these scrum penalties/free kicks are a lottery. The fact the Peyper might have got a couple wrong is hardly surprising. Peyper misses so much in his matches, it's a bit much of Hansen to highlight a couple of scrum free kicks. I sense some insecurity.

 

[Quick Hands]

Hansen's all over the shop - because one of the errors allegedly conceded relates to Crockof being offside: that wasn't a scrum

I hope Link impresses some of these points with Poite pre-match. (In private and without relaying the contents of the private conversation to the press)

 

[Dan54]

I know why we didn't perform at the weekend," Hansen said. "There were certain areas of our game we were very poor at, and there was another reason which we won't go into here, but that's been dealt with as well.
"We've spoken to the referee about the scrummaging. He put his hand up, said he got the free-kicks wrong. But we can't control [the referee], we've had the discussion we needed to have and moved on. It's about us playing our game and playing it better than we played it last week."
After declaring he wouldn't get into the refereeing issues, Hansen was asked what Peyper had conceded he got wrong.
"Where do you want me to start?" he barked. "The free-kick he felt was wrong and he was not sure why he called pre-engage. The first yellow card was wrong - the ball was out.
"It was a good conversation, I respect the man for his honesty . he's no different than players -- some days you have a bad day. He had a bad day at the office and put his hand up.
"But I've got to emphasise, it wasn't just his problem. We had a hell of a bad day ourselves so we'll forget about him and concentrate on what we can do."

I've just re-read this little gem.

I especially loved the bits in bold - aren't you really just trying to control the referee with your comments Steve?

Not wanting to talk about refereeing issues and then launching into the referee.

AB referee management obviously extends beyond the on field conversations with the captain.

I wouldn't want to have a private conversation with Hansen - seems it might end up in the press fairly quickly.

The one thing I agree with is that Peyper had a bad day, although in refereeing terms that is situation normal for Jaco.

Quick Hands, he said he can't control the refs, he didn't say he couldn't try to
Quite sure that Link (if he had any brains) would say or do the same if a ref handed him that ammo!!

 

[Dan54]

Let's face it, half of these scrum penalties/free kicks are a lottery. The fact the Peyper might have got a couple wrong is hardly surprising. Peyper misses so much in his matches, it's a bit much of Hansen to highlight a couple of scrum free kicks. I sense some insecurity.

I actually thought Jaco was highlighting them, not Shag

 

[BPC]

BDA how would you explain that scrum where the Charles was lying on his gut with a mouthful of dirt and Kepu was inconspicuously still upright?"

I saw Hansen nip out and yank Charles' legs out from under him.

Hansen was also the gunman on the grassy knoll.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Scrubber2050]

I saw Hansen nip out and yank Charles' legs out from under him.

Hansen was also the gunman on the grassy knoll.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

The bastard - mate he WAS the grassy knoll

 

[Braveheart81]

Who would feel more confident if we had Robbo on the bench for those last 10 minutes if needed rather than Cowan?

I'm a fan of Cowan and his play around the field is really strong but I can't help but feel that it would be good to have Robbo there for a crucial scrum late in the game.

I wonder if that thought has crossed Link's mind?

 

[KOB1987]

I wonder if that thought has crossed Link's mind?

Briefly!

 

[FrankLind]

I'd like to see video evidence of the actual conversation between Hansen and Peyper before I accepted this bit of psychological manipulation of the hapless Poite.

So Hansen is falsifying the conversation with the ref' and telling his made-up conversation to the media. I am sure that's a smart move for which he wouldn't be risking sanction at all - right.

 

[KOB1987]

So Hansen is falsifying the conversation with the ref' and telling his made-up conversation to the media. I am sure that's a smart move for which he wouldn't be risking sanction at all - right.

wouldn't matter, he'd say he was misquoted or quoted out of context, get a rap on the knuckles and that would be the end of it..the Bledisloe stays on your shores for another year and it's mission accomplished

 

[KOB1987]

I'm surprised that the ABs have followed the Deans/Hickey thinking in picking props who are good around the park, rather than on scrummaging ability.

Maybe Robbie is Hansen's secret advisor

 

[Quick Hands]

I actually thought Jaco was highlighting them, not Shag

Peyper might (or might not) have said so in a private conversation. Hansen was the one highlighting the comments to the press.

 

[Quick Hands]

So Hansen is falsifying the conversation with the ref' and telling his made-up conversation to the media. I am sure that's a smart move for which he wouldn't be risking sanction at all - right.

Perhaps not "falsifying", but certainly putting selected parts of what seems to have been private conversation into the public domain.

I'd have thought attempts to intimidate referees by selectively quoting private conversations to the press would be sanctioned whether "falsifyed" or not.

EDIT: But you're right to the extent that the IRB won't be applying any sanction.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

So Hansen is falsifying the conversation with the ref' and telling his made-up conversation to the media. I am sure that's a smart move for which he wouldn't be risking sanction at all - right.

Selective quoting.
Citing evidence well beyond the question: suggests he was caught just a "wee bit" on the assertion that Peyper had admitted stuff.
He's a master manipulator.
Is Peyepr going to come out and correct the record? "I told him I had really ****ed up on this one but I told him that this was only a minor **** up, by my standards".
Are we really that much more cynical than our Anzac brothers/sisters?