New Zealand vs Australia - Bledisloe 2, 24th August 2013
- Thread starter No4918
- Start date
- Status
Dan54
David Wilson (68)
Geez I don't blame the Aussies for booing him then Dam0Sir Richard Hadlee said it at a school assembly when I was in primary school.
Damn plagiarist.
RoffsChoice
Jim Lenehan (48)
While you never wish ill upon a player, it's nice to know that the All Blacks goal kicking won't be too flash this weekend.
Bullrush
Geoff Shaw (53)
If Taylor starts then we really won't be missing too much. He kept DC outta the kicking for a few weeks when DC came back. He's pretty sharp.
Taylor kicked 18/19 in Super Rugby 2013.
If they kicked no goals last weekend, they still won!
Dam0
Dave Cowper (27)
Sheesh. Only just though.
Well, McMeniman is injured again and will miss the rest of the Rugby Championship (shoulder injury - surgery and out for six months) so that makes selection issues a bit more straight forward.
Presumably Fardy will start and Douglas or McCalman will come onto the bench.
If Link is going to add another player to the squad, Dennis seems the most likely option.
Presumably Fardy will start and Douglas or McCalman will come onto the bench.
If Link is going to add another player to the squad, Dennis seems the most likely option.
mudskipper
Colin Windon (37)
Cruden and Barrett out
Rassie
Trevor Allan (34)
And Donald on the bench?
Whilst I think it is worth giving Fardy a go starting at 6 and leaving Mowen at 8, I do wonder whether our backrow would work better with McCalman at 8 and Mowen at 6.
Mowen had easily his least effective test at 8 (albeit from a tiny sample size of 4 tests).
Are we better off putting Mowen back at 6 where he excels and putting McCalman at 8 who will be reliable, work really hard but not do anything overly flashy?
Until we try Fardy, Hooper and Mowen together we won't know, but in my thinking the backrow balance could be better with Mowen back at 6.
Mowen had easily his least effective test at 8 (albeit from a tiny sample size of 4 tests).
Are we better off putting Mowen back at 6 where he excels and putting McCalman at 8 who will be reliable, work really hard but not do anything overly flashy?
Until we try Fardy, Hooper and Mowen together we won't know, but in my thinking the backrow balance could be better with Mowen back at 6.
mudskipper
Colin Windon (37)
cant see link just changing the 22 without injuries not after one match... Wallabies were good in the set piece, ABs just made the most of each mistake they made, especially the backs...
McMeniman is gone and it is a 23.
RoffsChoice
Jim Lenehan (48)
FTFY
2 of the 3 were ineffective.Rassie,you must have watched a different game if you thought Hooper played poorly.
jollyswagman
Ron Walden (29)
I would agree with you on this BH - if we have to have both McCalman and Mowen on the field at the same time then Mowen 6 - McCalman 8. The one thing that Mowen does need to work on is his control at the back of the scrum. You need a very, very cool operator back there otherwise things can get real messy - real quick. We saw a few glimpses of that last Saturday with the ball spewing out different channels every time. I believe McCalman has spent a lot more time at 8 in top level rugby.
MMM injured again - absolutely crazy. I feel for the poor bastard but can we seriously stop talking about the guy until he has come back and played more than 2 games in a row.
KOB1987
John Eales (66)
Last time I looked Hooper was a flanker..
I do concede Phil, that I think it was Rassie who made the mistake in referring to the 'back row' as the 'back 3'
- Status