Reds 2013

[tigerland12]

Reds are again a contender for the premiership - who do you guys think will be the other teams to beat? any unexpected's?

They're paying $13 on SportsBet. So pretty good odds there.

Crusaders (4.00), Chiefs (5.50), Stormers (7.00), Sharks (9.00), Brumbies (11.00), Highlanders (13.00), Reds (13.00), Waratahs (14.00)

Some good odds there for the Sharks, Highlanders and Reds. Crusaders do not look like they have a squad strong enough to be the favourites, especially by that margin.

Reds are a great bet, considering they skip the Crusaders this year. Highlanders, Chiefs and Stormers are the only away games that may cause problems. It's just unfortunate we wont get to belt the Kings. Only loss is that of Higginbotham. If they can keep at least 75% of their squad fit, they should finish top of the competition easily.

The Sharks have the Crusaders at home, plus get to play the Kings twice. But their overseas tour includes the Highlanders, Chiefs, Reds and Force. If they can get two wins from that they should be fine. They are arguably one of the strongest South African teams on the road. With Steyn, Lambie, Mvovo and JP Pietersen they have the firepower outwide, along with the most mobile forward pack in the comp (Daniels, Alberts, Coetzee, Kankowski, du Plessis, Mtawairra).

The Stormers have the Chiefs, Brumbies, Reds and Crusaders at home which is a massive advantage against some of the competitions big guns. They also skip this years darkhorses the Highlanders, which is a massive bonus. Australasian tour includes Hurricanes, Waratahs, Blues and Rebels. And as it is with the Sharks, they play the Kings twice, massive plus. It is just a matter of whether they decide to use their more then capable backline this year. They have Habana, de Villiers, Aplon and de Jongh to use out wide, and with Janjties at the helm, they should use the ball a bit more this year. Not much needs to be said about the forwards, they are very dominant, the return of Burger is a massive plus.

The Chiefs lose Taumalolo and Sonny Bill, but those loses aside they keep a majority of their last years premiership team. Stormers, Waratahs and Rebels away, Reds and Sharks at home. Which indicates a fairly decent draw for them, not easy by any means but have the Sharks and Reds at home is a massive bonus for them.

Crusaders have lost Ben Franks, Quentin MacDonald, Maitland and by the looks of things Guildford. Whilst they still have the firepower of McCaw, Whitelock, Carter, Read and Dagg. If any of them go down injured, the depth does not look as strong as what it usually is. But that being said, you keep those 5 players on the field, they should easily make the finals. Bulls at home, Brumbies and Stormers away. No Reds is a bonus, but having to play the Chiefs and Highlanders twice is a massive disadvantage, along with the dangerous Hurricanes.

The way I see it is that the Chiefs are a safe bet, they have a reasonable draw, but as it is with the Crusaders, playing in the NZ conference is a massive disadvantage.

In South Africa on the other hand, playing the Kings twice is a guarenteed 10 points. The Sharks are arguably the strongest SA team on paper, but they need to perform on their overseas tour. THe Stormers have a lot of big names at home, and not too many challenges on the road. THey should be strong again this year.

Finally, the Brumbies should make a fist of it this season, but Queensland have a good draw and a increadibly strong squad, which should see them top the Australian conference. The problem with the Reds is their tendency to get into a shit fight in the derby games, which suits the game styles of the Tahs, Brumbies and Force.

So my bets are (small bets).

$10 Chiefs
$10 Stormers
$10 Reds
$5 Sharks
$5 Highlanders

Best Bet: Reds at (13.00)
Safe Bet: Chiefs at (5.50)

Some great odds their. Sorry this got a lot longer then I expected.

 

[Ruggo]

My beer scale can't go from 7 out of 10 to 10 out of 10 otherwise it becomes really difficult to compare lots of beers!

I need to use the low numbers too. for Tooheys New.

Take a trip to SA and try that West End shit. That will enspire you to use the lower end of the scale. Also a Darwin Stubby. They might be a collectors item but they taste like crap.

Suncorp beer is OK whether it be the Carlton Mid from last year or the Golds this year. The constant turn over of kegs does it. You never get stale piss.

I drink golds so am happy with this years choice.

 

[USARugger]

Anywhere to catch the game online?

 

[kiap]

Anywhere to catch the game online?

There's no video or radio stream for the trial, sadly, but there are GAGR posters at the ground as well as live twitter commentary updates in this thread:

http://www.greenandgoldrugby.com/co...reds-v-blues-toowoomba-saturday-2-2-13.12306/

 

[Hawko]

They're paying $13 on SportsBet. So pretty good odds there.

Crusaders (4.00), Chiefs (5.50), Stormers (7.00), Sharks (9.00), Brumbies (11.00), Highlanders (13.00), Reds (13.00), Waratahs (14.00)

In South Africa on the other hand, playing the Kings twice is a guarenteed 10 points. The Sharks are arguably the strongest SA team on paper, but they need to perform on their overseas tour. THe Stormers have a lot of big names at home, and not too many challenges on the road. THey should be strong again this year.

If the Sharks are the strongest SA team on paper then they must be awesome. Look at the Stormers line-up. Only injury can cruel their chances of winning the SA conference and the overall log/table. That guarantees them two home games out of two in the finals series and their home ground is a fortress. Pre season they should be the shortest of short priced favourites at about $3.00, maybe less. The Crusaders are at very short odds given that Richie is on sabbatical and they've lost a few good-uns. Aussie teams will lose their best players early for a two week Lions training camp - only the Brumbies are a real chance for the finals because they will not lose many players to the Lions camps and also won't get bashed up in the Lions tests.

The top 6 favourites IMO would be:

1. Stormers
2. Sharks or Chiefs
3. Chiefs or Sharks
4. Highlanders
5. Brumbies
6. Crusaders or Bulls

I don't expect any Aussie team to get past the first finals week.

 

[liquor box]

If the Sharks are the strongest SA team on paper then they must be awesome. Look at the Stormers line-up. Only injury can cruel their chances of winning the SA conference and the overall log/table. That guarantees them two home games out of two in the finals series and their home ground is a fortress. Pre season they should be the shortest of short priced favourites at about $3.00, maybe less. The Crusaders are at very short odds given that Richie is on sabbatical and they've lost a few good-uns. Aussie teams will lose their best players early for a two week Lions training camp - only the Brumbies are a real chance for the finals because they will not lose many players to the Lions camps and also won't get bashed up in the Lions tests.

The top 6 favourites IMO would be:

1. Stormers
2. Sharks or Chiefs
3. Chiefs or Sharks
4. Highlanders
5. Brumbies
6. Crusaders or Bulls

I don't expect any Aussie team to get past the first finals week.

It seems like the Reds, Brumbies and Tahs are all great value. When you consider one Australian team HAS to make the finals then essentially you only have to win 3 games in a row and you win the whole thing and you dont need to score bonus points in the finals. Even if throughout the season we cant keep up with the SA and NZ teams we still only have to beat the Aussie teams and then you have a good shot at the title.

 

[RedsHappy]

We have a settled squad, we know who the leaders are, and only lost one squad member last year. Not much to talk about

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

Into this happy picture I must insert an element of concern, and (from me) not for the first time.

The Reds' most extraordinary decision of recent years was unquestionably the appointment of Richard Graham as 'Head Coach in Waiting' (although the issue of what is and what will be RG's real title has waxed and waned).

For some of us, this was an inexplicable moment when the QRU collectively seemed to take leave of its senses as Graham's demonstrable rugby coaching track record since returning some years ago to Australia from England has oscillated between ordinary and woeful.

And, relevantly or not, very little has been heard from Graham in 2013 - Link has headed up virtually every media event and talks as prominently regarding every issue has he did prior to the 'new Reds coaching arrangements'. This delights me and I'm sure others except for one - or actually two - little evidentiary details.

It was buried in last year's announcements re Graham that he'd replace Tatsie Taylor's role as defence coach, and thus Tatsie would not be replaced - and there can be no doubt of TT's large contribution to ensuring that the Reds' defence in recent years was of SuperRugby championship winning standard.

To square the circle: last night in Toowoomba I watched what was probably the worst display of general, over-all-of-80 Reds defence I think I have seen since some appalling instances in 2009 and prior. Such a display came very close to handing the match to a team comprised largely of Blues rookies whilst the Reds had assembled many of their best players for the event.

Defence can be trained for in the pre-season, it's far from a skill and system that can only be rebuilt from Round 1.

I am hoping that this poor display of such a critical skill set is mere rust, but my darker concern is that yet again we are witnessing the handiwork of a distinctly mediocre coach whose 'Skills' work with the Wallabies in 2009-10 and general coaching with the Force in 2011-12 was of a consistent quality that sadly spoke for itself, both at the time, and in the immediate aftermath.

 

[BDA]

History is pretty clear on the fact that you have to finish top of the log (or second at worst) to win the competition. The travel factor + home ground advantage is difficult to overcome. The Bulls won in 2007 from second on the log, but they were fortunate in traveling to Durban for the final which meant no travel and a decent showing of bulls fans at the stadium. The Chiefs won from second place but were extremely lucky not to have traveled to Newlands.

So if you're trying to decide the 2013 winner, ask yourself "can this team finish top of the log?" Teams like the Brumbies and Tahs look like good value but i'll suggest they're not. I cant see either team topping the log, which means their chances, come finals time, are slim. For the tahs to top the log would surely be rewriting the record books in terms of the biggest turn around in one season. I also think its unlikely the brumbies would top the log because a) they weren't able to beat any top 6 opponents last year (something they'll be looking to address this year no doubt, but something that must weigh on the mind of a diligent punter) and b) they are likely to lose two games against the Reds .

In my view the favorites for this year should be Stormers / Sharks / Crusaders / Chiefs / Reds , as these teams have the ability to top the log.

The South African conference this year is probably the least well balanced. IMO the Stormers and Sharks will be a cut above the other SA teams. The Cheetahs seem to have more success against the other conferences than they do against the top SA teams.So the best bet is either the Stormers or the Sharks, take your pick.

I'm not sure the Chiefs can repeat last year's overall performance, and even in 2012 they were lucky to avoid an away final. But i wont rule it out.

The Reds are going to have to be very consistent this year to pull off the win AND NEED TO TAKE MORE POINTS ON TOUR, something we didn't do last year. We need to consistently win games without Genia. We need to avoid injuries. even then its a long shot but we have a team who are world beaters on their day

 

[Sully]

Into this happy picture I must insert an element of concern, and (from me) not for the first time.

The Reds' most extraordinary decision of recent years was unquestionably the appointment of Richard Graham as 'Head Coach in Waiting' (although the issue of what is and what will be RG's real title has waxed and waned).

For some of us, this was an inexplicable moment when the QRU collectively seemed to take leave of its senses as Graham's demonstrable rugby coaching track record since returning some years ago to Australia from England has oscillated between ordinary and woeful.

And, relevantly or not, very little has been heard from Graham in 2013 - Link has headed up virtually every media event and talks as prominently regarding every issue has he did prior to the 'new Reds coaching arrangements'. This delights me and I'm sure others except for one - or actually two - little evidentiary details.

It was buried in last year's announcements re Graham that he'd replace Tatsie Taylor's role as defence coach, and thus Tatsie would not be replaced - and there can be no doubt of TT's large contribution to ensuring that the Reds' defence in recent years was of SuperRugby championship winning standard.

To square the circle: last night in Toowoomba I watched what was probably the worst display of general, over-all-of-80 Reds defence I think I have seen since some appalling instances in 2009 and prior. Such a display came very close to handing the match to a team comprised largely of Blues rookies whilst the Reds had assembled many of their best players for the event.

Defence can be trained for in the pre-season, it's far from a skill and system that can only be rebuilt from Round 1.

I am hoping that this poor display of such a critical skill set is mere rust, but my darker concern is that yet again we are witnessing the handiwork of a distinctly mediocre coach whose 'Skills' work with the Wallabies in 2009-10 and general coaching with the Force in 2011-12 was of a consistent quality that sadly spoke for itself, both at the time, and in the immediate aftermath.

Isat in the stands with Scott Allen and we had no such concerns. I believe that while there were problems they will be easily fixed when they look at the video.

Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF700T using Tapatalk HD

 

[Slim 293]

So if you're trying to decide the 2013 winner, ask yourself "can this team finish top of the log?" Teams like the Brumbies and Tahs look like good value but i'll suggest they're not. I cant see either team topping the log, which means their chances, come finals time, are slim. For the tahs to top the log would surely be rewriting the record books in terms of the biggest turn around in one season.

The Tahs finished 13th (second last) in 2007 and finished 2nd the following year to meet the Crusaders in the final..........

 

[BDA]

The Tahs finished 13th (second last) in 2007 and finished 2nd the following year to meet the Crusaders in the final....

true. But they didn't finish first. And the gravamen of my post is that if you're not first, you might as well be last. I'd say my comment's still more or less accurate, in that as far as i know, in the history of the Super comp, no team that has finished outside the top ten has managed to top the log the following year. The 2008 Tahs would be the team that has come the closet (although I think it's worth noting that they finished 3rd in 2006, suggesting that 2007 was something of an anomaly)

 

[TOCC]

Well I guess the closest thing to what your suggesting is the Crusaders who went from last in 1996 to champions in 1998

 

[qwerty51]

Chiefs were 10th in 2011.

 

[Jets]

Into this happy picture I must insert an element of concern, and (from me) not for the first time.

The Reds' most extraordinary decision of recent years was unquestionably the appointment of Richard Graham as 'Head Coach in Waiting' (although the issue of what is and what will be RG's real title has waxed and waned).

For some of us, this was an inexplicable moment when the QRU collectively seemed to take leave of its senses as Graham's demonstrable rugby coaching track record since returning some years ago to Australia from England has oscillated between ordinary and woeful.

And, relevantly or not, very little has been heard from Graham in 2013 - Link has headed up virtually every media event and talks as prominently regarding every issue has he did prior to the 'new Reds coaching arrangements'. This delights me and I'm sure others except for one - or actually two - little evidentiary details.

It was buried in last year's announcements re Graham that he'd replace Tatsie Taylor's role as defence coach, and thus Tatsie would not be replaced - and there can be no doubt of TT's large contribution to ensuring that the Reds' defence in recent years was of SuperRugby championship winning standard.

To square the circle: last night in Toowoomba I watched what was probably the worst display of general, over-all-of-80 Reds defence I think I have seen since some appalling instances in 2009 and prior. Such a display came very close to handing the match to a team comprised largely of Blues rookies whilst the Reds had assembled many of their best players for the event.

Defence can be trained for in the pre-season, it's far from a skill and system that can only be rebuilt from Round 1.

I am hoping that this poor display of such a critical skill set is mere rust, but my darker concern is that yet again we are witnessing the handiwork of a distinctly mediocre coach whose 'Skills' work with the Wallabies in 2009-10 and general coaching with the Force in 2011-12 was of a consistent quality that sadly spoke for itself, both at the time, and in the immediate aftermath.

Matt Taylor chose to leave the Reds as he wanted to coach at international level. He has history in Scotland having played over there and represented Scotland A at one stage. He has been doing a good job in his second role with Glasgow Warriors but judging from last nights game has a lot to do with the National team. To make out he was forced from the Reds is just untrue.
Graham has had some big questions over his head since returning to Australia. His 2 years with the Wallabies weren't outstanding but there is a Deans issue that needs to be taken into account.
Also his time with the Force was hard work. He took over from Mitchell and didn't get to make his mark on the team and had a few issues working against him.
I am willing to give him this year to make an impact. He has quality players and comes into a settled organisation. If the Reds don't finish in the top 4 I'll be disappointed and will be looking very closely at his contribution.

 

[BDA]

yep the Reds also went from 14th to 1st in 2 years.

 

[TOCC]

yep the Reds also went from 14th to 1st in 2 years.

Nah Reds were 13th in 2009... They were 14th in 2007

 

[RedsHappy]

Matt Taylor chose to leave the Reds as he wanted to coach at international level. He has history in Scotland having played over there and represented Scotland A at one stage. He has been doing a good job in his second role with Glasgow Warriors but judging from last nights game has a lot to do with the National team. To make out he was forced from the Reds is just untrue.
Graham has had some big questions over his head since returning to Australia. His 2 years with the Wallabies weren't outstanding but there is a Deans issue that needs to be taken into account.
Also his time with the Force was hard work. He took over from Mitchell and didn't get to make his mark on the team and had a few issues working against him.
I am willing to give him this year to make an impact. He has quality players and comes into a settled organisation. If the Reds don't finish in the top 4 I'll be disappointed and will be looking very closely at his contribution.

Just to be clear on a factual point: in no way did I say or infer Taylor was 'forced out'.......read please what I did say.......sheesh, no wonder people withdraw from these fora.

I simply said that (a) Taylor left the Reds (b) it was announced thereafter that RG would take on defence coaching duties at the Reds and (c) it's clear that Taylor accordingly has not been replaced at the Reds as a specialist, dedicated defence coach, RG is today billed as 'Head Coach'.

To the best of my knowledge RG has never been, up to now, even close to specializing in coaching defensive capabilities, and you will certainly find that most of the best S15 teams today do employ a seasoned, specialist defence coach with long experience in specifically coaching that dimension of play.

 

[TOCC]

It was Links call... Do you think he is wrong?

The Reds defensively weren't exactly a brick wall in 2012 anyway, only one other team in the top 7 conceded more tries..

 

[RedsHappy]

Isat in the stands with Scott Allen and we had no such concerns. I believe that while there were problems they will be easily fixed when they look at the video.

Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF700T using Tapatalk HD

On that display I honestly cannot say why you and Scott would have 'no such concerns', not even a scintilla of such concern over consistently very poor (especially mid field) Reds' defence. And I'm equally not sure then why Scott A was tweeting re both an individual Reds' players awful defence as well as commenting in passing on the Reds' numerous defensive errors. Oh well, another blow for Twitter.

 

[RedsHappy]

It was Links call. Do you think he is wrong?

The Reds defensively weren't exactly a brick wall in 2012 anyway, only one other team in the top 7 conceded more tries..

Well, clearly such a major appointment as that of RG was not solely a Link appointment, McCall and Carmichael would have been actively consulted surely.

To answer, yes, I have said since the first moment this very odd (on its objective merits) appointment of RG to take over the Reds from Link at some vague future date was announced that it looked highly risky and unjustified to me. Being a successful and very skillful coach - as clearly Link is - does not auto-magically make you an equally brilliant appointer of successors; in fact, rugby coaching history (outside of NZ) tends to prove this point rather painfully.

You make a very fair point re he Reds' defensive capability and record in 2012; how much of such was due to the obvious general distractions and overall problems the Reds had in the first half of that season, and/or the certainty then of Taylor's departure etc., is a matter for passionate speculation. But unquestionably and by all accounts Taylor made important and very high quality improvements to the Reds' defensive structures and skills in 2010 and 2011; in fact, I'd conjecture that the Reds would not have won the trophy in 2011 without Taylor, or someone of equivalent skills and experience.