Super Rugby AU - Semi Final - Reds v Reb

[Bobby Sands]

But that would mean if I team has already used all their subs and need someone to go off for HIA, they may be reluctant to do so. Why would you create a situation where a team could be disadvantaged on the field because their player is possibly being treated for a severe medical issue? You could possibly have teams carry a 24th man specifically to use in HIA situations if all other subs have been used.

It's very silly logic, an Louie doesn't want to play the Reds.

 

[Rebel man]

So over the Rebels kicking the ball away all the time. Does my head in, I agree with the criticism of To'omua. While I liked the width we played with early he over played his hand by going again and again and it cost the intercept. While I liked them being more expansive and looking to spread the ball you have to mix it up. Hit some forward runners through the middle so you are not so predictable to the defenders

 

[Derpus]

The Rebels didn't look too hard to defend against. Of the Rebels i thought MK and Naisarani were their only dangerous players.

Meakes was horrid. Been saying it all year but they should have run out with 10. Deegan 12. To'omua.

Paisami is an absolute gun. Apparently his defence isn't up to scratch at 13, which is a shame as otherwise he'd be right behind Petaia for Wallaby 13.

 

[Highkicks]

Respect your opinion to a degree, but let's see if Rennie agrees with you.

Where did Wilkin or Hardwick outplay him last night?

May have been a bit much saying Hardwick outplayed him but I think Wilkin definitely did. Hate to parrot the commentators, especially Kearns but Wilkin's work in the lead up to the try was very good and I thought he had more impact in contact and pressured the ruck well. Like I said, I don't mean to be too harsh on Wright, he is a good player and will certainly be in the mix for a Wallaby spot, just think he might be a bit overrated in his general play. Honestly his lineout work alone makes him a pretty tempting option.

Paisami is an absolute gun. Apparently his defence isn't up to scratch at 13, which is a shame as otherwise he'd be right behind Petaia for Wallaby 13.

With Kuridrani's effort last week and lack of game time before that he may just get a look in despite the missed tackles. He can certainly hit and was not missing so many earlier on in the year, so fingers crossed he can rectify it.

 

[Bobby Sands]

May have been a bit much saying Hardwick outplayed him but I think Wilkin definitely did. Hate to parrot the commentators, especially Kearns but Wilkin's work in the lead up to the try was very good and I thought he had more impact in contact and pressured the ruck well. Like I said, I don't mean to be too harsh on Wright, he is a good player and will certainly be in the mix for a Wallaby spot, just think he might be a bit overrated in his general play. Honestly his lineout work alone makes him a pretty tempting option.



With Kuridrani's effort last week and lack of game time before that he may just get a look in despite the missed tackles. He can certainly hit and was not missing so many earlier on in the year, so fingers crossed he can rectify it.

Wilkin is a gun, and better than Hardwick at 7 to my mind, but he isn't a 6. I think Wright easily matched them both around the ground, and his lineout play is what makes him such a standout at 6, rather than an afterthought skill.

So are you saying Wilkin is a better 7 than Wright, or a better 6?

Or are you saying it doesn't matter?

 

[Up the Guts]

Wilkin is a gun, and better than Hardwick at 7 to my mind, but he isn't a 6. I think Wright easily matched them both around the ground, and his lineout play is what makes him such a standout at 6, rather than an afterthought skill.

So are you saying Wilkin is a better 7 than Wright, or a better 6?

Or are you saying it doesn't matter?

Wilkin was perhaps involved in more of the big moments for the Rebels last night but I suspect watching the tape all the subtleties of Wright's game would add up. I think there were at least two maul turnovers generated by Liam that weren't called out on commentary.

 

[Sully]

As I watch the Rebels warm up last night I commented to the missus that the Rebels didn't look like they had changed anything for the Reds and were going with the same game plan as the last two games. Hoping for third time lucky I guess.
Bu the twenty minute mark I could see I was right and grew more confident as the game went on.

 

[Set piece magic]

The Rebels didn't look too hard to defend against. Of the Rebels i thought MK and Naisarani were their only dangerous players.



Meakes was horrid. Been saying it all year but they should have run out with 10. Deegan 12. To'omua.



Paisami is an absolute gun. Apparently his defence isn't up to scratch at 13, which is a shame as otherwise he'd be right behind Petaia for Wallaby 13.

Meakes seems to dawdle a lot, crab and not commit defenders, giving opposition defensive lines time to slide left or right

 

[Highkicks]

Wilkin is a gun, and better than Hardwick at 7 to my mind, but he isn't a 6. I think Wright easily matched them both around the ground, and his lineout play is what makes him such a standout at 6, rather than an afterthought skill.

So are you saying Wilkin is a better 7 than Wright, or a better 6?

Or are you saying it doesn't matter?

I guess we will have to disagree. I'd have picked Wright ahead of the other two for the Wallabies as well, in either position, just thought last night they probably got up on him. I'd have to watch them all again specifically, just my initial take. So I don't think Wilkin is better at either position at this stage.

The positional question is pretty interesting, It's so open as to what people value in their back rowers, I think ideally I'd want someone in the Pieter-Steph du toit, Kano or Courtney Lawes mould at 6. Tall, hard players who are also athletic and good in the lineout. Unfortunately I don't think we have anyone like that outside maybe LSL (Lukhan Salakaia-Loto). Wright is hard to grasp as he doesn't fit neatly into any of the traditional ideas of a 7 or a 6. Reminds me of a traditional 7 around the park while also being a bit taller and good in the lineout. Rennie seems to think the same but we will have to wait and see.

 

[TSR]

That’s always the problem Highkicks - if we had a Kaino, I don’t think you’d get much argument from anyone on here about them being selected.

 

[kiap]

I think ideally I'd want someone in the Pieter-Steph du toit, Kano or Courtney Lawes mould at 6. Tall, hard players who are also athletic and good in the lineout.

Kaino definitely world-class No. 6 and best in his time but not especially tall.

Billed at 6'5" but really 2 inches under that mark. Harder than Wright but not taller.

 

[Tex]

The one thing I took away was a positivity about the game here in Aus. Maybe it's because the fucken kiwis haven't battered it out of me this year, but there's been some exciting rugby played, young blokes coming through the pathways and while Rebs didn't get the bickies, they gave it a crack and fell short in a fair contest.

As always, support the underdogs so I'll be behind the young Reds tyros to take to and from the old stallions.

 

[Dctarget]

Watching Turinui on Rugby Ruckus Live breakdown some of the Rebels attack makes me feel a bit better about the Rebels and Wessels. Clearly a well drilled team just lacking the killer instinct. Actually think that Wessels has improved a few of his players' standings quite a lot.

 

[Adam84]

May have been a bit much saying Hardwick outplayed him but I think Wilkin definitely did. Hate to parrot the commentators, especially Kearns but Wilkin's work in the lead up to the try was very good and I thought he had more impact in contact and pressured the ruck well. Like I said, I don't mean to be too harsh on Wright, he is a good player and will certainly be in the mix for a Wallaby spot, just think he might be a bit overrated in his general play. Honestly his lineout work alone makes him a pretty tempting option.



With Kuridrani's effort last week and lack of game time before that he may just get a look in despite the missed tackles. He can certainly hit and was not missing so many earlier on in the year, so fingers crossed he can rectify it.

I think Wright brings a work rate and good technical ability, where this stood out to me on the weekend was in the lead up to the LSL (Lukhan Salakaia-Loto) try, prior to that JOC (James O'Connor) was tackled behind the gain line and Uelese was over the top ready to pounce on the ball, Wright managed to get back, come in through the gate and drive Uelese off the ruck and provide quick ball to attack the blind side. Uelese certainly isnt a slouch to shift off the ball, it was simply good technique at the ruck which enabled him to do that and secure quick ball.

He had an involvement in the lead up to the Daugunu try as well, he did a nice clean out on Naisarani, it actually removed Naisarani as one of the pillars on the edge of the ruck and opened the space for Tupou to come through.

 

[Highkicks]

Out of curiosity I went back and watched the first half and wrote down both 6’s involvements. This isn’t for the sake of arguing either, I just honestly feel there are a lot of misconceptions around players and if I’m going to disagree with the consensus then I should back it up, rightly or wrongly. Also I love rugby and it was fun to do. My takeaways were that while Wilkin definitely had more of an impact in this half, especially ball in hand, neither player was a work horse and Wright’s contact work, rucks especially, is very far from dominant or even effective. I mean in general the ruck work bar 3 successful pilfers (Wilkin, McReight and Hardwick) was pretty poor, a lot of ineffective clean outs.

Of note, they both had one lineout win and Wilkin disrupted 1 defensive lineout.

Wright was involved in 9 rucks, 3-4 of which he was effective in, none of which were dominant, 1-2 were hand on the ruck, 1 was an air swing. Wilkin was involved in 7 rucks, 5-6 of which were effective, 1 dominant and 1 pilfer, 2 slowed down ball.

Wright made 1 poor tackle all half, 2 if you include his hold up for a turnover, which upon reflection was dominant. Wilkin made 2 tackles, 1 poor and 1 dominant.

Wright had 2 runs, one lost ground the other made a meter. Wilkin made 5 runs, broke 2 tackles, offloaded once, put the wing in space once and got over the ad line each time, excluding the quick pass to the wing.

Obviously this is a very small sample size and no way to judge a player, really just wanted to see if what I said prior held any weight and even accounting for some inaccuracies on my end I think it does.

Edit: there were some other things, Wright came through a maul, didn’t gain possession but forced the Rebels to pass (maybe). He was very slow to leave a scrum to cover the blindside, had no impact on the play though. He also seemed to be positioned mostly around the far wing/13 zone in general play, clearly his role but other back rowers cop some flack for the same thing.

 

[Derpus]

Out of curiosity I went back and watched the first half and wrote down both 6’s involvements. This isn’t for the sake of arguing either, I just honestly feel there are a lot of misconceptions around players and if I’m going to disagree with the consensus then I should back it up, rightly or wrongly. Also I love rugby and it was fun to do. My takeaways were that while Wilkin definitely had more of an impact in this half, especially ball in hand, neither player was a work horse and Wright’s contact work, rucks especially, is very far from dominant or even effective. I mean in general the ruck work bar 3 successful pilfers (Wilkin, McReight and Hardwick) was pretty poor, a lot of ineffective clean outs.

Of note, they both had one lineout win and Wilkin disrupted 1 defensive lineout.

Wright was involved in 9 rucks, 3-4 of which he was effective in, none of which were dominant, 1-2 were hand on the ruck, 1 was an air swing. Wilkin was involved in 7 rucks, 5-6 of which were effective, 1 dominant and 1 pilfer, 2 slowed down ball.

Wright made 1 poor tackle all half, 2 if you include his hold up for a turnover, which upon reflection was dominant. Wilkin made 2 tackles, 1 poor and 1 dominant.

Wright had 2 runs, one lost ground the other made a meter. Wilkin made 5 runs, broke 2 tackles, offloaded once, put the wing in space once and got over the ad line each time, excluding the quick pass to the wing.

Obviously this is a very small sample size and no way to judge a player, really just wanted to see if what I said prior held any weight and even accounting for some inaccuracies on my end I think it does.

Edit: there were some other things, Wright came through a maul, didn’t gain possession but forced the Rebels to pass (maybe). He was very slow to leave a scrum to cover the blindside, had no impact on the play though. He also seemed to be positioned mostly around the far wing/13 zone in general play, clearly his role but other back rowers cop some flack for the same thing.

I find your actual analysis of player performances personally insulting.

 

[Adam84]

Out of curiosity I went back and watched the first half and wrote down both 6’s involvements. This isn’t for the sake of arguing either, I just honestly feel there are a lot of misconceptions around players and if I’m going to disagree with the consensus then I should back it up, rightly or wrongly. Also I love rugby and it was fun to do. My takeaways were that while Wilkin definitely had more of an impact in this half, especially ball in hand, neither player was a work horse and Wright’s contact work, rucks especially, is very far from dominant or even effective. I mean in general the ruck work bar 3 successful pilfers (Wilkin, McReight and Hardwick) was pretty poor, a lot of ineffective clean outs.

Of note, they both had one lineout win and Wilkin disrupted 1 defensive lineout.

Wright was involved in 9 rucks, 3-4 of which he was effective in, none of which were dominant, 1-2 were hand on the ruck, 1 was an air swing. Wilkin was involved in 7 rucks, 5-6 of which were effective, 1 dominant and 1 pilfer, 2 slowed down ball.

Wright made 1 poor tackle all half, 2 if you include his hold up for a turnover, which upon reflection was dominant. Wilkin made 2 tackles, 1 poor and 1 dominant.

Wright had 2 runs, one lost ground the other made a meter. Wilkin made 5 runs, broke 2 tackles, offloaded once, put the wing in space once and got over the ad line each time, excluding the quick pass to the wing.

Obviously this is a very small sample size and no way to judge a player, really just wanted to see if what I said prior held any weight and even accounting for some inaccuracies on my end I think it does.

Edit: there were some other things, Wright came through a maul, didn’t gain possession but forced the Rebels to pass (maybe). He was very slow to leave a scrum to cover the blindside, had no impact on the play though. He also seemed to be positioned mostly around the far wing/13 zone in general play, clearly his role but other back rowers cop some flack for the same thing.

No note of the two involvements I spoke of in the lead up to the reds two tries?

 

[Up the Guts]

No note of the two involvements I spoke of in the lead up to the reds two tries?

Highkicks only analysed the first half.

 

[Braveheart81]

This was a cracking game. The Rebels certainly blew their opportunities in the first half and should have had a strong lead with the Reds chasing the game.

I thought Koroibete put in an incredible performance in a losing side. He was everywhere. Not often a winger from each team could be fairly argued as the two best players on the park.

 

[Highkicks]

It probably comes off a bit critical, of Wright especially. However it was just one half of one game, where his team wasn’t performing well. Not a fair assessment of him as a player. As Adam pointed out, he had at least 2 good contributions in the 2nd half and likely a lot more. I feel it did give me more insight into his play though and I still doubt him as a link player and probably have more doubts around his contact and ruck work than I did prior.

If I do something similar in the future I can give more context around the involvements too. Sometimes making 1 meter in tight is a good dominant run etc.