• Welcome to the forums of Green & Gold Rugby.
    We have recently made some changes to the amount of discussions boards on the forum.
    Over the coming months we will continue to make more changes to make the forum more user friendly for all to use.
    Thanks, Admin.

The ranting at Deans/ARU/O'Neill/Players thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Slim 293

Slim 293

Stirling Mortlock (74)
waratahjesus said:
I watch a lot of them, which is why I don't understand your point at all. Moore is the better loose play runner and it is an advantage to have him on after the softening up period (based on both hookers being used which I think they should be)

TPNs strength is in close, pick and drives aren't the only in close. I'm not saying Moore is bad at them, just that I would prefer TPN during the first 30 and Moore for the last 30.
Click to expand...

I think you've got it backwards.......
 
J

Jiggles

Guest
daz said:
82% in the 2007 RWC year. We could only dream of such numbers.

His ratio was smashed over-all due to losses against the Kiwis (33% w/l) and Oz (55% w/l).

Funny, he has 100% against Scotland and Samoa. I'll take that for starters.

Forget the "lucky draw" arguement. He played the cards he was dealt and he came up trumps.
Click to expand...


Yeah Not saying I wouldn't take him over Deans, but I don't think his international record screams test super coach Like Macqueen, Ted or Woodward. And it is for this point I wouldn't disregard Link, and the track record he has at super level with both the Tahs and the Reds.

Also not arguing against the RWC, I would happily take that draw and be very content with RWC number 3 for the Wobs. But you can't deny PdV's springboks had a tougher assignment in the QF against Australia than White's did against Fiji, for example.
 
Slim 293

Slim 293

Stirling Mortlock (74)
But the Boks had to play England twice in that RWC.........

And at least they won both matches.........
 
D

daz

Guest
Slim 293 said:
But the Boks had to play England twice in that RWC...

And at least they won both matches...
Click to expand...

True. And remember this; while the RWC07 final was one of the dourest, most negative kick-fests of all time, the point is that SA adapted their game plan to negate the opposition.

They ran wide in games they could run wide, and they shut up shop when they had to shut up shop.

We just run at brick walls all day, and wonder why we don't score points.
 
J

Jiggles

Guest
waratahjesus said:
Nope, Moore is a faster runner and better link player. TPN is better at softening up opposition, I stand by it. There isn't a whole lot between them, that's just my opinion.
Click to expand...

Right. Just ignore what the stats say about were they put their work in...
 
Slim 293

Slim 293

Stirling Mortlock (74)
Yeah, Moore is the one you'll see in tight doing pick and drives while TPN hangs out in the midfield.........
 
waratahjesus

waratahjesus

Greg Davis (50)
Jiggles said:
Right. Just ignore what the stats say about were they put their work in.
Click to expand...

Are the playing the same teams at the same time in the same team in the same conditions? And what stat other than "pick and drive" indicates loose and tight play?

There both world class forwards who deserve time on the field every game Australia plays. Neither should be asked to give 80 minutes, it's just a personnel decision who is the better to start with a finish with, neither is more important than the other.
 
J

Jiggles

Guest
rucks, tight runs, tackles... Moore doing much more of it than TPN.
 
waratahjesus

waratahjesus

Greg Davis (50)
Slim 293 said:
Based on effectiveness, on our last match, Moore would come out on top...
Click to expand...

I wish every substitute offered the impact
Moore did, it was exactly what a bench should be able to do. Come on after a softening up period and raise the tempo of the match and get involved.
 
Slim 293

Slim 293

Stirling Mortlock (74)
TPN did a great job softening up those All Black forwards..........

By the time Moore got on the field they were begging for us to go easy on them.........
 
waratahjesus

waratahjesus

Greg Davis (50)
Slim 293 said:
TPN did a great job softening up those All Black forwards....

By the time Moore got on the field they were begging for us to go easy on them...
Click to expand...

So your saying moores contribution would have been the same upfront when possession was even and everyone was fresh?

Listen I'm not even arguing, Moore is a great player and his contribution was that of great work rate, exactly what should be expected of him. I will however defend TPN against the bullshit you continually want to throw upon him. Moore is a world class hooker, TPN is a world class hooker, neither is the messiah.
 
Sandpit Fan

Sandpit Fan

Nev Cottrell (35)
daz said:
Deans needs to go. We mostly agree on this. We also mostly agree that Link is the obvious successor.

Guys, I am just going to throw this out there: Why not Jake White, instead?

White is a no bullshit guy who takes no crap, while being a highly skilled motivator and man manager. He has a game plan and uses players well.

Like Link, he is taking a basket case S15 team on the up and up.

He is also proven at international level (unlike Link and Deans). Remember he did not quit the Saffa's, and was not sacked due to poor performance; it was political.

He would be relatively free of the provincial politics while still having a solid understanding of Oz rugby. He has coached here. Deans never did.


Discuss.
Click to expand...

No thanks Daz.

  1. I don't agree with foreign coaches for national teams. If we want to call ourselves a Tier 1 rugby nation and retain any sort of self respect, we need to have our own countrymen coaching. A bloke who can peel the paint from the walls at half time and finish the spray with "now get out there and &^%^ give it to those ^$@*&% kiwi/south african *&^%$^%", which was desperately needed last week.
  2. Bringing in someone from outside is a statement that there is not a single Aussie coach who is worthy. Not the sort of message we want to be sending to aspiring coaches who have performed well. The Wallaby coaching position should be the pinnacle that a coach progressing through premier then Super rugby aspires to. If there is nothing to aim for, there is no incentive for coaches to improve themselves - the long term effect puts our overall rugby development on a downward spiral. Which leads to my next point.
  3. If you make "proven at international level" a requirement, it condemns us to an never ending conga line of suckhole line of kiwi & South African coaches, simply because they have the stones to back their coaches. Let the Japans, Wales, and Italy's of the world import kiwi coaches who can't get a start at home, but FFS, a nation with our rugby pedigree should be ashamed to be doing it. We didn't need imports to win 2 RWC's, we don't need them now.
Ahhh. That feels better now :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top