Wallabies v All Blacks Melbourne

[naza]

3. Metres around the ruck, on attack and defence

Well written analysis there, Ash. What stood out was the line speed. All Blacks hit the line at pace, both in attack and defence. We...didn't. And far too much flopping down by our ball runners, they need to get their body height low and get their legs pumping through the tackle.

The scary thing is just ABs made it look incredibly easy. That is one hell of a gulf to make up.

 

[cyclopath]

Paris Tah - it (the first All Black try) looked suspicious in the first replay, but would've looked fine live to the ref. It's often too hard for them to pick that sort of stuff up and you just have to live with it. I was blowing up more about the try where AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) is tackled, and Smith doesn't roll away - instead Smith forces it out on the ground and they score...I think it was silly play from Smith as the All Blacks would've gotten the turnover without his illegal play and I thought he had given away a silly penalty, but I was proven wrong when the ball came out and the ref did nothing. The thing about that try as well - the Wallabies put themselves under pressure as AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) should've either kicked or passed to his man infield. In his defence, I bet he was hiding on the wing due to just having been knocked out, but still...

Sadly, these mistakes didn't really matter too much, as the All Blacks were simply too good for us.

I'll give AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) the benefit of the doubt, but this is one of his problems. At the back he seldom kicks, and let's face it, number 15 needs to kick sometimes, and he just as seldom passes. In that situation he was a liability once he did not beat his man. Robbie or that other twat who apparently coaches the attack needs to have a word in his ear about how a 15 needs to be able to play. Even an up and under would have been a better option than trying to beat 2 men in 5m just outside your own 22.

 

[Jethro Tah]

IMO the incident is irrelevant but the try itself was undoubtedly a game changer. Barnes never should have given them the opportunity but it's history now.

I should have said "No result changer". The ABs would have won either way.

As much as I am disappointed at the score line, I enjoyed watching a game of good rugby. I had a few drinks with some french rugby fans after the game and they barrack for anyone playing the ABs but similarly enjoyed watching the rugby.

 

[Muttonbird]

I should have said "No result changer". The ABs would have won either way.

As much as I am disappointed at the score line, I enjoyed watching a game of good rugby. I had a few drinks with some french rugby fans after the game and they barrack for anyone playing the ABs but similarly enjoyed watching the rugby.

As if sinking the Rainbow Warrior wasn't enough.

 

[Epi]

Thanks Barbarian for a sane summation of the game... Folks round here love to throw their toys out of the pram sometimes...

 

[da_grubster]

Welcome dg. He still doesn't give an ultimatum though, does he. I am not railing against the card here, he certainly mentions 'slowing the game' and 'yellow card' in the same breath so anyone who does anything from that point is an idiot who deserves what he gets. Just thought it was a tad harsh to call Mitchell on it when he did.

Cheers

Just watched it again and he is actually quite clear about it. mentions quick tempo, other team want to stop quick taps and he will not allow it (This was just after he penalised the ABs once and marched us 10 and the wobs twice) and will escalate to yellow if he needs to.

I suppose he felt he needed to!

One thing that is dissapointing is the refs and touchie's have a renewed focus on certain fouls and are penalising with impunity.

Have the teams been told about this because it hasn't got out to the wider public. I would hate to see us go the same was as soccer where yellow cards are brandished for small technical offences. It certainly felt that way on Saturday.

 

[TheRiddler]

Can someone please tell me how Carter was offside for his charge down try? Kafe was going on again about last night on the Rugby Club. From what I could see, the only time there was an offside line was at the previous ruck. The vision shown again last night clearly shows Genia getting the ball at the scrum base and passing to Gits. At that moment, you could see Richie and Carter both charging forward - but from an onside position. From then on, its all open play so no offside line - Gits passes to Barnes, Carter carries on charging forwards, Barnes kicks and Carter charges down, all from an onside position. I must have missed something somewhere because too many people are saying he was offside.

 

[Moses]

That's exactly what I thought so I rewound it to see that Nonu made the chargedown and Carter was in front of him.

Can someone please tell me how Carter was offside for his charge down try? Kafe was going on again about last night on the Rugby Club. From what I could see, the only time there was an offside line was at the previous ruck. The vision shown again last night clearly shows Genia getting the ball at the scrum base and passing to Gits. At that moment, you could see Richie and Carter both charging forward - but from an onside position. From then on, its all open play so no offside line - Gits passes to Barnes, Carter carries on charging forwards, Barnes kicks and Carter charges down, all from an onside position. I must have missed something somewhere because too many people are saying he was offside.

Sent from my HTC Dream using Tapatalk

 

[Scotty]

That's exactly what I thought so I rewound it to see that Nonu made the chargedown and Carter was in front of him.

I think the ball hits Carter, then Nonu who is behind him, then bounces forward to Carter, who picks up but is never made onside from Nonu.

And I disagree that this sort of thing should be explained away as 'too hard' for the refs to pick up. Surely one out of three saw the ball come from behind Carter?

 

[Richo]

Great analysis, Ash, Barba. Couldn't agree more.

I think it's fair to say that when you play hard, attack the line straight, get fast ball and kick accurately then "luck" will go your way. Sure, maybe either the offside or knock-on should have been picked up in the Carter charge down, but the ABs get those opportunities because they're always playing from the front foot. One reason I thought it was very unfortunate for Drew to be sent off was that he was one of few players on our side who was playing with the right intensity - his charge down is proof that he had the right mindset going into the game.

It's frustrating that the ABs play right at the limits of the rule book and get away with whatever they can, but that's just smart play. If we played as hard and fast at the breakdown we'd see our guys get away with offsides, side entries, and so on.

Finally, generally speaking I reckon Joubert did okay too. He missed a few calls, but they weren't why we lost. His player management is generally very good. I thought he was a bit harsh telling Rock to stop yelling, but the big man is just bad with the ref. Where was the "Sir, can I have a word?" and then getting his emotions under control to raise the issue. I thought we saw a ref that talks to players well, one captain that knows how to manage the ref and his team, and one captain that doesn't really do either.

 

[Gnostic]

Apart from the obvious weakness with the squad I really fear a blow out with the biased preconceived refereeing of Kraplan. It appears many other feel the same way.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...-problem-referee/story-e6frg7mf-1225901340590

I went so far as to say last year that the Tahs should simply refuse to accept him as an official of any kind for their games since he has such a statistical bias against them when compared to any other official. I agree that a team must not pick and choose the officials but it is equally as bad when a team is virtually assured of losing a game they could otherwise win because of the official.

Not that I suggest the Wallabies have any chance of winning this match.