By ohtani's jacket
July 4th 2009 @ 1:34am
Loading ...All Blacks need to re-think their attack
Rugby can be a frustrating game to watch. Teams spend an age fighting for the ball, only to lose it on their first possession. And even the most promising of movements can end in a penalty or turnover.
Yet, nothing grates quite as much as inept attack, and in the Test against Italy, the All Blacks showed once again that without line breaks, they have no teeth.
The Italian defence was nothing out of the ordinary.
It was a less aggressive version of the rush defence used by the French in Dunedin, a defence which is fast becoming the norm at Test match level.
It’s a defence that’s designed to keep play trapped in the midfield and prevent the opposition from getting quick ball out wide.
The idea is to “sack” the ball carrier before he can get over the advantage line, similar to how a linebacker targets the quarterback behind the line of scrimmage. The difference being that a quarterback has protection from his offensive line, whereas the first receiver in rugby is a sitting duck.
The All Blacks tried to counter this with a short passing game.
In theory, this creates holes in the defensive line, but in a real game situation, passing under pressure leads to a litany of mistakes, such as near intercepts, passes to no-one, and in the case of the Christchurch Test, a bizarre number of obstruction calls.
It’s more or less proof that you can only use a short passing game once you’ve broken through the defensive line. If you’re too flat, as the All Blacks were in Christchurch, then you can’t hit the ball at pace and wind up playing a static offload game.
This wasn’t entirely the backs’ fault, however.
The All Black forwards didn’t play over the ball and barely contested the rucks, allowing the Italians a huge amount of territory and failing to get the type of turnover ball that’s probably the All Blacks’ best attack against a rush defence.
The overall performance reminded me of the Hurricanes or Chiefs when they came up against the tougher defensive sides in the Super 14.
Guys would look to batter their way through the defensive line, but without any sort of go forward, the countdown was on to the inevitable turnover.
In short, we didn’t play enough rugby.
The good news is that these things are fixable, but it raises the question of why these players need the basics drilled into them.
The first instinct is to blame the coaches. But if those were the tactics, then Henry and his assistants sold the players down the river with their post match comments.
While it’s true that Wayne Smith has never fully abandoned his flat backline strategy, I’m not convinced that flick passes are what he had in mind.
During the game, you could see Muliaina trying to enter the line and give the All Blacks some direction, and it wasn’t until the substitutes came on (and Ross went out into the backline) that we started playing with purpose.
Too often people act as if the coaches pull all the strings and players are merely pawns to be moved around the field.
While it’s important to play the right players in the right positions, Test selections are only half the equation.
Perhaps the All Blacks thought the Italians would fall off some tackles and leave some holes. Perhaps they didn’t expect Italy to last the full eighty minutes. Or maybe the All Black forwards didn’t want to take a battering for the third straight week.
It could even be that the All Blacks, not being great proponents of the rush defence, aren’t that au fait with how it works.
Or perhaps they’re simply tired, stretched too thin and on the wane.
Whatever the case, Graham Henry needs to take stock of what he has: a backline that’s missing any sort of nucleus. For that reason, I’d suggest a pragmatic approach to the Test at Eden Park.
The All Blacks need to spend time in the opposition half and look to convert territory and possession into points by constructing our attack in a simpler fashion.
As disappointing as it sounds, we no longer have the backs to play running rugby from anywhere on the field.
Whoever plays first five eight, and I imagine it will be Donald and McAlister in tandem, the coaches have to tell those players that we don’t need them to be Dan Carter.
We simply need them to relieve pressure, kick for touch, look for territorial gains and be judicious with their running and passing. In other words, solid play from the five eight position.
There’s no need to set the world on fire. The All Blacks have always been at their best when they’ve played clinically.
So let’s try to get into a groove and actually outflank opponents instead of attacking the line with an endless series of pick and goes.
If Piri Weepu moves the ball quicker, then Henry needs to forgo his “impact” strategy and play Weepu from the start.
The All Blacks don’t have the luxury of playing their best players off the bench and can’t afford to wait until the final quarter to play rugby.
Nothing the All Blacks did in the past is working right now, but that’s not necessarily a bad thing.
The New Zealand rugby public seem a little edgy about another team passing us, but it’s a good chance to test our mettle.
This was the challenge Henry took on when he sought his reappointment.
Even last year it was obvious that we couldn’t keep winning playing the same style of rugby. What worked in 2005 and 2006 can’t work forever.
Unfortunately, the New Zealand rugby public don’t really think like that and thus the pressure is squarely on the shoulders of Henry and his players.
Personally, I think that’s ridiculous after four straight Tri-Nation titles. Painful though it may be, I look forward to the coming challenge.
Going to the Waratahs v Brumbies blockbuster at ANZ Stadium, Saturday 24 April? If you're keen to meet up with other Roarers, register you interest and we'll keep you informed on the place to meet. Register now.
Get Australia's best Rugby opinion emailed daily.
Like this content? Buzz it up!
Free Email updates:
Our daily emails are only sent if there is content for the sport or that author. You can subscribe to multiple daily emails; or get the daily Roar email with all our content in it. We value privacy. More...
(34)
Jolly Jupes said | July 4th 2009 @ 7:27am | Report comment
The All Blacks are playing the same style of rugby they played last season (under different rules) that is effectively a 15 man version of Sevens. The concept of playing what is in front of you is fine but you need to go forward first – shovelling the ball laterally against good defences does little. You need to use a more strategic approach to manipulate the defence, get accross the advantage line and then use your skill/speed/power. I note the odds for the AB’s in the tri nations are better than Australia which I cannot see – the style of All Black rugby will see them finish third. They may well adapt but you would question their intelligence as they have been out coached in the early games of this season and last season
hammer said | July 4th 2009 @ 7:41am | Report comment
who out coached them last season ?
Jerry said | July 4th 2009 @ 8:46am | Report comment
Jolly Jupes – what All Blacks were you actually watching last season? After the loss in Sydney (Hammer – this was the time they were ‘outcoached’ all year, probably the only time) they adopted a much more conservative game plan, a lot of tactical kicks to pin the opposition back into their own half.
hammer said | July 4th 2009 @ 8:56am | Report comment
Jerry – i know – but also that was the first time they’d come up against a team coached by the only international coach schooled in the ELV’s .. after that they certainly proved themselves to be a very good coaching team
Fuzz said | July 4th 2009 @ 12:03pm | Report comment
Did the All Blacks not win the Tri-Nations / Bledisloe and achieve a Grand Slam last year after being written off by the scribes?
Hmmm if this is the result of being outcoached I look forward to the All Blacks being coached positively
Jolly Jupes said | July 4th 2009 @ 12:47pm | Report comment
The point I make is that they have been out-coached in two consecutive years at the start of each season – I also said they may well adapt as they did last year by using a “more conservative game plan, a lot of tactical kicks to pin the opposition back into their own half” (your words Jerry). This is in fact how the Wallabies are playing this year so it was a surpirse to me that the AB’s forgot what worked last year and got caught by the frogs. No matter – I can only assume that you dont agree with my prediction so we will just have to wait and see. If you were betting your house on it you would be nervous backing this AB’s team this season.
Hammer – i am not sure what you are saying – If Deans had experience coaching under the ELV’s then what were the kiwi players doing the first half of the season (many of them coached by Deans). Secondly what were the 3 AB coaches doing in the first half of the year as they watch all the games, have coaches conference and all provincial coaches are on the NZRU payroll so there should be no secrets being held back – A lame argument from my point of view
bennalong said | July 4th 2009 @ 7:28pm | Report comment
A good piece OJ
IMO The return of Richie McCaw and Soialo will do a lot to improve things, a helluva lot. As I said earlier in the season the AB’s have lacked leaders and leadership. That changes, at least in the forewards.
Without Carter your stakes have fallen, but Donald /McCalister behind a solid pack with go-foreward may workout fine.
It will depend how much pressure the Wallabies can exert. Certainly the balance of confidence is with the Wallabies going into this game. We’ll have to see if the AB’s can find theirs.
How good will Richie be?
ohtani's jacket, said | July 5th 2009 @ 8:46am | Report comment
I don’t think the team is balanced enough to win the Tri-Nations, but it depends on the openings the other sides give us.
Here’s a run down of the squad:
Aled de Malmanche — finally got a cap against Italy; opportunity beckons on the away leg
Andrew Hore — short on form and playing time, which is hurting the All Blacks badly
Keven Mealamu — solid vet, but can’t put in a barn burner every Test out.
John Afoa — blew his audition for the starting tighthead gig; the fight’s on to keep his bench role
Wyatt Crockett — has a chance to impress in training
Owen Franks — ditto, but even a bench role seems unlikely
Neemia Tialata — first Tri-Nations in a while without a Hayman or Somerville. Tighhead looks like a weak point.
Tony Woodcock — hasn’t regained his fitness yet.
Jason Eaton — reeks of Henry going back to someone who has Test experience
Bryn Evans — didn’t disappoint in his brief cameos, particularly in the restarts
Isaac Ross — should be in the All Blacks on form; wouldn’t be if Williams weren’t injured. Blessing in disguise
Brad Thorn — workhorse, but he’s starting to pace himself
Tanerau Latimer — was a huge disappointment against Italy, but a big improvement over Thomson
Richie McCaw — hasn’t played much rugby this year and there’s question marks over his form and the chances of him staying healthy
Jerome Kaino — the right choice at blindside. Hopefully he gets stuck into the tight stuff
Kieran Read — needs to prove that he’s not just another Crusader and has the skills at Test match level
Rodney So’oialo — have to wonder if the rest did him any good. Make or break campaign for him.
Jimmy Cowan — needs to play like a halfback and stop acting like Justin Marshall
Brendon Leonard — looked rusty to me against Italy; could be crucial in helping Donald settle at Test level
Piri Weepu — one of the only real leaders in the backline (along with Mils). Why not start him?
Stephen Donald — needs to stop listening to the critics and simplify his game
Luke McAlister — shouldn’t be in the All Blacks and his only advantage over Donald is that he’s a better goalkicker. Not his fault he was rushed back too soon.
Ma’a Nonu — will have every rush defender targeting him. Needs to beat some tackles.
Conrad Smith — crucial linkman, but his presence alone won’t help the backline function
Isaia Toeava — the selectors love this kid, but when is enough enough?
Hosea Gear — I don’t get this one. Masaga was pulled from the Junior All Blacks and given a single opportunity against Italy. Gear plays for the Juniors and gets a recall? Go figure.
Josevata Rokocoko — may have entered the stage where he’s more of a finisher than a genuine threat.
Sitiveni Sivivatu — hope he can rekindle his Super 14 form, because he’s the only real line breaker in the All Black backline
Cory Jane — another guy like Ross who’s actually having a good Test season. Very much a fullback, however.
Mils Muliaina — still the best fullback in the world
Aside from Carter, Williams and Kahui, it’s not that far off a full strength All Blacks squad. We’re just well and truly in a rebuilding stage, which is a nice way of saying on the decline.
I would’ve liked to have seen Whitelock in the squad.
mother teresa said | July 5th 2009 @ 8:37pm | Report comment
OJ
brilliant assessment and the reason i support joly jupes intelligent predictions;time for the “tucked up trio” of AB coaches to rouse and wayne smith might look for the exit.
LeftArmSpinner said | July 6th 2009 @ 4:38pm | Report comment
OJ, short pasing game only works once you have broken through the defensive line. I must first admit to being an OJ fan, but not this time. Short passing is designed and has worked at all levels of rugby, to make the hole by short, easier to throw passes and lots of support play, a la the Ella era.
It works.
Firstly, it compresses the defence laterally, leaving more space out wide. The shorter passes are easier to throw accurately and make midfield moves at the gain line easier to make stick. Inside players in support dont have to travel so far and are deep enough and close to take the next short pass. All done at pace and with the liberal use of extra men, not telegraphed blind side wingers or fullbacks, but “out of the blue” players at pace creating overlaps and holes to run into.
I didnt see the games but it sounds like the AB’s didnt implement very well. it takes some time but produces the desired results. it goes on at the gian line so when it comes off, the ball carrier is through and into space with support to finish off the break.
For me, pro players have the time and abilty to learn different attacking alignments, wide sweeping backlines or short, sharp passes. Mix them up and force the defence to adjust but without prior notice.
Mark said | July 6th 2009 @ 4:45pm | Report comment
OJ – nice summary & well done. Just a couple of points I disagree on
Tialata- only got undone by illegal techniques from French loosehead, I reckon he’ll go well
Thorn – played out of his skin, when was he pacing himself ?
Leonard, great service against italy, very crisp & seems to take a 1/2 step vs Piris full step b4 passing, they’re definitely the form 9s though..
McAllister – I rewatched the first 20 mins & he did pretty well, 2 nice chips that with a different bounce or Mils holding on might’ve been trys, good defence, give him a chance.
Jane – played well on the wing so could easily go one side with Sivi on the other although good to know we’ve got a Mils backup now McDonald’s gone.
I like the look of this team, loosies are settling down & will only get better, lineout & restarts are good, scrum needs a bit of work but not much, either 1st 5 will bed in well if they stick to the simple things. As long as Smith stays fit or they drop McAllister into 13 & Donald at 10 instead of Toeava at 13 we’re looking pretty good.
Call me a glass half full type og guy but I like teh look of this team & can only see them getting a LOT better than how they’ve played so far.
Spiro Zavos said | July 6th 2009 @ 5:01pm | Report comment
Do you think the All Blacks coaches could buy Ian McGeechan’s playbook for the British Lions in the series against the Springboks. The one thing the Lions didn’t have much trouble in doing was make breaks against the Boks. In the last Test Stephen Jones hardly kicked but re-cycled the ball to willing runners with the fast men running off the shoulders of the big players. Is this the answer for the All Blacks?
Generally I haven’t been impressed with Wayne Smith’s performance as the backs coach. The All Blacks seldom have interesting moves and run-arounds to set up easy tries like the two from set pieces the Springboks scored in the second Test.
In fact it is difficult to see the patterns that Graham Henry is trying to set up, unlike Robbie Deans who seems to have a coherent game-plan based on his Crusaders model of fast forwards, good in the set piece, and turning turn-over ball to the fast men out wide.
But then how do we explain the success the All Blacks had last year? Perhaps better players is the answer, although it is doubtful whether this is true this year.
What would Deans do with the talent New Zealand rugby throws up? My guess is that he’d be already looking a youngsters like Aaron Cruden to cover up the undoubted weakness in the first five-eighths position. l
ohtani's jacket, said | July 6th 2009 @ 5:46pm | Report comment
Leftie,
A short passing game works in theory, but it’s something the All Blacks haven’t been able to master.
What’s happening lately is that the first five is receiving the ball at the same time that the defence reach him, which not only limits the space he has to work with but puts pressure on him to execute. If they were passing short while attacking the line, it would be all right, but they’re passing right before the defence knocks them into the middle of next week, hence the intercepts, charge downs and the like. The only way to counter that is to stand deeper.
Both Donald and McAlister tried the chip kick option, but it was useless to put it mildly. The only successful kicking has been box kicks from the halfback and McAlister’s Carter impersonation with the cross field kick to Rokocoko.
We’ll be in for a torrid time in South Africa if we keep this up. I’ve never quite understood why Henry moved away from the forward based offload game that worked so well for us at one stage. You still see the All Blacks play that way sometimes, but they don’t link up like they did when Henry first took over.
Thanks for the replies guys. I’ve gotta go now, but I’ll answer some more of them when I get home.
Wowser said | July 6th 2009 @ 6:31pm | Report comment
Not many other teams could lose so many world class players and still compete. Just look at SA on the weekend. They were a shambles and were smashed. The All Black 2009 vintage won’t be the best ever, the forwards might lack a bit of bite and the backs might be a bit lumpen, but it will compete. Now, this might mean losing a couple but that, curiously enough, may be just what NZ needs. Here’s my pet theory. The All Blacks rise to their reputation (or ’story’ if you want to talk like a marketer) in between World Cups but come crunch time that same story works against them. Everyone they play is the underdog, the tournament levels out the standard, the pressure mounts up and they stumble. We can talk all day about which players to pick but if they really want to win the RWC they need to re frame their story. Of course they are unlikely to ever enter a world cup with a losing record but even so, they need to take the pressure off themselves and go from the biggest, baddest, hardest team on the planet to ‘the little engine that could’. Their story needs to be about overcoming the odds. Something like, “In spite of a small population, geographic isolation and threadbare resources NZ rugby is still up there among the best.” Graham Henry tried to do this all by himself when he took over. He actively tried to take the pressure off the team and reduce expectations. It seemed to help. They need to do more of it before 2011. Are you listening, Adidas?
Stash said | July 6th 2009 @ 7:16pm | Report comment
Good theory Wowser – still you can’t have the ABs winning the World Cup… that would mean they win everything.
That doesn’t seem very fair.
mother teresa said | July 6th 2009 @ 9:09pm | Report comment
mark you are a glass 90% full;
OJ;deeper is easy but mixed is better;brain is best with a coach who sets strategy before structure.
spiro agreed ;it defies belief that smith has a reputation of master coach;with seasoned internationals is this the best he can do hide behind lack of depth.
wowser you will have me in tears ,poor grahams predicament;for the second year in a row he has been underprepared is this the way he takes pressure off the team by losing .next you will tell me the games the thing not winning.now i wouldnt dare argue with that philosophy.
ohtani's jacket, said | July 6th 2009 @ 10:24pm | Report comment
Mark,
I thought Tialata played well in the second Test against France, but it’s a hard task getting him to play that way every Test. He strikes me as the kind of player who needs to be told what to do.
Thorn was outstanding in Wellington, but I don’t think we can expect that type of MOTM performance in every Test. He’ll wear himself into the ground if he does all of the hard work himself. I don’t think he played quite as well in the other two Tests, but it’s not a big concern.
I didn’t rate Leonard’s performance. He was trying to clear the ball from the ruck too fast and didn’t size up his options that well. He threw the ball in far too many directions and didn’t utilise his forwards well enough.
McAlister has only really played first five for the All Blacks when they’ve been on the front foot, so it doesn’t surprise me that he looked his best when he came on at the end of the Wellington Test. He can cover 10, but he doesn’t look all that comfortable there and that dates back to the quarterfinal in Cardiff. His confidence seems shot and his comments about how he wouldn’t select himself are a little damning.
As for Jane, I don’t think he’s an out and out winger and putting him there for defensive reasons or as a kicking option won’t help the backline. He’s unlikely to do anything wrong, but he’s barely had any ball playing on the wing and doesn’t seem to come off his line very often.
Spiro,
The All Black attack in recent years has been built around counter attacking through turnovers and quick recycling of the ball. They don’t use a lot of set plays because they prefer broken or loose play to set pieces.
As for Deans, he probably would’ve made some selection errors of his own. All coaches do. Until he wins some silverware with the Wallabies, I’m not convinced that he has better ideas than any other Test coach.
Sam Taulelei said | July 7th 2009 @ 12:07am | Report comment
OJ
Brian Lochore made an insightful comment when reviewing the All Blacks performances before their departure for France in 2007. He always felt that NZ rugby teams were at their best when the forwards engaged in close hand to hand passing rushes to beat the defence and get behind the advantage line. This was one area he felt required the greatest area of improvement in NZ rugby as a whole. His assessment still holds true today. I’m also perplexed as to why we no longer see the forwards offloading to players running from deep positions. If Tialata has overcome his documented problems with compartment syndrome in his calves then we should see greater consistency from the big man, but it’s high time he delivered.
Spiro, it shouldn’t be too hard to see what Deans is trying to have his Wallabies emulate as it’s obviously served him well in the past and you only have to cast your memory back to the All Blacks from late 2004 to 2007 to acknowledge that it was the same style played by the All Blacks. I wasn’t impressed with the quality of our attacks from setpieces last year and it’s difficult to see any improvement in that area during their past 3 tests. What strikes me as peculiar is the quality of our setpiece attacks against England in the June 2008 tests – we carved them up and that was before the ELV’s.
I read tonight that Graham Henry and Wayne Smith have already earmarked Aaron Cruden for higher honours if he has a strong season in the Air NZ cup this year. Personally I’m wary of placing such pressure and expectation on young talent and there’s also a danger of countries insuring against these players being poached by selecting them for national teams before they’re ready. I remember an article Spiro published on this site in 2007 where you claimed Stephen Brett was the second best first five in the world after Dan Carter following Brett’s performances for Canterbury in the NPC and there were reports that he may sign for an overseas club if he wasn’t selected for the end of year tour last year. As fans we’re often guilty of only noting the good qualities of a particular player but it’s the coaches task to look for the weaknesses in a players game so they can improve and aspire to do better. Non-selection can sometimes be a good thing in a players longer term development.
I don’t believe the performances in June are as accurate an indicator as many people think ahead of the Tri Nations – but then what else do we have to go on? In the past the Wallabies have flattered to deceive against modest opposition during their inbound tours and have been written off by many pundits but they’re always competitive. Conversely SA and NZ are talked up and never dominate as expected. To keep some perspective even as talented a side as the 2005 All Blacks that swept the Lions, was confident, injury free, played a great brand of rugby and generated much excitement and expectation from the NZ public DIDN’T dominate the Tri Nations and it took a late Howlett try against Australia in the final game at Eden Park to win the title. The early 2009 version isn’t a patch on that team. They’re lacking in experience, combination, cohesiveness, direction and execution but the expectations haven’t changed. With the return of McCaw, So’oialo, Smith, Sivivatu and Hore the hope is that the performances and results will.
Mark said | July 7th 2009 @ 9:05am | Report comment
Spiro – “Generally I haven’t been impressed with Wayne Smith’s performance as the backs coach. The All Blacks seldom have interesting moves and run-arounds to set up easy tries like the two from set pieces the Springboks scored in the second Test.’
Well there were some quite good moves but unfortuntely they co**ed them up ! I’m surprised you missed them, they were the ones where someone (a back) came screaming straight through the fist line of defence only to drop the ball or be forward of the passer. Funnily enough I was watching these moves & thinking that their timing was only off by 1/2 a second so they should be getting them right (mostly) through the TN.
OJ
- I thought the issue with Leonard was a game plan one as he likes to run the ball & uses his forwards normally.
- Jane has got good pace so I disagree that he’s not a real wing candidate.
- As for the chip kick there were 2 in the first 15 mins vs Italy, one Mils spilled & the other bounced long into the FB’s hands instead of sitting up for the THREE supporting ABs. Either would’ve been a try if they’d stuck.
- McAllister – well you’re going to get the chance to say you were right by the looks of it, I still rate him.
God I love this time of year, especially proving Marshall wrong that the TN is boring !
Sam -excellent point re the Lochore comment. It’s what they weren’t doing inthe first & third test this year & they have to do that to give the backs time.
Mother T – thanks, as long as it’s an Islay or a Scapa !
Not long now & it’ll all be academic, then we can start arguing about the refs instead……
Dean Pantio said | July 7th 2009 @ 2:11pm | Report comment
Jane is not a winger. Three sperate times he was caught out against the French by coming in and leaving an unmarked man on the line. One of those resulted in the fantastic Heymans try. As a fullback he definitely shows talent and composure to be a back up to Mills.
Leonard’s game play against Italy was poor. Too many bad options including passing to the wrong side of the ruck where the All Blacks were outnumbered. Not one of his better games, but he has demonstrated a capacity to play much, much better than that.
Toeava’s only problem is his versatility. He played some marvellous rugby for the Blues at fullback and I rate him higher than Jane.
“What would Deans do with the talent New Zealand rugby throws up?” We’ve seen that in 2003.
“I remember an article Spiro published on this site in 2007 where you claimed Stephen Brett was the second best first five in the world after Dan Carter” – LOL, not even the one-eyed hillbillies were proclaiming that.
OldManEmu said | July 7th 2009 @ 9:11pm | Report comment
I am salivating at the prospct of this years Tri Nations. I think it is the most even since the tournament began.
Predictions:
The Richie McCaw V George Smith debate (which in truth probably only exists in my tiny little mind) will be settled once and for ALL. If McCaw can lead the rabble that has been the ABs in the pre season tests, he is the greatest.
Brad Thorne will be the outstanding forward of the tournament
Deans will talk a whole lot and not say much.
The myth that is the Beast will be exposed
Refereeing will be a blight lead by Bryce Lawrence and Marius Jonkers closely followed by Stu Dickenson (the NZ refs are far and away the best in the world)
ABs to win by a whisker.
Jerry said | July 7th 2009 @ 9:25pm | Report comment
Other than Yonker, I really rate the SA refs to be honest. Mark Lawrence, Kaplan and Joubert are all top notch. Of the NZ contingent, only Lyndon Bray is really quality (though Bryce Lawrence can be good also, he does have off days).
ohtani's jacket, said | July 7th 2009 @ 11:16pm | Report comment
Thankfully, we’ve got Mark Lawrence, Kaplan and Joubert against the Aussies.
Sam Taulelei said | July 7th 2009 @ 11:24pm | Report comment
I can already hear the moans from the Aussies who weren’t impressed with Lawrence last year at Eden Park and have never fared well under Kaplan against NZ. If the Bledisloe goes to a decider in the fourth match they’ll be happier with Joubert controlling the game.
Mark said | July 8th 2009 @ 9:19am | Report comment
Sam – they’d winge if it was Dame Edna reffing & they lost. Just look at the whining that went on last year about the ref when they lost, never mind some of the shockers in teh previous test which they’d won (Sivi being taken out without the ball ,etc)
All of the refs have good & bad days & sometimes the calls just go against you. What gets me going is how they penalise the wrong team in the scrums i.e. loosehead not binding or dropping their outside shoulder & they then ping the tighthead. To be honest the standard of reffing these days is pretty high with the ocassional blip. I’m sure if you ask Kiwis about Kaplan they’ll mention ‘Kaplan time’ (7 mins of extra time wasn’t it ?) but I’ve enjoyed the tests he’s reffed.
Sam Taulelei said | July 9th 2009 @ 12:01pm | Report comment
Well the NZRU has given the three wise men another opportunity to try for the World Cup and improve the depth and performance of the All Blacks by reappointing them to the end of 2011. Wish them all the best.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/rugby/news/article.cfm?c_id=80&objectid=10583398
ohtani's jacket, said | July 9th 2009 @ 12:25pm | Report comment
They were always going to have their contracts extended, but what do you think about the timing Sam? Should the NZRU have waited until after the Tri-Nations or would a loss be too damaging? If they lose, it’s going to be damaging either way, I imagine.
Hemjay said | July 9th 2009 @ 12:37pm | Report comment
Certainly a no brainer wasn’t it?
If you didn’t have a clue they were going to be reappointed I’d have to ask you where you’ve been living these last few years. Henry was always going to be Head Coach and it was never more obvious than when the NZRU let Deans sign with Australia
Sam Taulelei said | July 9th 2009 @ 12:42pm | Report comment
OJ
I imagine there will be two camps of thought about the timing. There will be those who argue it woud have been more prudent to wait until after the team performs during the Tri Nations and others who argue that there are no other genuine candidates to consider so why wait.
My view is that this years Tri Nations results are irrelevant if they’re appointed to win the world cup in two years time, so announce it now, let them concentrate on their immediate goals as well as giving them the tiime to begin planning for the future. I agree that their contracts were always going to be extended unless Henry decided to abdicate to Steve Hansen at the end of this season. The NZRU had already decided who their team was going to be when they reappointed them in 2007, this announcement merely confirms it.
Mark said | July 9th 2009 @ 1:05pm | Report comment
Sam – agree completely, we’ve got enough TNs how about another WC. Flipping Boks & Ozzies have allthe bragging rights. Now they can focus on the job of building the team for 2011.
Sam Taulelei said | July 9th 2009 @ 1:31pm | Report comment
Interesting to read Jock Hobbs comments about the reappointment that they wanted to retain the coaching team as a whole rather than run the risk of losing one of them overseas (read Steve Hansen). I recall the strength and experience of the coaching team was a strong factor in the NRU decision to stick with Henry when compared to Deans and his proposed assistants Pat Lam and Vern Cotter in 2007. Hansen appears from the outside anyway to be key in this decision as he was making noises about wanting to coach fulltime again and Wayne Smith harbours no amibitions to take the top job.
Sam Taulelei said | July 9th 2009 @ 1:58pm | Report comment
If the Board had reached their decision in April and announced it then, imagine the furore following the June test series.
retired rucker said | July 9th 2009 @ 4:54pm | Report comment
Just a comment about whining and refs.
I think you will find aussys and kiwis are equally as capable of a bit of a whinge/whine about the refs. I think the volume of it is directly related win/loss ratio, hence a little less from you Kiwis.
I have been completely one eyed and biased wrt refs in the past but over the last 12 months have made a concerted effort to watch the games more clinically, I’ll tell you it is very hard when you back a team(Force and Wallabies).
What I find when watching neutral games is that the best refs are consistent with their application of the laws, which i beleive is all we can ask. my other observation is that there are alot of reffs at S14 and international level who don’t have a clue about consistancey. This is what generally leads to the Howls from the whiners!
Oh and by the way as an ex 2nd rower I think most of them don’t have a clue at the scrum.
My solution to this is for the iRB and local unions to target ex high grade props as refs and have 2 refs on the field, min 1 with prop background so the scrum can be policed from both sides. Then I would set a minimum reset number @ 5, with the realisation after the 5th collapse a yellow will be issued and penalty. I reckon this would create a fair contest at the scrum most of the time, it would also end the careers of serial collapsers as they would be in the bin for most of the game.
Mark said | July 9th 2009 @ 5:06pm | Report comment
RR – nice idea but a couple of flaws in your plan
1) No ex-first grade prop will have enough cartelidge left to run around the field for an entire game
2) No self respecting ex-prop will penalise late hits on those irritating backs when teh hit comes from any of the tight 5, they’ll simply see it as divine retribution.
Realistically they scrums are simple to police
- both props must be bound & stay straight (no Village people allowed)
- no rolling/dropping of the outside shoulder
- the ball goes in the middle (how hard is it to police this one ?)
- players must remain bound until the ball is out
- no early shoves but take the weight on engagement
- then include the niggly stuff like deliberate wheeling (not sure on the rules with this one)
How hard is that ?? & in fact some refs (don’t ask me to name them as I never remeber a refs name after the game) police the scrum very well although it might take tehm a few resets to cotton on to who’s the problem.