All Blacks have room for improvement
Roar Rookie By Michael Angus, 19 Sep 2012 Michael Angus is a Roar Rookie
- Tagged:
- All Blacks, Rugby Union, The Rugby Championship
145 Have your say
The Wallabies couldn't keep up with the All Blacks in their 27-19 loss on Saturday (AAP Image/Paul Miller).
Related coverage
The All Blacks are head and shoulders above the field as the world’s best team in international rugby and they can be even better.
In the All Blacks first four games of the inaugural Rugby Championship, they have beaten the Wallabies twice, Pumas once and most recently the Springboks. As imposing as their current 14 match unbeaten streak is, which dates back to the beginning of the 2011 Rugby World Cup, they are still far from unbeatable.
The scary part for other teams is that they are finding ways to win, despite not always being at their best.
An area they could significantly improve on for the rest of the year is their attack. Too many times this season they have squandered try scoring opportunities.
In the second Bledisloe Cup test in Auckland this year, the All Blacks missed several chances to score more five pointers. Despite the emphatic 22-0 score line and Australia’s at times stout defence, the All Blacks could have the won the game by much more if their attack was more clinical.
Two weeks later against the Pumas, the All Blacks again struggled to get over the line, not breaking through until Julian Savea scored a try in the 66th minute. Despite the atrocious conditions in Wellington that night, there were still far too many silly handling errors and errant offloads.
Their most recent encounter with the Springboks in Dunedin was also a patchy one on attack, with the only highlights being an outstanding team try finished by Israel Dagg and individual brilliance by replacement scrum-half Aaron Smith.
The issues in attack have started with uncharacteristically bad handling errors. There has also been too many offloads that have ended in turnover ball, when the better and safer option would have been taking the ball to the ground. They also need to be more patient when close to the line as things have been a little rushed to get over it.
The biggest reason for their struggles in attack this season may just be down to their adjustment to new attack coach Ian Foster. Foster has only been on the new coaching staff for seven Tests after all.
With all the options and skill the All Blacks have in attack though, they should eventually hash out the small details that are preventing them from more scoring opportunities. They are simply too good at the moment to not improve in that area.
Despite these issues, it should not take away from the fact that they keep winning against the rest of the field. Their defence has been close to impenetrable during the current win streak and their collective cunning and intelligence to make the right choice in tight games has been outstanding.
This is arguably the greatest All Black team ever assembled and the fact that they have room to improve has got to be exciting for the team and their fans. With this said, they are certainly not unbeatable and it won’t be easy to extend that winning streak.
If any team could keep it going though and extend that streak, it would be hard to bet against this current group of All Blacks.
- Explore:
- All Blacks, Rugby Union, The Rugby Championship
September 19th 2012 @ 3:08am
DuffyV said | September 19th 2012 @ 3:08am | Report comment
BREAKING NEWS!!!!!!!!!
This years All Blacks are already playing to the incoming modified laws, ultimately producing a brand new and very, very exciting benchmark come 2013.
Does anyone believe that Australia or South Africa, are even up to this years laws let alone planning/implementing 2013′s (or this years Northern Tour to be exact)????
The NZ ITM coaches have already been instructed to play the game at extreme pace, under the new law environment, thus creating a perfect petrie dish, to observe amongst other reactions, pure bacterial growth.
The 2012 All Black team resembles, a player/management group, attempting to execute at extreme pace, whilst being refereed under the old laws, which if my assumption of their intentions is correct, would equate to an additional small boat anchor accompanying them along the Southern Hemisphere season only.
An interesting example was when Dan Carter tried to take a quick line out against Australia under the incoming rules, 6 months prior to international implementation, which the ref snuffed out immediately. Why would Mr (Perfect) Carter be deliberately attempting to use laws that were 6 months from implementation????
The All Blacks and New Zealand, are the only country, already 100% implementing the impending new laws.
Does this actually surprise anyone????
September 19th 2012 @ 3:47am
Johnno said | September 19th 2012 @ 3:47am | Report comment
I love the AB;S and NZ rugby. The AB’s are the most successful team ever and this includes the great Brazil teams and great west indies team. What a culture they have in NZ with rugby . We can achieve it here if only we changed our systems.
September 19th 2012 @ 4:07am
DuffyV said | September 19th 2012 @ 4:07am | Report comment
Its too late Johnno.
In another 20-40 years countries like USA & Russia will rule Rugby Union and any local changes to grass roots, will only delay the inevitable.
David will no longer be able to smoke Goliath.
Its called “finite Globalization” and a lot of Roarers are stupidly begging for it……..
September 19th 2012 @ 4:20am
Johnno said | September 19th 2012 @ 4:20am | Report comment
DuffyV good points you make. But do you want protectionism in rugby union. DO you only want the home unions, and a few SH coutnries to participate in rugby.
And money and population size don’t equal greatness. Just look how far the pacific island nations punch above there weight, there populations size are smaller than Canberra or Newcastle. And Uruguay soccer team for a small nation has always punched above it’s weight.
USA has pumped millions into soccer and never won a world cup yet not even close quarter final best effort, they are no better than the socceroos. Holland has never won a world cup . And Russia has never own a soccer world cup.
And England has one won 1 soccer world cup and that was a home world cup, and zero Euro titles.
September 19th 2012 @ 4:51am
DuffyV said | September 19th 2012 @ 4:51am | Report comment
Nice Johnno,
To some degree I would like to see protectionism in relation to locally bred and/or trained players, incurring a internationally stipulated transfer fee, to the benefit of the union whose production line spat them off.
NZ did steal young, unproven talent, from other pacific islands up until about ten years ago, but in the last world cup Samoa had 14 born, bred and more importantly trained kiwis in their starting XV, all traveling around on NZ passports.
A lot of people do not accept that NZ is actually a Polynesian country.
A lot of people still will not admit, that ALL Polynesian’s, view the All Black jersey, as the ultimate “badge of honor”.
Your facts in regards Soccer are very, very valid, other than the fact that in union, we are looking for players with a high IQ, of significantly above build size, who would also not be disgraced in a state athletics sprint competition.
But most importantly they will be required to enhance the legacy of a very special jersey.
Two countries with financial clout and athletic freaks, spring to mind, USA & Russia.
My actual complaint right now, is that the NZRFU cannot run a profit, with the worlds consistently best and most exciting team for the last 3 years.
What hope does David really have??????? against Goliath in the long term???????
September 19th 2012 @ 5:03am
Johnno said | September 19th 2012 @ 5:03am | Report comment
DuffyV
With regard to poaching, the ARU are doing it right now which i don’t like. this developmental import rule so if a foreign born player comes here qualifies in 3 years for the wallabies. I don’t like that. It should be 5 years .
-The David and golatiah thing is valid and USA/Russia have so much money just look at the USA olympic funding far more than we have to spend.
-USA are marching ahead at a big rate as are russia. we can only hope and pray. But we do have 1st class facilities in OZ, and if we change our business models eg allow moor reimports that could bring in more money.
-Your point about the NZRU is a good point, and i believe long term it will have to scrap the ITM cup and work on trans tasman series in Australia. ITM cup is expensive to run.
September 19th 2012 @ 2:12pm
Ralph said | September 19th 2012 @ 2:12pm | Report comment
Not to put finer point on your analogy – but David won.
September 19th 2012 @ 6:19am
Kippa said | September 19th 2012 @ 6:19am | Report comment
No suprise at all. They are doing exactly what Robbie deans has said. Play what is front of you. While Robbie tells the wallabies to do this in a game, Hanson has Ritchie and co doing this much further out.
September 19th 2012 @ 4:25am
klatu said | September 19th 2012 @ 4:25am | Report comment
the current Allblacks are good but the greatest yet. They are winning but not in style………
September 19th 2012 @ 5:36am
mania said | September 19th 2012 @ 5:36am | Report comment
luckily with all this improvement the AB’s need we have mccaw picking up the slack. mccaw wouldnt look anywhere near as good as he has the last few games if the rest of the team were doing their jobs at the rucks and mauls.
September 19th 2012 @ 5:42am
Ben.S said | September 19th 2012 @ 5:42am | Report comment
I’m really confused as to where this greatest team ever tag has come from? It’s come out of nowhere and gathered real pace. It’s borderline ridiculous. There’s still so much rugby to play.
September 19th 2012 @ 5:54am
mania said | September 19th 2012 @ 5:54am | Report comment
i first heard of it from oz media and players and yeah its just gathered undeserved momentum. it was barnes one week, then AAC, then Genia and when AB’s beat oz in auckland it was deans singing their praises. oz media have jumped on this bandwagon as well adn pushed this moniker. probly has a lot to do with having won the world cup.
ths is no where near the best AB’s team ever, not by a country mile….despite all of mccaws efforts.
September 19th 2012 @ 6:15am
DuffyV said | September 19th 2012 @ 6:15am | Report comment
The All Black’s have dominated international rugby for 100 years, they currently posses the greatest Captain they have every had, said team has also managed to dominate World Rugby at the same time for the duration of their Captains tenure.
They have the greatest winning percentage in the history of all global professional sport
They also have the worlds leading points scorer and are acknowledged as the most interesting team to watch.
Currently they have won 14 tests in a row, when every team they play are desperate for their scalp and inevitably lift their performance accordingly.
Yet through all the negative tactics that teams bring against them, because privately nobody believes they can beat them at Rugby, they continue to play a positive game.
No wonder the refs love em.
September 19th 2012 @ 6:27am
biltongbek said | September 19th 2012 @ 6:27am | Report comment
100 years?
I reckon you need to go back in history and check those facts mate.
September 19th 2012 @ 6:30am
Jerry said | September 19th 2012 @ 6:30am | Report comment
It’s arguable – even before the All Blacks overhauled the Boks in terms of head to head, they had a superior winning percentage against all comers.
September 19th 2012 @ 7:14am
DuffyV said | September 19th 2012 @ 7:14am | Report comment
No Biltek,
You need to check your facts.
Then we will talk about 50 years of South African Refs, or was it stooges, that penalized All Blacks for being punched, gouged and skin colour challenged, yet managed to eventually come out on the undisputed right side of the ledger.
September 19th 2012 @ 8:10am
biltongbek said | September 19th 2012 @ 8:10am | Report comment
Mate, it took NZ until 1996 before they overhauled the Boks, we also led the grandslams four to zip in the amateur era.
September 19th 2012 @ 8:22am
moaman said | September 19th 2012 @ 8:22am | Report comment
Biltongbek—–ON Grand Slams you were not quite correct mate. Graeme Mourie’s 1978 NZ team achieved the feat and it is misleading to say RSA led “4 to zip”–particularly when one takes into account the number of times teams were stymied from achieving the feat because they didn’t face all four ‘Home’ Unions!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Slam_(rugby_union)#Grand_Slams_achieved_by_touring_sides
September 19th 2012 @ 8:26am
mania said | September 19th 2012 @ 8:26am | Report comment
how much better would the AB’s have played in SA if they had been allowed their coloured players? all the maori’s werent allowed to tour SA and brianWilliams was allwed as an “honourary white”.
not that any of this matters and nor do i care
September 19th 2012 @ 8:28am
biltongbek said | September 19th 2012 @ 8:28am | Report comment
Moaman, true, in the pro eracSA has only had two opportunties for a grandslam, 2004 and if I recall correctly 2010.
I may be wrong with the grandslams, but I know we led it and now it is 4 each by memry.
September 19th 2012 @ 8:30am
biltongbek said | September 19th 2012 @ 8:30am | Report comment
Mania, I can ask the rethorical question about the pro era, how much better would SA have been if we were allowed to always pick our best team.
We can argue history as much as we want and justify reasons for this or that.
duffy siad NZ has dominated rugby for 100 years. they have dominated the pro era.
September 19th 2012 @ 8:42am
mania said | September 19th 2012 @ 8:42am | Report comment
biltongbek – i dont want to argue history. someting as contentious as playe quota should be left to the political science professors.
September 19th 2012 @ 8:59am
Jerry said | September 19th 2012 @ 8:59am | Report comment
Biltong – here are the historical cumulative winning percentages of both sides.
To 1910 – Boks 35.3%, AB’s 75.6%
To 1920 – Boks 50%, AB’s 79.2%
To 1930 – Boks 51.5%, AB’s 69%
To 1940 – Boks 60%, AB’s 66.7%
To 1950 – Boks 63%, AB’s 63.5%
To 1960 – Boks 63.4%, AB’s 64.4%
To 1970 – Boks 60.9%, AB’s 69.9%
To 1980 – Boks 62.8%, AB’s 68.1%
To 1990 – Boks 64.4%, AB’s 71.3%
To 2000 – Boks 64.2% AB’s 71.7%
To Present – Boks 62.8%, AB’s 75.6%
As you can see, although the Boks made some good ground in the first half of the 20th century, they’ve trailed the AB’s in overall winning percentage.
I know Bok fans always look at the head to head, but given NZ had a better record against all comers for pretty much the entire century (there may have been a couple of years when the Boks were ahead in the 50′s and 60′s) it’s arguable that the AB’s were the best side of the 20th century overall.
September 19th 2012 @ 9:30am
WQ said | September 19th 2012 @ 9:30am | Report comment
You beat me to it Jerry, I was working on the exact same stats!
There is no argument about these statistics they show a very clear picture.
September 19th 2012 @ 3:00pm
biltongbek said | September 19th 2012 @ 3:00pm | Report comment
Guys, if you are going to say the All Blacks dominated world rugby, then you are suggesting they dominated all teams , they disn’t dominate South Africa until the pro era.
September 19th 2012 @ 3:00pm
biltongbek said | September 19th 2012 @ 3:00pm | Report comment
Guys, if you are going to say the All Blacks dominated world rugby, then you are suggesting they dominated all teams , they disn’t dominate South Africa until the pro era.
September 19th 2012 @ 7:00pm
Charging Rhino said | September 19th 2012 @ 7:00pm | Report comment
Jeepers some of you Kiwi’s never cease to amaze.
You guys just cannot accept and stomach that for 71 years of rugby (1921-1992) between South Africa and New Zealand the head to head count stands as:
37 games
SA wins – 20
NZ wins – 15
Draws – 2
Simple. Fact. Regardless of whether they were played in NZ or SA. You don’t hear South Africans making up excuses for the times they lost in New Zealand back in the day.
Accept it. New Zealand was NOT better at rugby head to head against South Africa for 71 years of rugby! They only surpassed the Boks in a better win-loss ration in 1996, which was ironcially the very first Test series win by the All Blacks ever in South Africa. SA had already won in NZ.
Irrespective of scores against other nations. By the way SA had never lost to Wales until 1999.
But in the Professional Era New Zealand has been by far the best and leader in rugby and the only way to confirm this are with their superior results. They have been better. Simple. I accept it. It sux for South Africans and it hurts that the Boks haven’t been able to keep their superior win/loss record against the All Blacks and that rather the gap has opened up quite wide now, the All Blacks have been better over the past 15 odd years. It’s horrible for us but we accept it and move on and hopefully our Boks in the future can be better and catch up again and take back what has been lost from the past 15 years.
So Please just don’t be so prideful and arrogant because the simple facts state…. 37 games. SA wins 20, NZ wins 15 and 2 draws…… You can’t have excuses for 37 games of rugby!!!! Yes 37 games… maybe 1 or 2 games but not 37 games played in different parts of the world.
And All Blacks win/ loss now is better.
SIMPLE
September 19th 2012 @ 7:35pm
Jerry said | September 19th 2012 @ 7:35pm | Report comment
I can fully accept that SA had a better head to head vs NZ, Rhino. I’m just not so sure that’s the only factor in determining who was the better side overall. You obviously feel it’s the only relevant factor. Fair enough, I disagree.
Oh, and regarding your “Didn’t lose to Wales till 1999″ stat – that’s great. I did note you didn’t mention anything about Scotland or Ireland though….
September 19th 2012 @ 7:52pm
Charging Rhino said | September 19th 2012 @ 7:52pm | Report comment
Ha ha… yes good point.
Out of 10 games against Ireland. SA lost 1 in 1965. An awful Springbok team that was.
And yes it seemed Scotland had a knack to beat us for some reason… in Scotland. Out of 8 games prior 1992 SA lost 3 won 5. Again one of those was the 1965 team. … Perhaps the weather….?? Ha ha just jokes. Can’t make excuses.
But no the head to head SA-NZ is definitely not the only relevant factor. I’m just pointing out that the All Blacks were not superior head to head against the Boks, that’s all. And then some Kiwi’s come with excuses…. excuses… excuses…. which seems to be engrained in the culture of some New Zealanders when the All Blacks lose which is simply poor sportsmanship. My point is you can’t have excuses for 37 games of rugby over 71 years played in different parts of the world.
That… my friend is an equalling of the playing fields
Otherwise I love Kiwi’s
Met some great guys and girls in the past. And both cultures have a passion for rugby and their respective national teams so there is always going to be a heavy rivalry.
September 19th 2012 @ 10:45pm
Paul said | September 19th 2012 @ 10:45pm | Report comment
SA wins – 20
NZ wins – 15
2 draw
that is not ‘domination’.
That is one team being slightly better than the other.
Boks had a better winning % against the ABs.
ABs had the better % against all other teams.
Therefore each had a better record that makes them the 2 best teams before the pro era.
September 20th 2012 @ 10:23am
WQ said | September 20th 2012 @ 10:23am | Report comment
Charging Rhino, I have just caught up with your post and unfortunately have to point out that if you are going to offer up statistics at least get them right!
Between 1921 and 1991 there were 38 Tests played between New Zealand and South Africa.
- 21 of those Tests played in South Africa and 17 played in New Zealand
- 20 Tests won by South Africa and 16 won by New Zealand with 2 Draws
- South Africa won 14 in South Africa and 6 in New Zealand
- New Zealand won 10 in New Zealand and 6 in South Africa
Whilst you have cherry picked a period where you believe South Africa had the wood on New Zealand, you have failed to point out that more Tests were actually played in South Africa with South African Refs whom at best were one eyed and at worst were just straight out cheats.
I would prefer to look at the statistics as a whole from the beginning until today, my reasoning for this is the development of neutral Refs to handle International Test matches on the whole. Of course you are probably not that interested in that as this was about when things changed with the stats……
September 20th 2012 @ 9:14pm
Charging Rhino said | September 20th 2012 @ 9:14pm | Report comment
WQ… you are exactly the type of Kiwi I was talking about….
“Whilst you have cherry picked a period where you believe South Africa had the wood on New Zealand, you have failed to point out that more Tests were actually played in South Africa with South African Refs whom at best were one eyed and at worst were just straight out cheats.”
Mate if a “period” is 71 years of rugby then I find it amazing… and over 37 Tests (thats what my records say but hey if I am wrong I will happily say sorry and stand to be corrected, I could easily say to you… “Get YOUR facts straight” as I am under the impression from my sources that mine are correct) how can you say that refs were “at best one eyed and at worst were just straight out cheats” when you have no idea about what happened over all 37 tests from 1921?? Oh my grow up dude.
Did you even read my 2nd post? I’m not overlooking the pro-era and I’m happy to accept that the All Blacks have been far better. Done
Posts above were talking about the pre-era and I commented on post isolation results. That’s All.
Boks WERE better than the All Blacks head to head for 71 years. The results state it simply. Stomach it. Accept it. Move on. End of story
September 21st 2012 @ 12:39pm
WQ said | September 21st 2012 @ 12:39pm | Report comment
Once again it has taken me a little while to catch up with your post.
Your stats are wrong as I have pointed out, I suggest you check yours again as they may have been provided by one of those South African Refs I mentioned?
Thank you for pointing out how proud and passionate Kiwi’s are re their Rugby Team, we have every right to be.
The Boks have never been better than the All Blacks – EVER!
Just a few extra things I would like to point out for your bed time reading. Just so that you can understand the true meaning of dominating World Rugby:-
- One of our Countries has a winning percentage of 84.33% over 1213 games, the other has a winning percentage of 73.8% over 771 games. You can work out which is which I am sure and just so you know, the one running second would have to win their next 250 games without loss before they matched a winning percentage of 84.33%
- Since the introduction of World Rankings one of our Countries has held the number 1 ranking for 379 weeks the other 59 weeks. One has held that ranking for 96 games the other for 13. In fact if it were not for the doubling of ranking points at RWC one of our teams would never have relinquished the number 1 ranking ever
- One of our Countries has scored the most points in World Rugby and the most tries in World Rugby. That same team also averages the most tries per test of any Rugby playing nation
- In summary one of our countries has truly dominated World Rugby the other only thinks they have.
September 19th 2012 @ 6:26pm
guinness14 said | September 19th 2012 @ 6:26pm | Report comment
Who cares about the facts. Been gone and dusted, keep it in the now. AB,Crusader and Western Force supporter.
September 19th 2012 @ 7:42am
Riccardo said | September 19th 2012 @ 7:42am | Report comment
The Northern Hemisphere Refs don’t appear to love the All Blacks that much Duffy.
In fact, it would appear that the Northern Hemisphere Refs are finding fault with just about every aspect of the way the game is played down here.
September 19th 2012 @ 8:18am
garth said | September 19th 2012 @ 8:18am | Report comment
Probably because they are expected to keep up with the pace of play, something NH refs have had trouble with for over 100 years. AB’s 1st test vs. Wales anyone?
September 19th 2012 @ 5:25pm
ceboss said | September 19th 2012 @ 5:25pm | Report comment
The allblacks.are the most successful sporting team because they throw everything at a sport that has only 2 nations n a couple of islands that hold.rugby as there no1 sport, while it barely makes no4 in aus. If Rugby had the same popularity as soccer than im.sure we.wouldnt.be praising the all
blacks right now. i believe if aus didnt focus most of.there talent.in league we would be.taking down the allblacks.
September 19th 2012 @ 6:47pm
guinness14 said | September 19th 2012 @ 6:47pm | Report comment
OMG, what are you saying, if rugby was the number one sport here in Australia then things could be a lot different. Let me apologize on the ABs behave for having too many wins and for Australia only placing rugby as their number 4 sport.
September 19th 2012 @ 8:25pm
ceboss said | September 19th 2012 @ 8:25pm | Report comment
OMG, off course im saying that things would be very different if Rugby was the preffered sport for kids growing up here in Aus, good on the Allblacks for succeeding at there preffered sport just like we are at league with 9 out of 13 worldcups won by australia. We can only imagine how the Wallabies would have been impacted if we had the likes of Wally Lewis, Andrew Johns, Darren Lockyer, Billy Slater, Jonathon Thurston ect ect, our depth would be amazing just like it is in league. Then you have all the players in the AFL which i wont get into.
September 19th 2012 @ 11:02pm
guinness14 said | September 19th 2012 @ 11:02pm | Report comment
Ceboss, get over the, if only we had. If only NZ had League as a preffered sport we may be as good as, or even better than your League team. Or if we were lucky enough to have 25 million people in NZ instead of 4 million. Mate get a grip. You can go on and on with excuses, but this is the way it is. We were bought up on Rugby, you guys dominate league and every thing else,is that not nough for you?
September 19th 2012 @ 11:42am
peterlala said | September 19th 2012 @ 11:42am | Report comment
The greatest team tag comes from Robbie Deans. They obviously aren’t. Unfortunately, such nonsense is taken seriously, and instead of being ridiculed, the “greatest” tag is begining to stick.
September 19th 2012 @ 6:36am
Jerry said | September 19th 2012 @ 6:36am | Report comment
Yeah, it’s rubbish. I’d rank the 87-90, 96-97, 05-07 and 10 AB’s ahead of them definitely. And the 03 English, 91 and 99 Wallabies and probably the 97-98 Boks. And that’s just off the top of my head.
If you look at the personnel, only McCaw and Carter are surefire all time AB XV selections, with Conrad Smith being the only other guy who might sneak in on some people’s ballots. There’s a few younger guys who might reach that level (Read, Dagg & O Franks) but it’s far too early in their careers to make that call.
September 19th 2012 @ 7:05am
DuffyV said | September 19th 2012 @ 7:05am | Report comment
Jerry
Though you are a voice of reason, you are an extremely difficult marker…
If the All Blacks have their greatest captain and fly half, whilst enjoying their best winning record against everyone, in the most competitive professional era… what the hell else do you neeeeeddd????
September 19th 2012 @ 7:07am
Ben.S said | September 19th 2012 @ 7:07am | Report comment
People talk about the gap between NZ and the rest ATM, and that may well pan out to be true, but it’s the first year of the pre-WC cycle, with new players and new coaches and the European tour yet to come. Just don’t see how it’s still being perpetuated… What if the Boks turn them over in SA? So much rugby ahead of us. Too much arguably…
Agree that players like Dagg and Read might go on to reach legend status, however. Read is such a good player. Love watching him. Dagg too. Still not massively sold on Owen Franks though.
September 19th 2012 @ 7:17am
DuffyV said | September 19th 2012 @ 7:17am | Report comment
Owen is only 23 Ben, who are you factually comparing him to????
September 19th 2012 @ 7:49am
Ben.S said | September 19th 2012 @ 7:49am | Report comment
Who am I factually comparing him to? I’m not comparing him to anybody. I just said I’m not sold on him, which I’m not. I think he drifts in and out of games.
If you’d like me to compare him to somebody then I’d compare him to Dan Cole.
September 19th 2012 @ 7:54am
DuffyV said | September 19th 2012 @ 7:54am | Report comment
So the only prop in the world that consistently competes, yet has 5-7 years to actually hit his prime??????
September 19th 2012 @ 8:43pm
Ben.S said | September 19th 2012 @ 8:43pm | Report comment
I’m really not sure what you’re getting at here?
I’d take Adam Jones and Nicolas Mas ahead of Franks, and Dan Cole, a year older, is simply a better player IMO.
September 19th 2012 @ 11:39pm
nick said | September 19th 2012 @ 11:39pm | Report comment
hahaha. Jones and Mas better than Franks? Classic
September 21st 2012 @ 12:42am
Ben.S said | September 21st 2012 @ 12:42am | Report comment
Great argument, and I really appreciate your sense of humour. Thanks now.
September 21st 2012 @ 4:40pm
Wal said | September 21st 2012 @ 4:40pm | Report comment
I depends on what you want to measure the entire career or a this year or any single year.
Woodcock would have to be up there as one of the Best Looseheads for a long time,
I just can’t bring myself to go past Bunce or Stanley for Conrad but he still does stuff on a reugby field I could only dream of.
Brad Thorns play last year had to be one of the best single years for an AB lock. Career wise just a little to disjointed to supplant Meads
Weepu (before he got sick) and Nonu at the RWC would have made some compelling discussions.
Read definitely has to be getting close he has been the best No 8 in world rugby for a number of years now.
September 19th 2012 @ 6:27am
Jerry said | September 19th 2012 @ 6:27am | Report comment
“They have the greatest winning percentage in the history of all global professional sport”
The USA Men’s Basketball team has a better percentage, I’m sure. I’d say the Kangaroos in League probably do, too – but that’s nowhere near as global a sport as Basketball or indeed Rugby.
September 19th 2012 @ 7:50am
DuffyV said | September 19th 2012 @ 7:50am | Report comment
Jerry
None of your mentioned teams play 12-14 tests every year.
Have you got some actual examples?
September 19th 2012 @ 9:35am
Jerry said | September 19th 2012 @ 9:35am | Report comment
Why is that a required consideration? While the US Basketball side may not play 12-14 times a year, they play a World Championship or Olympic Games every two years. And Basketball is the 2nd most popular team sport in the world with an international profile that puts rugby to shame.
September 19th 2012 @ 10:43am
WQ said | September 19th 2012 @ 10:43am | Report comment
Jerry,
The Kangaroos all time winning record is 68% so they are a mile off the All Blacks at 84%. The USA Mens basketball Team winning record is very hard to get however from what I have been able to research it seems to be 86% which is in fact marginally better than the All Blacks.
However there is a significant difference between the All Blacks and any other International Team in relation to winning percentage.
The All Blacks have maintained their winning percentage over 1213 games as opposed to the USA Mens basketball Team which have only played 439 games and the Kangaroos whom have only played 372 games.
September 19th 2012 @ 12:59pm
Jerry said | September 19th 2012 @ 12:59pm | Report comment
Personally, I’d limit the debate to the AB’s test record – I don’t think their record against provincial sides or scratch regional selections is relevant. They’re record in tests is 75.6% from 491 tests, which is a way off that US Basketball record off a similar sample size.
September 19th 2012 @ 2:41pm
WQ said | September 19th 2012 @ 2:41pm | Report comment
Jerry, once again I can’t agree.
I am presuming that you believe the Provincial sides provide a level of competition that is not of Test standard.
If you want to apply this methodology then you must also provide it to the USA Mens Basketball results as well. They have played a high number of preliminary games at the Olympics against Countries such as Switzerland, Japan, Spain, Egypt, Thailand, Finland, Senegal, Angola, Peru none of which are highly regarded for their ability to play Basketball.
In addition to that I am aware at least 3 of those recorded wins are from Forfeits by Teams such as the above because they could not field enough fit players to play.
So I am sorry Jerry but unfortunately you can’t have it both ways.
September 19th 2012 @ 2:56pm
Jerry said | September 19th 2012 @ 2:56pm | Report comment
I’m not having it both ways – I’m comparing one team’s international record with another team’s international record. The US Basketball side hasn’t had the opportunity to play against non international sides, so I think that aspect of the AB’s record shouldn’t be compared.
There may be some ordinary sides that have played the US at Basketball, but let’s not pretend that the AB’s haven’t played their share of easybeats.
September 19th 2012 @ 3:09pm
WQ said | September 19th 2012 @ 3:09pm | Report comment
In fact that’s not right either Jerry, a number of the USA Mens Basketball wins have come from so called exhibition matches at tournaments that they have attended. These games were played to raise funds for developing Basketball nations.
I suspect that most of the Provincial sides that have played against the All Blacks provided much stiffer opposition than some of the international sides that have played the USA Mens Basketball Team.
September 19th 2012 @ 4:23pm
Jerry said | September 19th 2012 @ 4:23pm | Report comment
Fair enough, but they’ve still got a better overall record than the AB’s and in a sport that is truly international and has a far far greater participation than rugby.
Even if you only look at the Olympics & World Championships, they’ve got an 88% record and that’s despite handicapping themselves considerably for a great deal of their history by not selecting professionals.
September 19th 2012 @ 5:17pm
WQ said | September 19th 2012 @ 5:17pm | Report comment
Cheers Jerry, I have quite enjoyed the research actually.
It is hard to get hold of all the USA Mens Basketball statistics and I have found a varying degree of win loss ratios, however even the lowest one I found was still 86% which is I have to admit better than the All Blacks 84%
September 19th 2012 @ 6:49am
richard said | September 19th 2012 @ 6:49am | Report comment
DuffyV, NZ never stole pi talent, that canard was started by Dwyer back in the late ’80′s and was gleefully taken up by the nh press. I wouldn’t throw stones , considering the number of pi’s currently in the wallies squad, most of whom come from nz! The second part of that paragraph is a bit closer to the mark.
Johnno, your comment about nz scrapping the ITM Cup, it’s not going to happen. Tew and the nzru understand that this comp is vital to nz’s ongoing competitiveness in international rugby, so everything will be done to maintain it. Even with financial restraints, the nzru will find a way to keep this comp going, but to add oz teams would only put more of a financial burden on nz rugby, ( due to travel costs) so why would we do this? It is up to oz to develop its own domestic comp, not freeload off ours!
September 19th 2012 @ 6:57am
mania said | September 19th 2012 @ 6:57am | Report comment
richard- so agree with u about the ITM. oz need to establish their own domestic comp but roarers are always coming back and saying they could join itm. i dont want an oz team in itm as it would just dilute the quality and ruin it. a few players maybe but a whole team of sub par club players? no thanx.
September 19th 2012 @ 7:38am
Riccardo said | September 19th 2012 @ 7:38am | Report comment
Michael,
You would certainly hope the All Blacks can get better. After 7 Tests together you would expect them to be improving in this accuracy area and they haven’t. Frankly, it is the calbre of the opposition and our defensive systems that are getting us over the line.
Arguably the best All Black Team ever? How do I write “snorting derisively”? Really? No they aren’t. In fact your other statement rings true. They are not only beatable but at their most beatable right now. They are likely to lose a Test on the road and when they do, watch the clamour and hand-wring back here. Questions will be asked of Hansen and Foster, in particular, regarding their systems and tactics.
As an All Black fanatic, I am a supporter of the pacier gameplan they are trying to execute and hope they can improve that accuracy but the fact remains they seem to be trying too hard. Where is the patience and composure? We need to apply pressure through efficient set-piece, collision domination, and effective phase retention before unleashing the flashy stuff.
Where I do agree is that the All Blacks will get it right and repeat the excellence of that last Test against the Irish. However there will still be a long way to go before they can assume a mantle of even being one of the great All Black sides.
September 19th 2012 @ 7:51am
mania said | September 19th 2012 @ 7:51am | Report comment
riccardo – i’m not a fan of the gameplan but else i agree with the rest of what you say. AB’s need to do the little things correct first, efficient set-piece, collision domination, and effective phase retention . eliminating drop balls, handling errors and missed passes would go a long way. agree no patience and composure. its cool to play fast but not to rush.
September 19th 2012 @ 8:05am
moaman said | September 19th 2012 @ 8:05am | Report comment
Riccardo—-I’m with you on this.Huge question-mark hovering over Foster,for mine,and indeed over the entire AB leadership-team.
Surely it is past time to pull the horns in a little and regroup? The ABs have bumbled their way from one error-strewn display to another with no noticeable attempt at alteration.
It could be that they don’t rate their opponents (understandable,actually) and believe they have squeeze room enough to get by with this hectic approach. I applaud their self-belief and desire to play the game up-tempo.But the time has come to change gears a bit more gradually!
Carter’s reintroduction,hopefully at Soweto,may be all that is needed to get the ABs back on course. Can’t wait for that one!!
September 19th 2012 @ 8:45am
Riccardo said | September 19th 2012 @ 8:45am | Report comment
Soweto could actually end up being a defining moment Moa.
Carter wil bring some time and composure back into the All Blacks
Equally, the Boks will be fizzing to get one over us at “home”. I heard somewhere that Meyer is planning to start Goosen at home (radiosport I think but don’t quote me) and I am of the opinion they will be a different beast with that young man at the helm.
I’m glad there is a 2 week window mate. Apart from the successful introduction of Los Pumas the other 3 sides have flattered to deceive (that’s a Mark Reasonism) and need the time to get their houses in order.
September 19th 2012 @ 11:00am
Michael Angus said | September 19th 2012 @ 11:00am | Report comment
I agree that the next two tests will help define this years team. The Pumas are playing with tremendous commitment right now and will be very difficult at home. The Springbok game will be the ultimate test though. The All Blacks need to stop giving away stupid penalties within 55 metres otherwise the Boks will punish them with kicks. I recall thats how they lost in SA last year. Luckily Morne Steyn’s radar has been off this year!
September 20th 2012 @ 12:05am
liam said | September 20th 2012 @ 12:05am | Report comment
moaman, it’s a bit harsh to say they’re bumbling and need to rein it in.
it’s one thing to play slowly, steadily, ruck to ruck. it’s another to play helter-skelter trying to rush the opposition off their feet. most players can do either, mentally it’s just one mode. but the ABs are obviously trying to do it right, and strike a balance between the two… play the opp team off their feet and be considered enough to slow it downso as not to rush themselves and spill passes at the crucial moments. it take experienced player to do this and time to get this typ of switching right in a game… in can be very tough to do, especially as the moments they need to tighten up arent between setplays, its after a linebreak and in the throes of a play.
they’re not great…. people like cooper claiming every AB on the park had the game of his career in auckland against the wallabies is so ridiculous its taking the piss. but with more practice and tweaking their systems, hopefully they can start making small improvements to the finished article.
September 19th 2012 @ 9:36am
ohtani's jacket said | September 19th 2012 @ 9:36am | Report comment
The way we’re playing reminds me of the failed flat backline experiment of 2004 coupled with our performances of 2009, only this time we’re winning because the Springboks are considerably weaker than those two years where they won the Tri-Nations. The All Blacks had many bad halves under Henry but they always adapted well at half-time and usually started making metres through the forwards. Right now, we’re struggling up until the 60th minute where the ref yellow cards the opposition and we’re safely home. In general, I think the forwards are playing well aside from their lack of ball carrying and too few numbers to the breakdown at times, but the backline is broken and I think that’s most evident with the back three who haven’t gelled as well as you’d expect. Cruden doesn’t play with Nonu as well as Carter does, but Carter didn’t play with SBW as well as Cruden did so that’s a bit of a wash. Conrad Smith looked a bit rusty in Wellington, which was understandable. As his play improves, so too may some of the attack. But really, the backs are playing as individuals not a backline.
September 19th 2012 @ 9:50am
Riccardo said | September 19th 2012 @ 9:50am | Report comment
“But really, the backs are playing as individuals not a backline.”
I think this best sums up some of the disappoinment some of us are feeling with the RC so far OJ.
Then question is why? Foster? Hansen? Both?
I’m sure Conrad’s injury and the subsequent chopping and changing hasn’t been helpful but you have also alluded to the weakness in the back 3, which is also evident. They haven’t been the victim of the same tampering as other positions and you’d expect them to be firing by now.
September 19th 2012 @ 11:04am
WQ said | September 19th 2012 @ 11:04am | Report comment
I think you just hit it on the head Riccardo when you mention the constant changing with the backline.
We have to be fair to the coaches here though, most of this has been to do with injury and of course SBW’s departure.
September 19th 2012 @ 9:45am
kingplaymaker said | September 19th 2012 @ 9:45am | Report comment
Strange that Hansen hasn’t mentioned bringing in new players for the end of year tour. I would think it would be an ideal time, against teams lower down the rankings, to advance some young players.
This team are winning now but it would be good to develop other options when the pressure’s off.
September 19th 2012 @ 10:03am
mania said | September 19th 2012 @ 10:03am | Report comment
hansen has pretty much intimated that kerr-barlow will tour @EOY
but i dont think it strange that hansen hasnt revealed to the public what he intends for EOY before the RC is completed. i’m sure he’s got a whole bunch of ideas he isnt sharing
September 20th 2012 @ 12:20pm
Ryan said | September 20th 2012 @ 12:20pm | Report comment
Hansen has stated that it is highly unlikely any bolters will be included in the EOYT, the players who will likely end up going are already in the wider training groups e.g TKB etc.
it’s just a matter of who
September 19th 2012 @ 10:32am
Sprigs said | September 19th 2012 @ 10:32am | Report comment
NZers like us to swallow the propaganda. It is part of the strategy to win.
If they nearly rank with the Angelic choir (the team in heaven where rugby is played):
How come the Boks would have beaten them the other day had there been a competent kicker in their side?
How come the Pumas frightened them in their recent game, and the Irish nearly drew with them?
How come the Wallabies licked them in Brisbane last year and the French almost won the final of the World Cup?
Yes, they are very good but they due to be beaten soon and we getting closer to that day.
September 19th 2012 @ 11:20am
WQ said | September 19th 2012 @ 11:20am | Report comment
Sprigs, honestly mate – “How come the Wallabies licked them in Brisbane last year”, were you watching the same Test as everybody else?
The only relevant comment in anything you say here is that yes the All Blacks are due for a loss. After all we have won 14 on the trot, normally we would have lost 2 of those!
September 19th 2012 @ 12:05pm
Riccardo said | September 19th 2012 @ 12:05pm | Report comment
“How come the Boks would have beaten them the other day had there been a competent kicker in their side?” The Boks did have a competent kicker as it turned out; they just chose to bring him on too late. You’re aware that the All Blacks also missed opportunities? Or were your vitriol-tinted shades precluding you from reality?
“How come the Pumas frightened them in their recent game, and the Irish nearly drew with them?” The Pumas combined with a liberal Ref did give us a scare Sprigs because they played well but not well enough it would seem. It’s probably fair to say the All Blacks left some points out there too. A better question regarding the Pumas is how on Earth did the Wallabies let themselves get behind 19-6 and then have to count on the assistance of the Ref to get out of jail? The Irish have played the best this year so far against the All Blacks and almost got a deserved draw. Well done to them. Can you remember what happened at the next fixture?
“How come the Wallabies licked them in Brisbane last year and the French almost won the final of the World Cup?” So 25-20 is a licking now? All Blacks behind 20-3 @ half time and almost snatching Victory from the Jaws of Defeat is a licking is it? All this in a RWC year too? Well done on that victory though. How did you go in the next fixture against the All Blacks mate? Where it really counted?
I get fed up with the 1 point victory in the RWC final being held up as a failing. We bet the French in a tight encounter where they had come to play. So what? We won. The All Blacks ground out the victory in tight circumstances in a ding-dong battle befitting the final of such an epic tournament.
As WQ has alluded to Sprigs, about the only thing relevant is your eerie forecast into the clouded future where you fatefully predict an All Black loss. Cue the dried ice and wailing voices of the undead mate. You must be a registered travelling gypsy palm reader my friend because we ALL know this is going to happen. Some of us even saw it before you! Cue the dried ice and wailing voices of the undead…
September 19th 2012 @ 12:12pm
mania said | September 19th 2012 @ 12:12pm | Report comment
nicely stated ric. and i’d also like to point out that all this BS propaganda is mainly coming from ozzies.
give me a break, AB’s never consider themselve unbeatable which is why they have such an awesome winning record. every team has the potential to beat the AB’s
September 21st 2012 @ 8:09am
patonga said | September 21st 2012 @ 8:09am | Report comment
Didn’t the Boks have a player yellow carded ??? Didn’t the Pumas have a player Yellow Carded ??? Didn’t the wallabies have there captain and half back yellow carded??? Sorry but the All Black only seem to win when they are playing 14 players…
September 21st 2012 @ 8:26am
Jerry said | September 21st 2012 @ 8:26am | Report comment
A) all those yellow cards were for blatant offences and the cards were 100% deserved; and
B) the AB’s were ahead when all of them happened;
September 21st 2012 @ 4:11pm
Wal said | September 21st 2012 @ 4:11pm | Report comment
If you don’t want to get yellow carded, don’t professional foul or try to take a guys head off.
September 21st 2012 @ 4:16pm
biltongbek said | September 21st 2012 @ 4:16pm | Report comment
The All Blacks make their advantages count for them, that doesn’t mean a yellow card can’t swing momentum though.
September 22nd 2012 @ 12:13pm
Jerry said | September 22nd 2012 @ 12:13pm | Report comment
The Wallaby card didn’t really turn the game that much. The AB’s scored 6 points when Genia was off the pitch but the Wallabies were still well in the match when he returned, they just couldn’t do anything about it.
The Argentine yellow was in response to the AB’s turning up the pressure significantly – they’d conceded 2 penalties in the previous minute, both in the 22 and the knock on saved a sure try.
Both of those were in response to the AB’s putting significant pressure on the opposition and the opposition reacting negatively. It’s not as if these things happen in a vacuum.
September 19th 2012 @ 12:39pm
dcnz said | September 19th 2012 @ 12:39pm | Report comment
We have 14 straight wins on the board thats why people want to take the All Blacks down….
The ABs have not been at their best yet, but you could argue that since the QF loss to the French in Cardiff, we have learned to win ugly.
And for this, I am grateful….its nice being the benchmark, even if we aren’t necessarily the best on day every day…
September 19th 2012 @ 2:19pm
Ralph said | September 19th 2012 @ 2:19pm | Report comment
How come the Boks lost?
How come the Pumas fright came to nought?
How come the Irish didn’t draw?
How come the French lost the final?
September 19th 2012 @ 2:39pm
Sprigs said | September 19th 2012 @ 2:39pm | Report comment
Just lost, all of them.
These weren’t mighty victories from a totally dominant team that demolishes everything in their path.
Yes, they are very good and yes they have a great record, but no they are not “daylight” ahead of the other teams.
This is how they are portrayed by some Wallaby supporters who are sucked into the AB psychological strategy.
The ABs can be beaten and will be beaten and let’s hope it is soon and by the Wallabies.
September 19th 2012 @ 2:43pm
Jerry said | September 19th 2012 @ 2:43pm | Report comment
The Pumas just lost? How do you ‘just lose’ by 16 points?
September 19th 2012 @ 2:59pm
Sprigs said | September 19th 2012 @ 2:59pm | Report comment
You blokes were sweating up until half way through the second half.
So was that the performance of the greatest team ever? Against a team with so much less experience at this level?
The Wallabies, with a seriously depleted team due to injury, totally dominated the stats against the Pumas.
With just a little help from Lady Luck (a couple of tries and two penalties were left on the field) , the victory would have been much greater than the ABs managed.
September 19th 2012 @ 3:08pm
Jerry said | September 19th 2012 @ 3:08pm | Report comment
Firstly, I’ve never said they were the greatest side ever. In fact, in this very thread I said they weren’t.
Secondly, are you really trying to claim that the Wallabies played better than the AB’s vs the Pumas? The AB’s never trailed at any point in the second half and won by 16 points. The Wallabies trailed by 13 points with about 20 minutes to go before finally taking the lead in the 70th minute and apparently they played better?
September 19th 2012 @ 3:21pm
Riccardo said | September 19th 2012 @ 3:21pm | Report comment
“The Wallabies, with a seriously depleted team due to injury, totally dominated the stats against the Pumas.”
Ah no Sprigs, no they didn’t.
Half time score 6-3 to Los Pumas. At one stage in the 2nd half they were 19-6 in front. One could argue that the scrum penalty that effectively decided this contest could just as easily been awarded to the Pumas which may have changed the result.
Australia had 1 yellow card. The Wallabies lost 2 scrums on their own feed. The Wallabies also conceded 20 turnovers. The Pumas had more off-loads and clean breaks. All other statistical areas were dominated by the Wallabies.
However, to compare that match with the All Blacks game against the Pumas is ludicrous. The Wallabies all but lost and had one Pat McCabe not been on the paddock probably would have.
This is not to excuse an average performance by the All Blacks but to keep a foot in reality.
The positive here is the perfomances of Los Pumas but I reckon that’s lost on you.
September 20th 2012 @ 10:11pm
stillmatic1 said | September 20th 2012 @ 10:11pm | Report comment
what about lady luck in the AB v ARG game too sprigs? or is it only relevant to spout this nonsense in defence of “your” team?
September 21st 2012 @ 4:25pm
Wal said | September 21st 2012 @ 4:25pm | Report comment
Winning. Not how is the measure of a great team, and winning over time. The only reason you might consider the current All Blacks the greatest side of all time is to include the last 2-3 years. Personally I don’t but some might. They have only lost 3 of 35 games since Sept 2009 so you can see how the argument could stack up
As for the just winning that is complete BS the Chicago Bulls won alot games on the way of their 6 titles with buzzer shots from Jordan, Eales/Mortlock kicked some great goals at the death against the AB’s as well. I would even argue a greater team finds a way to win when confronted with a monumental challenge, not by smashing everyone in there path.
September 19th 2012 @ 3:03pm
Riccardo said | September 19th 2012 @ 3:03pm | Report comment
Sprigs,
We can all agree that this isn’t one of the great All Black sides yet so take the time to take your blood-pressure meds.
Apart from the Pumas you are also right when you say they were close encounters in spite of the fact you are cherry-picking.
I would counter this argument that the potentially great sides still know how to grind out a win when they are under pressure or not playing well.
As far as this All Black Team being beaten? This will happen, sooner or later. It may just be the Wallabies too but I doubt it will be any time soon. The new spate of injuries is about to make life very tough for them on the road.
What is this conspiracy the All Blacks are driving that you refer to, where “Wallaby supporters are sucked into the AB psychological strategy.”
Perhaps it’s more than blood-pressure meds you have fogotten to take…
September 19th 2012 @ 4:11pm
Sprigs said | September 19th 2012 @ 4:11pm | Report comment
I can’t understand this reaction.
You have a haka, which is a challenge to a group of men.
Some men take up the challenge and say, “Ha! You’re not so good….we plan to beat you now and next time.”
And then you blokes get all offended.
Man up, as they say!
September 20th 2012 @ 10:09pm
stillmatic1 said | September 20th 2012 @ 10:09pm | Report comment
so why so serious then, sprigs?
September 21st 2012 @ 9:27am
Sprigs said | September 21st 2012 @ 9:27am | Report comment
Laughing, bloke. I know the psychology very well and just don’t bow to the propaganda.
September 23rd 2012 @ 9:02pm
stillmatic1 said | September 23rd 2012 @ 9:02pm | Report comment
i know brother. your always a good wind up!! but why does the propaganda work against such a confident people?
September 19th 2012 @ 11:37pm
guinness14 said | September 19th 2012 @ 11:37pm | Report comment
You no what, I for one would like to see the Wallabies beat the ABs, maybe that is just what they need. Then they will return with a vengence. I watch Richie McCaw, his attidue and determination to do even better, after being at the top of his game for almost a decade is inpiring. To be able to ask, no demand, to up the ante another couple of notches from the boys, and they do, is great to see. So come on you Wallabies get your shit toogether, and don’t blame Deans, take a game from my beloved ABs, but god help you when you face them again.
September 19th 2012 @ 11:49pm
nick said | September 19th 2012 @ 11:49pm | Report comment
RB World Rankings – 17 September 2012
Position (last week) Member Union Rating Point
1(1) NEW ZEALAND 92.43
2(2) AUSTRALIA 86.62
3(3) SOUTH AFRICA 84.20
That actually is ‘daylight’
Funny how even winning a world cup isn’t enough anymore. You have to beat someone by 20 points even though the majority of finals have been decided by only a few points and 2 went into extra time which is, by definition, a closer match than winning by 1 point in regulation time.