Sir Graham Henry sings praises of Sonny Bill Williams

Not for me. A one point win in every game over seven games means you have a side that will lose one of those. A one point win team doesn't win every game. Abs have never been a one point win team. And obviously it is the concept I refer to. No team wins at 90% by winning by one point every match. The ABs are a side that plays to score so many points more than the other side until there isn't enough time left to catch them. If they have not put themselves in a position that just before full time the opposition cannot possibly win then they're not the clearly superior team. They may play for 80, but the goal is to win within 75,70, 65, even 60. That is the mark of a champion team.

Don't have to convince about Ali, he went on far too long. But Nonu has delivered consistently for the ABs, SBW has never. He's not top match starting material and never has been. All I'm saying is he's strictly bench for the big ones. Very good bench however.

lets just put the 20 minutes with two players off the pitch in the mix T. That requires a major change in tactics to contain the powerful Argies. Yes they weren't as sharp as we expect them to be, but a win and injury free is good enough. I'm not too anal over history and how much we beat them by in the past. One point win in every game is enough for me.

taylor, just to remind you, Ali Williams and Nonu had rubbish super rugby seasons back-back for years, but were always In the All Blacks mix... on their super form neither should have been anywhere near the black bus and that must have left a number of super coaches really frustrated to see that happen.

BBA My comments are throw-aways in that every side, lifts themselves above and beyond the call simply because on this particular stage, they get to have-a-crack, against the No1 side on the planet. It doesn't matter about how the ABs progress or how many points they left behind....in '07, the ABs were marching through some high points scoring matches only to come up against a side they demolished in no uncertain terms (at their last meeting), who decided to just play the game, of their lives. Similarly in '99. The ABs can be 110% prepared for their next game but, it will mean nothing whatsoever, if their opponent has decided they don't care how they play, just as long, as they win. As I said before, it comes with the territory when every opponent grows an extra leg, simply because, they're playing against the ABs.

I think you have to factor in that we left some points behind in the last match and that it was the first game of the tournament, normally whereas we do not play Arg first in the Championship. You can overead one game, the question is how do they progress from here (and not talking about the game against Namibia). However it will matter how we scrum against Georgia and deal with the Tongan big hits.

And that's what I'm saying mate.....a side suffers 9 straight losses to the ABs and the 10th match, just happens to be the biggest stage, they will ever play. It doesn't matter how much improvements the ABs make - what matters is their opposition have hit that magic moment where they collectively say, enough is enough and no matter how much mental and physical preparation the ABs undergo, the efforts of their opponent are now multiplied 10-fold, to win. It's called hunger and it becomes the single difference between teams, in that once-in-a-lifetime achievement. And, that becomes the outcome of either a par-for-the-course win to the favourites or an epic upset win, to the underdogs. IMO, the ABs are on a hiding-to-nothing pathway with every team they face at this competition.....it comes with the territory when you are the No1 side and favourites, to win.

Yeah I'm just taking things at face value. By accepting that we didn't see this defence two months ago still means that all things being equal Argie have closed the gap in that time 'overall', i.e.- the Argie prep- whatever that was- made more gains than whatever we made. As the number one side I say that should be deemed unacceptable, and historically, that fits the trend when we have been knocked out. Other sides have raised their game to levels during the tournament on a relative basis when compared to before or after the tournament, the French the best example. We have 9 straight wins, then lose during the tourney, then go back to winning again after it.

I dunno t-man. It's hard enough going into the tournament listed as favourite and then being expected to brush all and sundry aside accordingly. When your team has occupied the top spot for something like the last 10years, it isn't easy to keep improving your efforts year in, year out and yet to all their opposition, the target just got bigger for them to achieve and match.....we can guess who has the greatest opportunities to improve. And, that's what we will see at this tournament....every team has been hiding their improvements just for this RWC combat and no matter how much the ABs will have improved their own efforts, the opportunities for their opponents to improve their game ten-fold, are far more achievable than for the ABs to improve, what they've been doing since the last RWC. We didn't see this defence from the Pumas a couple of months ago and as every couch-potato critic will say, it seems that defence, is what wins RWC cups.....I for one, think the Pumas can shake up the other side of the draw if they continue defending in the same vein as we saw yesterday. But, it will be a coin toss on their ability to go the full 80mins, that may catch them out. No doubt, the Pumas use of the next 3 pool games, can only enhance their chances going into the finals. They must surely, be feeling positive about their AB match.

The other thing about the Argie match is the margin. 10 points. In looking at our matches versus Argie between 2011 and now we averaged 33-13, our smallest margin 15 in Hamilton in 2013. Here we are at a World cup, and this match becomes our worst result score wise in 9 matches since we beat them in the 2011 quarter final. Now some might say that is explainable due to the Argentina effort being that much more focused for a World cup. I don't buy that. Why should the Pumas be more focused than the AB's? Does the World cup not expect improved performances from the AB's as well as the Puma's? For me, throw whatever context you want at it, but what is supposed to be the best AB side should be beating the Puma's by more, not less than it would outside this tournamant.

I just happened to start watching the AB's Argie match from the seventy-ith minute on and its incredible how the game had moved to a snail pace by then. Watch just Faumuina during the last ten minutes and he's literally walking around the ground at a stroll along the beach pace, every now and then holding up or pushing on the breakdown. The rest are a bit faster but the difference in pace between that and the start is incredible. That's certainly where matches are won and lost.

It was boring stuff OB but a good rolling maul is all good by me. ;)

For me, SBWs impact was that he straightened up the ABs attack line. Too many occasions, prior to his arrival, we witnessed the ABs running laterally and passing in the process which IMO, placed large red targets on each player for the Pumas to pick-off with their defence. The Pumas were excellent with their first tackles and IMO, had the ABs in sixes & sevens with their attacking lines in both forwards & backs. As I watched the game, I kept thinking that the ABs are playing similar to how they played the WBs in Sydney.....very loose, lateral running and very little go forward. That is, until SBW came on and his first couple of runs were straight into the Puma's defence line. As the game progressed, he became more confident and his straight running, provided more space for his outsides....just a pity, NMS missed the pass - but, he'll make sure next time. SBWs running in conjunction with more pick & go work by the forwards to keep the puma forwards in the middle, improved the ABs ability to maintain the pressure and eventually, spread the Puma defence to allow for the outsides to get more opportunities. It finally worked for Cane's try. Now, its a matter of improving combinations, tactics, game-plays and scrummaging. I suggest the line-out is working fine and their own ability to maul can do with a bit more tweaking - that maul they did wasn't too shabby though.....I was mildly, impressed. Anyways, onward to the remaining pool matches and here's hoping that the ABs take opportunities, to sharpen up their skills and basics.

not me.. big fan of the guy.. would have loved for him to choose the green and gold over the black.. but i guess that was wishful thinking... ;)

Faumuina was good though, got stuck in while he was on. Looks to have sorted his injury well. But agree with Playmaker re SBW getting to watch the game before he goes on...spot the weak points that look to be appearing as the game goes on, picking out the slower or even possibly injured in the opposition, or just looking for the gaps.

Well this morning he was waking up that little boy's father from the AB adverts to watch the game. Not sure if that was live or not though...?

We have a short turnaround before the Namibia game. I imagine we'll see SBW and Fekitoa take the midfield positions and they'll be competing for the reserve spot in the big games. What I liked about SBW's cameo was that it coincided with a change of tactics up front. The Pumas were fanning out and moving up to shut down the ball in midfield. NZ chose to pick and drive more committing Pumas to rucks and bided their time before shifting wide. Sam Cane's try being a classic example. What SBW did as well was to break the line with the Pumas tiring in defence. That also pulled in defenders creating gaps out wide. I think NMS warrants perseverance but Naholo's future return against Tonga I think means he'll have to wipe that fumble from his mind and just worry about the next one like Sam Cane did. Both these players are green but both are capable of turning a match. They are high risk high reward and it was nice to see SBW not look like that kind of player. There was a break where I thought he should've shifted it wide late in the game but generally his impetus was such that NZ lifted and Argentina faded when he came on. That's the definition of impact or at least what it should be. Speaking of impact, Charlie looked big to me and not in an Evander Holyfield way. He looks to have put on a lot of weight.

I really dont think they picked him as anything but an impact player for the pointy end of th wc an a couple of starts in the pool games and no doubt sh have always had this plan and I'm sure they would have told sbw that was his role barring injury to nonu. Cant wait to read after the wc what strategies hansen , meyer, chieka, Lancasters plans we're and their reasons behind them.

SBW has finally found his position in the no 23 jersey. He can watch the game unfold and with the right instructions in hand from the coaching staff , he can deliver the killer blow. Mine you, the ABs have 6 other players off the bench who can also deliver.

He is leading an NZ tour package to the RWC - think it leaves shortly if not already.