Thanks Bluesfan. I couldn’t agree more.

As an ABs fan, the rugby exhibited wasn’t my cup of tea but it is certainly nonsensical to attribute the boring style of play solely to the Bokke. I watched all 3 tests and thought the Boks were the better side and deserved to win.

If you can stomach it, watch the opening 10-15 mins of the 3rd test again. The Lions attack consisted ONLY of passing to first receiver & running straight into contact and after a while kicking the ball away. The Boks might have a good defence but its not hard to defend against that.

There are villains here though – both coaches and the gutless WR.

I’m really looking forward to the RC tho. You would expect it will be either ABs or Bokke to win and I think it will be very close and much more entertaining than what we have just witnessed. Although the ABs beat them last time they played, I’d say the Boks have overall a better forward pack both tight and loose, the ABs better inside backs (yep, our halfbacks both better than Faf & Mounga better than Pollard) but the remaining backs fairly even. I think the ABs tour better than the Boks generally so nothing much in it.

Anything is possible but nothing is certain Sheek.

Personally, I think there will be some version of a World League relatively soon because the so-called self-interest of (some of) the 6N members can only remain relevant in a broader context.

Rugby is not like AFL. Everyone knows its an international game. You might be a diehard Saracens fan for example but your enjoyment of rugby isn’t limited to the club. Some part of you wants England (or Wales or whatever) to smash Aust or NZ in a meaningful competition that doesn’t only happen once in 4 years.

Rugby is a business but its by no means only a business.

I agree with all you said Cookie.
Personally, I think both England & Ireland forwards lie all over the tackled player in an attempt to significantly slow down the recycle. I also think the rush defence of most teams is offside quite a lot. Both tactics enhance tackle & gain line dominance.
Fair enough if you get away with it – that’s rugby.
In the event the referee agrees with me (which is more likely to be a SH ref), then teams like England & Ireland will struggle more.
But you can’t take anything away from England’s performance – fantastic intensity and fabulous kicking game. Cheika should watch again to see the critical importance of kicking properly.
As noted by many, the 2 V’s & Tuilagi were immense (as was Farrell) but Youngs, Slade & Curry were the real surprises for me. Conversely, the Irish backline was a complete dud.
If England keep playing with that intensity, they’ll beat anybody including ABs IMO.
Can they keep doing it though?

I agree with Highlander.

Farrell is a great player but he does have defensive issues especially with shoulder charges.

Feel free to write your own article one day. Maybe get Funbus to help you. Here, I’ll start you off with the title – “Why England is 100 times better than NZ”.

Geez, for someone who found this piece “boring”, you sure seemed excited in your response.

If you can’t see that Farrell plainly shoulder charges at times, then perhaps your knowledge is more limited than you realise. I wouldn’t be surprised if he gets carded for it come RWC time especially away from the 80,000 assistant referees at Twickenham.

As for “relentless negativity”, check out your perpetual derision of NZ and its supporters.

Spot on.

Hi Nick

Thanks for another great article.

Mo’unga played better than BB last weekend but surely Richie had the easier job playing behind the Crusaders pack. I would wager that BB would’ve outperformed RM if the former had played behind the red & black pack.

Incidentally, I thought of the much-maligned Foley after the match given he plays behind the “light-weight” Tahs pack. Forward momentum is EVERYTHING to an inside back.

Having said that, there is some vague uncertainty with BB as a test 10 in that he doesn’t seem to have the composure / tactical awareness / game management skills of Carter or a “traditional” NH flyhalf. Instead he has pure unadulterated acceleration – but so does DMac & (only to a slightly lesser extent) Mo’unga.

This ability to accelerate close to and past the breakdown is the crux of the AB attack platform.

On DMac, his defence is excellent and his kicking game has improved immensely. I think it was the game in Hamilton v the Brumbies that showcased his tactical kicking prowess in particular. I think those tactics we will see again v the Wallabies before the season is over, particularly if Cheika makes a mistake with lineout selection.

Coming down to who will be preferred at 10 at RWC, I can’t see any obvious clear-cut advantage Mo’unga has over BB and the former has infinitely less test experience. Between DMac & BB, again the status quo is likely to prevail in that BB will start with DMac off the bench when defences tire. I can’t see DMac as 1st choice FB as I would think guys like Folau will leap all over him.

I hope very much, however, that RM will be given a start at 10 perhaps v Argentina in NZ & possibly on the NH tour at some stage. I would think that Mo’unga will be BB’s replacement should the Bok Beating Bast*rd get injured at the wrong time.

Ha!

?

+1 Tman.

Yeah possibly Corne.

There was some chat on the Roar the other day about the mental side of playing pro rugby and the role Gilbert Enoka had with the ABs. I wonder if there is a Enoka-lite program run out at S15 level with the NZ teams?

Good article Corne.

I know its boring but is it possible that the difference between the SA & Oz teams from NZ is the aerobic fitness?

When you’re buggered, you make mistakes.

Take the Waratahs v Crusaders match & the super-effective blitz D from NSW in the first 30 mins. Check out the same team’s D at the 60 min mark. Not the same.

SA teams are looking much more dynamic than in the past esp the Bulls (recently) & the Lions (last few seasons) but they are running out of steam quicker than NZ teams.

Hi Geoff

Had a great night out watching my Chiefs vs Reds at Suncorp – great stadium.

At the risk of oversimplifying how Oz Super Rugby teams may become more competitive, is there anything substantially absent from the points below?

1. Create more competition for positions within the squad – the Waratahs in particular. I don’t subscribe to the view that there is no cattle in Oz. I just think the most of the cattle out there simply isn’t encouraged enough. A guy like Beale needs to feel that if he isn’t on song, he won’t get picked for a while.

2. Enhance coaching and training to focus on:

(a) Strategic – moving the ball effectively into space – watch the Chiefs, Canes & Lions in particular – this is the essence of modern rugby;

(b) Tactical – focus on skills especially passing for the receiver to run on to the ball and tactical kicking – tactical kicking is almost completely absent in Australian Super Rugby.

3. Improve aerobic fitness across the board.

Lastly, there needs to be a fundamental development piece around growing excellent inside backs starting back at school level – fast halfbacks that can threaten the line themselves and flyhalves with acceleration and who can kick effectively even when the pack is going backwards.

Problem solved. ?

Who’s the “they” Peter?

Great piece. Thank u Albo.

Good post BBA.

Eventually, the same thing will happen to NZ. As sure as the sun rises in the east.

Nothing lasts forever.

CS good of you to suggest some reading material.

You’re fond of absolutes. What makes you think “nationalism is the most common form of collective consciousness in the modern world”? Anderson “widely regarded” in the top 100 works in humanities?

Accuracy & brevity. Nice work Rt.

And if you deny it enough, it must not be?

Gold Tman

Tempo of this game was frenetic.

I had tipped the Chiefs as champions this season but their scrum may be their undoing – seriously deficient.

With his unrivalled acceleration, Barrett playing flat is a significant advantage, but his kicking isn’t up to scratch. For me, AB fly half must be Cruden. One thing not often detected is the amount of defensive work he gets through.

Liked the look of some of the newer guys – Fatialoafa (sp?), Seu, Tamanivalu, Proctor, Woodward (good to have him back in NZ). Rettalick and J Savea strangely quiet.

When the ante was upped, McKenzie was simply amazing. I understand the argument that it might not be appropriate to bring him into AB back line in a “transitional” season but geez he can change a match and, despite his size, does not appear to have any weaknesses (at least at SR level).

With regard to the mooted new AB centres, I’d say Crotty will get the nod before Ngatai but ultimately I prefer the latter. Everyone seems to assume Fekitoa will be 13 but I must be the only one who hasn’t seen him do much. Despite the ghosts of Cullen, and Macdonald, I wonder if Hansen might slot Bender in there to accommodate McKenzie especially if it’s 2-0 vs Wales going into the 3rd?

Hi Taupo

I think Shag will take the conservative option & keep the same squad to the fullest extent possible.

Crotty for Conrad & Cruden will remain starting flyhalf but perhaps only for 1st half (unless he lights the place up). Fekitoa & Tuipolotu should get 20 mins each.

Might be a bridge too far to bring Read back ATM and he may be better served returning to S15 in prep for RC. Anyway, the current pack has done (just) enough to date. Retallick has been a revelation.

I will be interested in Jane’s fate if he fails to shine (again).

It’s been a fantastic series so far. England have been as strong an opponent for the ABs as any team could be ATM (including the Boks). There were moments in both tests (esp the 1st) when I felt England could win it.

England’s forwards are excellent and their set piece is almost flawless. However, their backs let them down a bit, particularly flyhalf. Like the Boks, I think they sacrifice general play nous for goal kicking at flyhalf. This tactic might make more sense in the mud and slush of NH paddocks but not at a place like Forsyth Barr. Wouldn’t Nick Evans be eligible by now? 😉

Like many commentators, I think the referee can have too much influence on a match and this seems endemic (right word?) with rugby. Someone earlier mentioned they watch a 1967 test match and was amazed at the simplicity of the scrum. I have noticed that too when watching old tests. Nowadays, the scrum is a lottery and I can imagine a scenario in RWC final where a ref makes an unsubstantiated call that could decide the tournament. When playing for sheep stations, it is simply not a good enough state of affairs. I won’t mention ’07 RWC quarter final (ABs) or ’11 semi (Boks). Or have I?

Anyway, the basic difference between NZ & England is the backs. What was wrong with Eastmond? When will coaches realise that size is not everything – exhibit 1: Conrad? Twelvetrees & Burrell are not disciplined in defence. Also, NH teams generally (except France historically & Wales semi recently) seem confused when their backs get the ball. Scotland is the best example of this – watching their backs is painful.

Finally, I think England will be fearsome come RWC next year and (I’m bracing for the howls of dissent) will be favourites esp if they beat ABs later this year at Twickenham. Whilst I was very happy with ABs in 2nd test I cannot shake the feeling that our ascendency is in decline.