Geekzone Rugby (Union) Discussion Thread

Forums › Sports › Geekzone Rugby (Union) Discussion Thread

1 | ... | 247 | 248 | 249 | 250 | 251 | 252 | 253 | 254 | 255 | 256 | 257 | ... | 640

29641 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2100774 3-Oct-2018 13:19

networkn:

tdgeek:

Objective is about blaming the loser? It takes two to tango. So a losing side has a bad day at the office. Cannot possibly be that the winning side, brought a strategy that shut down parts of the AB's play or theme. No, can't be that.... You have confirmed what I read here from some, not all. Being a big fan is one thing, unashamed non objective bias is another. Fan Club stands. Its is for some, a club of fans. For others fanboyism

Ticker tape parade? Childish comment. I broke the rules here, that's patently clear

Blaming anyone but the loser would be making excuses. How many times have you seen critism over the way fans reacted to the loss in 2007? SA got props for the way they played, but it's not enough according to you.

As a team/player, you can only control yourselves. That is who should get the blame for a loss.

Ok, I disagree, that's my opinion. My basis is this. A team, especially in rugby can effect control over the game. Targeting areas they feel will shut down strengths of the opposition. Thats often mentioned. Their lineout sux so lets kick to their line, close to the try line. Fusitua scores on the right wing at will, lets keep the ball away from him, their forwards are too good, lets not take them on, and so on. IMHO thats a big part of team sport, and individual sports. Its up to both sides to target those favourable areas, and try to respond when the opposition is doing the same. Any team or player can have a bad day at the office, Id expect a lot less from the top top sides, and there will always be statistical anomalies which is bad luck, not the run of the green. That happens. But its a two side game. The opposition isn't playing a scripted game play, they are playing their game as well as they can and going after weaker areas they feel they have an advantage. IMO, RSA did that, played well, and it paid off. If AB's say now, we should have been more ruthless, why didn't they do that? Thats an excuse. If we drop balls more than usual, that can mean the other side is pressuring us, we are taking risks because of that. They have affected our game. I can blame the AB's for not adapting to the way RSA was playing, and I have. RSA created that, AB's did not respond. Maybe they could not, in which case AB's are not to blame. Their side and skill was outplayed by the other side and their skill. But to only blame the losing side isn't how I see it. Of all the factors involved, they fell short, they had the same 80 minutes as the other side. You can blame them for not doing this or that, but a lot of that is a direct effect what the other side took to them. On that they were beaten by a better side, playing better on the day.

This week I expect a 15 point win. RSA's tactics worked, but that's no secret now. They will try other things, we need to nullify them. The last match was a top effort by them strategically and execution, yet that only gave them what is in effect an even score line. RSA aren't that great. They achieved their maximum. If they payed AB's 10 times we win 8 of them. Maybe 9. TAB has them evens at 13.5 points, I feel it will be 15 and a bit more to NZ

Wise

Send money globally for less with Wise - one free transfer up to NZ$900 (affiliate link).

clevedon

1059 posts

Uber Geek

#2100778 3-Oct-2018 13:46

tdgeek:Ok, I disagree, that's my opinion. My basis is this. A team, especially in rugby can effect control over the game. Targeting areas they feel will shut down strengths of the opposition. Thats often mentioned. Their lineout sux so lets kick to their line, close to the try line. Fusitua scores on the right wing at will, lets keep the ball away from him, their forwards are too good, lets not take them on, and so on. IMHO thats a big part of team sport, and individual sports. Its up to both sides to target those favourable areas, and try to respond when the opposition is doing the same. Any team or player can have a bad day at the office, Id expect a lot less from the top top sides, and there will always be statistical anomalies which is bad luck, not the run of the green. That happens. But its a two side game. The opposition isn't playing a scripted game play, they are playing their game as well as they can and going after weaker areas they feel they have an advantage. IMO, RSA did that, played well, and it paid off. If AB's say now, we should have been more ruthless, why didn't they do that? Thats an excuse. If we drop balls more than usual, that can mean the other side is pressuring us, we are taking risks because of that. They have affected our game. I can blame the AB's for not adapting to the way RSA was playing, and I have. RSA created that, AB's did not respond. Maybe they could not, in which case AB's are not to blame. Their side and skill was outplayed by the other side and their skill. But to only blame the losing side isn't how I see it. Of all the factors involved, they fell short, they had the same 80 minutes as the other side. You can blame them for not doing this or that, but a lot of that is a direct effect what the other side took to them. On that they were beaten by a better side, playing better on the day.

This week I expect a 15 point win. RSA's tactics worked, but that's no secret now. They will try other things, we need to nullify them. The last match was a top effort by them strategically and execution, yet that only gave them what is in effect an even score line. RSA aren't that great. They achieved their maximum. If they payed AB's 10 times we win 8 of them. Maybe 9. TAB has them evens at 13.5 points, I feel it will be 15 and a bit more to NZ

You can try and psychoanalyse it as many times as you want (and you have over numerous repetitive posts) - you still don't make sense.

It's a basic game, you win or lose. The AB's win more than not, don't try and over complicate it.

tdgeek

29641 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2100786 3-Oct-2018 14:00

clevedon:

tdgeek:Ok, I disagree, that's my opinion. My basis is this. A team, especially in rugby can effect control over the game. Targeting areas they feel will shut down strengths of the opposition. Thats often mentioned. Their lineout sux so lets kick to their line, close to the try line. Fusitua scores on the right wing at will, lets keep the ball away from him, their forwards are too good, lets not take them on, and so on. IMHO thats a big part of team sport, and individual sports. Its up to both sides to target those favourable areas, and try to respond when the opposition is doing the same. Any team or player can have a bad day at the office, Id expect a lot less from the top top sides, and there will always be statistical anomalies which is bad luck, not the run of the green. That happens. But its a two side game. The opposition isn't playing a scripted game play, they are playing their game as well as they can and going after weaker areas they feel they have an advantage. IMO, RSA did that, played well, and it paid off. If AB's say now, we should have been more ruthless, why didn't they do that? Thats an excuse. If we drop balls more than usual, that can mean the other side is pressuring us, we are taking risks because of that. They have affected our game. I can blame the AB's for not adapting to the way RSA was playing, and I have. RSA created that, AB's did not respond. Maybe they could not, in which case AB's are not to blame. Their side and skill was outplayed by the other side and their skill. But to only blame the losing side isn't how I see it. Of all the factors involved, they fell short, they had the same 80 minutes as the other side. You can blame them for not doing this or that, but a lot of that is a direct effect what the other side took to them. On that they were beaten by a better side, playing better on the day.

This week I expect a 15 point win. RSA's tactics worked, but that's no secret now. They will try other things, we need to nullify them. The last match was a top effort by them strategically and execution, yet that only gave them what is in effect an even score line. RSA aren't that great. They achieved their maximum. If they payed AB's 10 times we win 8 of them. Maybe 9. TAB has them evens at 13.5 points, I feel it will be 15 and a bit more to NZ

You can try and psychoanalyse it as many times as you want (and you have over numerous repetitive posts) - you still don't make sense.

It's a basic game, you win or lose. The AB's win more than not, don't try and over complicate it.

For crying out loud. I was responding to a post that said the loser is always to blame.

Sorry if that bothers you. Sorry also that its not allowed to comment here unless its not acceptable to the fan club. Is there a problem if one poster says that you only blame the loser and another poster disagrees? Is that not allowed? I know disagreeing with anything here is a problem as its so fickle and shallow

So my response to his fair question and point is psychoanalysing? Its a discussion, or at least I thought it was, but not here clearly for the obvious fickle fanboy reasons. I considered his opinion of only blame the loser a fair discussion point.

networkn

Networkn
32243 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2100811 3-Oct-2018 14:23

https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/opinion/107558324/all-blacks-midfielders-are-all-chasing-jack-goodhue-the-form-runner

Interesting that this writer thinks that 12 is Crottys best position, I believe it to be 13. SBW is best at 12, but I am unsure where I see Goodhue who I agree with the writer is in probably the best form of any midfielder right now. I feel it would be tough to toss Crotty out, and SBW certainly showed class in the game last week, but for my money you simply can't leave Goodhue out given his compelling performances. He may end up on the bench. SBW is a beast defensively, something he is way under rated in. Goodhue and Crotty also. Some of the tackles Goodhue made during SR made me wonder if he had thors hammer with him. I thought he might have killed a couple of guys they were so thunderous.

Batman

Mad Scientist
29717 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2100879 3-Oct-2018 16:11

The only positions that i understand are 10, 2 & 9.

The rest ... Who knows what they actually do! When they don't have the ball the forwards try to get it by bashing each other while the rest are in some kind of man marking sideways shuffling choreography. When they have the ball some random backs run in some preset ways while the other backs wait and run a second wave, and that's after the forwards have bashed each other up until there's nobody else to bash.

12, 13 in fact are the most mysterious numbers to me. After 8. Maybe 6 & 7 too.

networkn

Networkn
32243 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2100881 3-Oct-2018 16:14

7 Steals the ball from the other team in rucks and mauls, well at least our one used to. This is something the number 8 does for Australia.

Good luck with scrumaging without 1 and 3 :)

Not much going to be going on in the lineouts without 4 and 5 :)

Batman

Mad Scientist
29717 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2100885 3-Oct-2018 16:24

Well the inside prop is stronger than the outside prop, and they have some kind of a reverse tug of war contest when the ball is fed. Then like the whack the mole game, one prop inevitably pops up and say hi and the referee gets crossed.

The locks bury their heads in between butt cheeks and binds their mates' crotch together for the whack the mole contest. Then they also shout some random codes and magically get lifted to the ball, sometimes also dropped onto their heads when lifters forget to put them down.

But the tactics board must be 99 pages long, the attacking plays and defensive formations are pretty complicated, compared to say golf for example.

networkn

Networkn
32243 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2100992 3-Oct-2018 19:12

I wasn't even aware this event had occurred. What a horrible end to this proud mans Rugby Career.

Batman

Mad Scientist
29717 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2101020 3-Oct-2018 20:12

are you talking about Rob Horne?

networkn

Networkn
32243 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2101035 3-Oct-2018 20:45

Doh didn't post the link!

Handle9

11258 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2101036 3-Oct-2018 20:54

networkn:

7 Steals the ball from the other team in rucks and mauls, well at least our one used to. This is something the number 8 does for Australia.

That used to be the case but not really anymore. The laws don't allow it and a big tackle is more likely to create a turnover than a pilfer. McCaw didn't really play that game at the end of his career, he was a very different player from when he first made the All Blacks in the early 2000s

If you look at the Super Rugby Stats the difference between Pocock and Cane was 3 turnovers through the whole tournament.

https://www.foxsports.com.au/rugby/super-rugby/stats/teams

Teams recycle the ball at a rate of greater than 95% now so it's not a skill that is so important anymore. What is important for a flanker is slowing ball down legally and making tackles behind the gain line. This is an article from 2016 but it shows some more advanced thinking than is typically displayed by the mainstream media.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/all-blacks/82528201/digging-the-data-what-stats-reveal-about-the-all-blacks-no-7-debate

I think the guys doing the 1014 rugby show are doing some of the most interesting and nuanced analysis around and they really bring some interesting stats to the table. They showed when we lost to Australia last year and when we lost to South Africa a couple of weeks ago we lost the battle of the advantage line. We gained a lot less territory per carry than we normally do and that killed our game plan.

Handle9

11258 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2102797 7-Oct-2018 07:18

That was another really enjoyable test. South Africa have dominated our pack two matches in a row. Their physicality and commitment is really enjoyable and they are playing these matches with a real physical edge. Our line out hasn’t really been great and they have won the battle at the ruck.

They are going in with a plan to slow the ball down and they are doing that consistently and mostly legally. They’re also creating a lot of traffic on attack and their block players are very very close to the edge of what is legal. I felt that they got away with sheperding in the build up to one of their tries.

I also found Gardeners ruling when Smith threw the ball into an offside player crazy. Whether or not it was deliberate from Smith it was a clear offside. South Africa are going in to create a messy breakdown area which is fine but they should be penalised when they get caught.

All that said the All Blacks showed amazing character and had a dose of luck when Mo’unga missed touch but got it anyway. Great finish and I’m really looking forward to the northern tour.

GV27

5883 posts

Uber Geek

#2102847 7-Oct-2018 10:48

Handle9: They are going in with a plan to slow the ball down and they are doing that consistently and mostly legally. They’re also creating a lot of traffic on attack and their block players are very very close to the edge of what is legal. I felt that they got away with sheperding in the build up to one of their tries.

I also found Gardeners ruling when Smith threw the ball into an offside player crazy. Whether or not it was deliberate from Smith it was a clear offside. South Africa are going in to create a messy breakdown area which is fine but they should be penalised when they get caught.

Another SANZAR game, another completely different interpretation of the rules we've all spent the last ten months playing under. These interpretations almost always seem to give the benefit of the doubt to the team that isn't the All Blacks.

There has been a lot of runners ahead of the ball and clearing out past the rucks just not enforced during the tests, but the Super Rugby TMOs were hot on it. It took 23 minutes for the All Blacks to get a penalty. I think we were warned 12 minutes in? This is despite some other games where teams just repeatedly infringed on their line the whole game and didn't even lose a player. Even more maddening is the constant boring tweets from NH idiots who think the ABs get favouritism from the referees. They wouldn't know fast flowing rugby if it bit them on the bum.

Likewise I recall the Blues losing a game because of a penalty given after a halfback threw the ball into a retiring player. In any other game, that has been a penalty. Even more confusing? Gardener: "You threw it forward into the player". Well call a knock-on then!

Still, glad we won.

frednz

1467 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#2102850 7-Oct-2018 10:57

A great comeback that certainly didn't look likely with only a few minutes to go! I think the All Blacks gifted a lot of possession to the Boks by some rather pointless kicking. Why can't they back themselves to hang on to the ball for longer and show that they can make progress without having to kick away possession so often?

Batman

Mad Scientist
29717 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2102854 7-Oct-2018 11:35

So it's either great game or poor refereeing then eh, depending on how you see it!

1 | ... | 247 | 248 | 249 | 250 | 251 | 252 | 253 | 254 | 255 | 256 | 257 | ... | 640