All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.
-
@NTA said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
The replay - regardless of the big screen at the ground - would be right in front of Veldsman
As you say, there were two replays between Owens whistling the try, and the stoppage to check more replays.
Yes. Didn't mean to imply Veldsman was watching the bigscreen. But think he missed it live and picked it up on the replays (in his booth).
-
@NTA said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
The replay - regardless of the big screen at the ground - would be right in front of Veldsman
As you say, there were two replays between Owens whistling the try, and the stoppage to check more replays.
Now that is what people should be up in arms about. Not the decision itself.
@Bones said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
Now that is what people should be up in arms about. Not the decision itself.
Yeah. Like that guy wrote in the blog post over on GAGR about TMO Protocols, the influence of the home broadcaster, and whether it could all use a little tweaking to ensure situations like this and the RWC2015 England / Fiji thing are properly scrutinised.
@canefan said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Rapido right, so at least it was instigated by the TMO and not Owens
Yes. Though its worth noting that if Owens - or either of the Touch Judges - saw it on the big screen before the conversion, he could have asked for a review.
-
@Bones said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
Now that is what people should be up in arms about. Not the decision itself.
Yeah. Like that guy wrote in the blog post over on GAGR about TMO Protocols, the influence of the home broadcaster, and whether it could all use a little tweaking to ensure situations like this and the RWC2015 England / Fiji thing are properly scrutinised.
@canefan said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Rapido right, so at least it was instigated by the TMO and not Owens
Yes. Though its worth noting that if Owens - or either of the Touch Judges - saw it on the big screen before the conversion, he could have asked for a review.
-
Cheika's ranting is serving a purpose. It's preparing us for an avalanche of whinging next year from the Lions and, in particular, their media.
@Tregaskis said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
Cheika's ranting is serving a purpose. It's preparing us for an avalanche of whinging next year from the Lions and, in particular, their media.
He will also be planting the seeds for the series next year with his players, I would be surprised if it is not used in the build up next year.
-
@da_grubster said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Marty said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Marty said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Marty said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Chris-B. said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@mariner4life said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
Thoughts on the All Blacks playing without a goal kicker?
Wondering about this.
Beaudy was pretty ordinary in the first part of the Super season. Came right in the ABs camp, but he seems to be regressing.
I wonder how long the coaches will put up with substandard goal kicking - eventually it will cost us a match, so he needs to sort it - otherwise he'll have to be relegated to super-sub status again.
General performance from Beaudy has me wondering again how effective he can be when his forwards are getting munched. I didn't see him trying to take control at any point. In fact after the game I realised I could barely remember seeing him.
They had 30 something percent possession in the first half. He barely had the ball enough to make an impression before he was hooked. When and where was he supposed to take control?
35% is not great but it's adequate. A more controlling performance from a Beauden Barrett would include, for example, taking on the line himself - something that has been his hallmark this season. Aaron Cruden had more direct influence on proceedings when he came on, though admittedly not always positive.
As mentioned, he only had the ball a handful of times in attack. It would be interesting to know at what stage him taking the ball to the line would have been a controlling performance or indeed called for under the circumstances.
Cruden came on and failed to find touch from a penalty and then sent a harmless kick into the 22. With much more possession and a tiring opponent of course he's going to be more involved.
BB totally deserves any criticism for his kicking, which could prove crucial in some of the typical arm-wrestles up north. It could even be argued that Lima S gets the nod if BB cant get at least 70%. But complaining that he didn't control the game enough when his team had 35% possession and he barely touched the ball in attack is absolutely ridiculous.
Far from ridiculous but OK, if you're happy with that level of influence from your field general , then fair enough. You can probably even argue that the pattern this team plays removes the need for one central decision maker and that's probably what got them through on Saturday.
Still, the great first five performances I remember were the ones where, when things weren't panning out, the player demanded the ball and took the game on his shoulders. And that includes situations where possession was poor. Andrew Mehrtens is a classic example, he often played behind a pack that served up less than 40% possession, especially in the latter half of his career. Dan Carter was frequently in those situations too.
I've got no doubt Barrett will get there with more time under his belt but he hasn't yet and Saturday's game was clear evidence of that.
Jesus, the way you're banging on you'd think we were getting hammered and severely under the cosh. But the abs were farking leading at half time and if BB had had his kicking boots on the buffer would have been rather healthy. So you have a team that has scored 3 tries to 1 and is leading at the break and you reckon that's a poor reflection on the flyhalf, who has had little ball to work with?
I'm sure BB would have become much more involved as the game wore on, but it's absurd to criticise him for a first half performance when the abs scored 3 tries with 35% possession. But I'm sure if he put his head down and took the ball to the line those stats would look so much better and the forwards would start winning the collisions and making tackles.
He touched the ball 6 times in the 1st half and missed 3 kicks at goal.
6 times. For a 10. Did we only win 6 ducks in the half?
I agree with Crucial, this is exactly the sort of game that you would like your general to take hold of and steer his team around the park and make the play and yet he only touch the ball once every 7 minutes.
Then it is revealed that he has an ear infection.
Perhaps he should have been left out be wise he clearly wasn't right
Perenara did most of the kicking in the first half.
He did 3 box kicks in positions you would expect him to. Nothing more.
I just think in that first half, we had so little ball, probably the least we have had all year in a half.
We weren't doing multiple phase after phase plays. Even the fries were off a charge down, a line out and the first was off a few phases.
It's hard for a 10 to get himself into a game like that for sure but he was largely anonymous apart from the missed kicks.
He kicked well from hand and made some tackles (although missed one in the lead up to the aus try)
It was comfortably his worst performance of the year largely due to him. Or really doing anything positive apart from shuffle on what ball he had.
Probably just a one off as it was an unusual performance from the rest of the side
-
Rod Kafer column: Nigel Owens was very poor and changed the course of the Test match
Source: FOX SPORTS
IN the heat of battle on Saturday night I said that Nigel Owens should never referee a Test again.
Well, on reflection, I think that Nigel should get the opportunity to referee again, because I’m sure he’d like to do a better job.
I do regret saying that, because he has been a great servant to the game, but I thought that his performance was very poor that night.
Australia has got a particularly poor record with Nigel as a referee and I didn’t think that All Blacks 37, Wallabies 10 was reflective of how close the game was.
Key moments in games can have a massive impact on the result and the Henry Speight no-try decision was a key moment.
MY SIDELINE EYE
I was sitting on the Eden Park 22m line for that incident and in the lead-up to that break, Kieran Read changed his line to block Dane Haylett-Petty.
Both Read and Julian Savea grab Haylett-Petty but the Kiwi crowd was incensed as the host broadcaster kept showing replays of the Haylett-Petty/Savea contact on the big screen.
They don’t go back two seconds before to show that it should have been advantage to Australia because Haylett-Petty was pulled back.
EVEN THE KIWIS THOUGHT IT STUNK
I went back and listened to the New Zealand commentary and had a beer with Justin Marshall afterwards — he was adamant that it was a try.
Their whole commentary team thought it was a try — they couldn’t believe the try was overturned.
Jonathan Kaplan came out, everyone believed it was a try — there was no chance Savea was going to make that tackle.
Shoulder on shoulder, behind the ball, it’s not obstruction.
NOT THE ONLY HOWLER
Making matters worse was the fact that a Savea try was allowed to stand after Scott Sio had his heels clipped by Aaron Cruden.
I thought both the Speight and Savea tries should have been awarded but where is the consistency?
Sio was in a position to pick that ball up but there were no replays at the ground and all of a sudden Cruden has kicked the conversion before the referee and TMO Shaun Veldsman can review it.
Cruden’s trip was accidental but he obstructed a player by changing his line and to a player who was going for the ball.
You can’t apply the law on one instance, when it suits the All Blacks and the local crowd, and not apply it in the same game, 10 minutes later for the other team.
MY TAKE ON CLOWN-GATE
The All Blacks aren’t in control of what the media write, but they’ve got a close relationship with the New Zealand Herald.
There are stories in the Herald that are very closely linked to the All Blacks — but I’m not suggesting they had anything to do with that Michael Cheika clown cartoon.
It’s a bit of foolish fun but I was also disappointed with the ‘Richetty Grub’ dig at Richie McCaw in Australian papers last year.
I don’t think that’s respectful to one of the great players of the game.
I’ve been a great supporter of McCaw’s over the years, he’s one of the greatest footballers I’ve ever had the privilege to watch.
This is an amazing All Blacks team but rugby probably doesn’t need this sideshow.
REASONS FOR HOPE
All of the drama has overshadowed what was a much improved performance by the Wallabies.
We had seven players with less than nine caps in our starting XV which is remarkably inexperienced.
They played with no fear and were in the contest, right up until the Speight no-try.
I know people will say we got beaten by 27 points — but moments like that in Test matches can change momentum.
This Wallabies team were very close.
We tested the All Blacks like they haven’t been tested for some time and that’s a really good sign.
I’ve got a lot of hope for the tour of Europe.
-
As I said earlier. I really hope DHP took the opportunity to pop in pre-emptively to the refs to apologise for the unhinged bile bound to head their way for his own low percentage action.
That's slightly better from Kafe but still a pretty measly explanation / extraction of his Hastingsesque commentary and disrespect to officials for making a correct call. Actually is still pretty condescending to Owens.
-
Oh boo fucken hoo.
Perhaps if the Wallabies have got a very poor record under the best referee in the world, they should take a bit of a look at how they play the game, rather than moan about the ref? On the other hand, our poor record under Barnes is because he's obviously an asshat.
-
If Cruden did truly manage to trip up Sio in the split second he had to realise that that option was there and then to actually execute it he's pretty awesome imho, especially doing it without even looking down to see where Sios feet are.
Bravo you little bogan hobbit hybrid.
-
Late to the party. But the thing that stood out to me most watching the game was -
"How good / much"
I lost count of the number of times Smith & Justin asked each other "How good is Ben Smith?", "How much is ALB liking test rugby" "How good was that try", "How much did the ABs need that" "How good was that catch?" "How big was that tackle?" "How fat am I since I stopped playing cricket?", "How little did I prepare for this test" "How much much of this comentary is Nisbo saying stuff & me repeating the last thing he said, but louder?"
It got to the stage I was actually waiting to see what Smithy or Justin would ponder the how of next. Turned out it was "How good is the NZ bench"
-
Bit disingenuous from Kafer. When he had his on air meltdown he didn't mention or probably even know about the initial grab from Reid. He kept banging on about how you can do "anything you like" if you're behind the ball.
Interesting none of my mates here (who can be Wallaby boofheads at the best of times) had an issue with it. To them it was inconsequential when you get done by 27 points (including missed kicks and disallowed tries which would have blown the score out even more) and the likelihood of Aus defending that lead for 30 minutes was slim at best.
Personally I thought some of that forward play was pretty fookin impressive. Big munters eating up the yards and showing more heart than a million Coopers. The big question is whether they will have the gas to sustain it going forward. If they play like that up north I cant see anyone beating them.
-
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
Jesus, the way you're banging on you'd think we were getting hammered and severely under the cosh. But the abs were farking leading at half time and if BB had had his kicking boots on the buffer would have been rather healthy. So you have a team that has scored 3 tries to 1 and is leading at the break and you reckon that's a poor reflection on the flyhalf, who has had little ball to work with?
I'm sure BB would have become much more involved as the game wore on, but it's absurd to criticise him for a first half performance when the abs scored 3 tries with 35% possession. But I'm sure if he put his head down and took the ball to the line those stats would look so much better and the forwards would start winning the collisions and making tackles.
No, I said I didn't think Barrett's general play was as influential as it has been previously and it might be an insight into his ability to take control of a game where his forwards are getting beaten. Then I pointed out that other first fives in history have been able to do that in similar situations and that probably comes with experience.
@Marty said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
Jesus, the way you're banging on you'd think we were getting hammered and severely under the cosh. But the abs were farking leading at half time and if BB had had his kicking boots on the buffer would have been rather healthy. So you have a team that has scored 3 tries to 1 and is leading at the break and you reckon that's a poor reflection on the flyhalf, who has had little ball to work with?
I'm sure BB would have become much more involved as the game wore on, but it's absurd to criticise him for a first half performance when the abs scored 3 tries with 35% possession. But I'm sure if he put his head down and took the ball to the line those stats would look so much better and the forwards would start winning the collisions and making tackles.
No, I said I didn't think Barrett's general play was as influential as it has been previously and it might be an insight into his ability to take control of a game where his forwards are getting beaten. Then I pointed out that other first fives in history have been able to do that in similar situations and that probably comes with experience.
For the 1,000th time, what was he supposed to have done any differently in the time he was on the park and given the lack of possession? When have other first fives in the history of the game altered the tactics and game plan in the first half to "take control" of a game?
Your one and only suggestion was that he take on the line. With all due respect, that's pretty weak.
Had he stayed on the park he may well have ended up scoring a hat trick. But we'll never know because he was replaced so early.
-
@NTA said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
Anyone would think you fluffybunnies had lost...
Maybe it's why we win ...
-
@NTA said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
It was pretty to watch
True, I must admit I've had a lot of fun watching the Wallabies in the doldrums this year.
I am worried about the knowledge of laws in Australia - I was told twice today that you can only obstruct defenders from in front of the ball player. I really should have watched more of the NRC to see this hybrid Rugby-NFL that appears to be taught in the Oz system.
What was weird was the usually mild mannered Aussie guy I chat about with rugby at work went all a bit Kafe over this, I thought he was going to clock me at one stage (which is a worry as he's about 6ft 5"). Thankfully we avoided all rugby talk for the rest of the day.
@Nepia said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@NTA said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
It was pretty to watch
I was told twice today that you can only obstruct defenders from in front of the ball player.because that was the half arsed uninformed billshit that Kafer spewed in his commentary.
-
@Bones said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
Now that is what people should be up in arms about. Not the decision itself.
Yeah. Like that guy wrote in the blog post over on GAGR about TMO Protocols, the influence of the home broadcaster, and whether it could all use a little tweaking to ensure situations like this and the RWC2015 England / Fiji thing are properly scrutinised.
@canefan said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Rapido right, so at least it was instigated by the TMO and not Owens
Yes. Though its worth noting that if Owens - or either of the Touch Judges - saw it on the big screen before the conversion, he could have asked for a review.
@NTA said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Bones said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
Now that is what people should be up in arms about. Not the decision itself.
Yeah. Like that guy wrote in the blog post over on GAGR about TMO Protocols, the influence of the home broadcaster, and whether it could all use a little tweaking to ensure situations like this and the RWC2015 England / Fiji thing are properly scrutinised.
@canefan said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Rapido right, so at least it was instigated by the TMO and not Owens
Yes. Though its worth noting that if Owens - or either of the Touch Judges - saw it on the big screen before the conversion, he could have asked for a review.
Fuck GAGR and that willis Pfitzy ...
But without having read what I'm sure is a bullshit article shouldn't the TMO check replays anyway regardless of the homeground producer? TMO sees something it's checked regardless of conversion timing. Just hold the restart until TMO has checked?
-
@Marty said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
Jesus, the way you're banging on you'd think we were getting hammered and severely under the cosh. But the abs were farking leading at half time and if BB had had his kicking boots on the buffer would have been rather healthy. So you have a team that has scored 3 tries to 1 and is leading at the break and you reckon that's a poor reflection on the flyhalf, who has had little ball to work with?
I'm sure BB would have become much more involved as the game wore on, but it's absurd to criticise him for a first half performance when the abs scored 3 tries with 35% possession. But I'm sure if he put his head down and took the ball to the line those stats would look so much better and the forwards would start winning the collisions and making tackles.
No, I said I didn't think Barrett's general play was as influential as it has been previously and it might be an insight into his ability to take control of a game where his forwards are getting beaten. Then I pointed out that other first fives in history have been able to do that in similar situations and that probably comes with experience.
For the 1,000th time, what was he supposed to have done any differently in the time he was on the park and given the lack of possession? When have other first fives in the history of the game altered the tactics and game plan in the first half to "take control" of a game?
Your one and only suggestion was that he take on the line. With all due respect, that's pretty weak.
Had he stayed on the park he may well have ended up scoring a hat trick. But we'll never know because he was replaced so early.
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
what was he supposed to have done any differently in the time he was on the park and given the lack of possession? When have other first fives in the history of the game altered the tactics and game plan in the first half to "take control" of a game?I can't recall too many 10's who see the big picture in the game, more ofdten they get it explained to them at halftime. I think Barret got yanked because of his goal kicking not his control of the game.
You could see 2nd half that Cruden had either been able to see more from the sideline or had been told by the coaches to deal with the very fast rush D the Wallabies were playing (hence them getting pinged offside a bit) and one of his first actions was to dink a chip kick in. Thats pretty much text book for what to do if a side are rushing you.
I'm pretty sure he only did it once tho' & Charlie & Crocket galloping onto the ball close in probably had more tactical effect. Adding 230kg of ball carrying helped us push the gainline far more.
-
Oh boo fucken hoo.
Perhaps if the Wallabies have got a very poor record under the best referee in the world, they should take a bit of a look at how they play the game, rather than moan about the ref? On the other hand, our poor record under Barnes is because he's obviously an asshat.
@Bones said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
Oh boo fucken hoo.
Perhaps if the Wallabies have got a very poor record under the best referee in the world, they should take a bit of a look at how they play the game, rather than moan about the ref? On the other hand, our poor record under Barnes is because he's obviously an asshat.
Define "poor" re Barnesy? How many have we lost compared to won?
-
@Bones said in All Blacks v Wallabies at Eden Park.:
Oh boo fucken hoo.
Perhaps if the Wallabies have got a very poor record under the best referee in the world, they should take a bit of a look at how they play the game, rather than moan about the ref? On the other hand, our poor record under Barnes is because he's obviously an asshat.
Define "poor" re Barnesy? How many have we lost compared to won?
