All Blacks v BI Lions Test #3
-
@ACT-Crusader said in All Blacks v BI Lions Test #3:
Perenara was poor, again tonight. He's obviously got talent but far too often is found wanting when the pressure is on.
The concern is that we don't really have someone knocking on the door underneath Smith and him. I would've kept Smith for the 80 tonight.
I said to the mrs and oldies just after half time, I wouldn't sub any of those backs on (while the camera showed them)... none of them would have offered any impact IMO... No point making changes just coz you can...
@Gunner I didn't mind the Fekitoa one. He's been a good sub in the past and has provided impact. He didn't look to bad I thought. Bent the line on the couple of runs he got. Good defence as well.
-
@Damo said in All Blacks v BI Lions Test #3:
He then decided to refer the PK upstairs, which he had basis in law to do so.
Actually he didn't. He had the right to refer to the TMO for Read possibly taking out the Lions player in the air, which is what he initially went to the TMO for. However, he had no right to seek clarification on the penalty that was already awarded.
@akan004 said in All Blacks v BI Lions Test #3:
@Damo said in All Blacks v BI Lions Test #3:
He then decided to refer the PK upstairs, which he had basis in law to do so.
Actually he didn't. He had the right to refer to the TMO for Read possibly taking out the Lions player in the air, which is what he initially went to the TMO for. However, he had no right to seek clarification on the penalty that was already awarded.
Sure he had the right to refer about possible foul play. But once he determined there wasn't foul play he had no basis to then change his original decision. And in any case it is clear that his original decision was correct anyway.
I think we are in agreement.
-
@akan004 said in All Blacks v BI Lions Test #3:
@Damo said in All Blacks v BI Lions Test #3:
He then decided to refer the PK upstairs, which he had basis in law to do so.
Actually he didn't. He had the right to refer to the TMO for Read possibly taking out the Lions player in the air, which is what he initially went to the TMO for. However, he had no right to seek clarification on the penalty that was already awarded.
Sure he had the right to refer about possible foul play. But once he determined there wasn't foul play he had no basis to then change his original decision. And in any case it is clear that his original decision was correct anyway.
I think we are in agreement.
-
Well, I needed to go our dinner and then walk home to calm down after that. And I'm still pissed.
What I find galling is the opposite-ness of this test to the previous one.
We have a player binned for a shot to the head (which was arguably fair or a penalty at least, but first contact was made with the ball), they don't have a player binned for a shot to the head and then he gets off at the judiciary (which I don't have a problem with).
We have a last minute penalty which is a correct decision even if harsh, then it is overturned, they get a penalty which is the correct decision even if harsh. I don't know where the lack of advantage played fits into it for them though ... I doubt they were in a position to score.
I'm unsure how a ref can bottle it like that. Add in the fact that two of the last three scrums seem to be refereed completely opposite to each other and I don't think anyone can claim he had an ok night.
Thought Jordie had a good game and he was one I was worried about. Fatty was ok, not as bad as some are making out, but not as good as his fluffer's are claiming - he dropped a sitter.
-
Prickish behaviour from Read. Glad the ref caught that.
@SimonAdd_2 said in All Blacks v BI Lions Test #3:
Prickish behaviour from Read. Glad the ref caught that.
Hah, I imagine you'll be calling that for both sides...
-
-
Well, I needed to go our dinner and then walk home to calm down after that. And I'm still pissed.
What I find galling is the opposite-ness of this test to the previous one.
We have a player binned for a shot to the head (which was arguably fair or a penalty at least, but first contact was made with the ball), they don't have a player binned for a shot to the head and then he gets off at the judiciary (which I don't have a problem with).
We have a last minute penalty which is a correct decision even if harsh, then it is overturned, they get a penalty which is the correct decision even if harsh. I don't know where the lack of advantage played fits into it for them though ... I doubt they were in a position to score.
I'm unsure how a ref can bottle it like that. Add in the fact that two of the last three scrums seem to be refereed completely opposite to each other and I don't think anyone can claim he had an ok night.
Thought Jordie had a good game and he was one I was worried about. Fatty was ok, not as bad as some are making out, but not as good as his fluffer's are claiming - he dropped a sitter.
-
It wasn't just Savea that dropped balls in scoring chances. I believe there were at least 3 chances we blew in the first half due to dropped balls.
Cane dropped one with the line clear from the tighthead scrum. I can't remember the other culprits.
@Damo the worst was when we won the tighhead and Aaron threw a bullet pass (too hard) to Beauden running into a gap a mile wide close to the line. Ball spilled. But for my mind Aaron and TJ have same mindset (so not just TJ) and don't always get it right but I would rather have players that push the limits.
-
Did Ardie play tonight?
@ACT-Crusader If only Luatua was the impact sub.
Scott Barrett is a fine player, but this series demonstrated that he isn't a good bench option in these physical games.
-
@ACT-Crusader If only Luatua was the impact sub.
Scott Barrett is a fine player, but this series demonstrated that he isn't a good bench option in these physical games.
@Tim I think he's really only there for injury cover. A genuine lock that is a very good lineout option. They basically play the two starters for the whole game if they haven't got injured. Scott came on tonight for what 5 minutes?
I know this doesn't fit your Luatua argument
but if Squire is fit, he's in the 23. -
@Tim I think he's really only there for injury cover. A genuine lock that is a very good lineout option. They basically play the two starters for the whole game if they haven't got injured. Scott came on tonight for what 5 minutes?
I know this doesn't fit your Luatua argument
but if Squire is fit, he's in the 23. -
@ACT-Crusader If only Luatua was the impact sub.
Scott Barrett is a fine player, but this series demonstrated that he isn't a good bench option in these physical games.
-
@Tim Agreed. PT's physicality and ball carrying ability would have made a bigger impact imo.
@akan004 said in All Blacks v BI Lions Test #3:
@Tim Agreed. PT's physicality and ball carrying ability would have made a bigger impact imo.
I get the sentiment but I would've had my doubts about his impact in this series given he has been pretty poor since the EOYT. Got pretty bad for him that he wasn't a regular starter at the Blues. I think the coaches recognised that not all was right with him.
Hopefully he can return to form and to the sort of play that we've really only seen glimpses of at International level.
-
@Damo the worst was when we won the tighhead and Aaron threw a bullet pass (too hard) to Beauden running into a gap a mile wide close to the line. Ball spilled. But for my mind Aaron and TJ have same mindset (so not just TJ) and don't always get it right but I would rather have players that push the limits.
@kev said in All Blacks v BI Lions Test #3:
@Damo the worst was when we won the tighhead and Aaron threw a bullet pass (too hard) to Beauden running into a gap a mile wide close to the line. Ball spilled. But for my mind Aaron and TJ have same mindset (so not just TJ) and don't always get it right but I would rather have players that push the limits.
Yep, wtf was that? He put that farking thing in a cannon and launched it. Definitely should have scored there.
-
Winning the 2015 world cup has made people very soft.
We played like garbage in this series. We lost to Ireland last year, and were lucky that Australia and South Africa were so bad.
If you don't get upset about drawing a three match series at home then there's something wrong with you.
-
@Rocky-Rockbottom by and large the platform was there but again it was how the backs used it. I thought Beauden did some good things like mixing the kicks (up and unders, kicks down the line into space, cross field) and then taking on the line.
The handling errors were at critical moments it seemed. You could see during the stoppages the experienced players - Read, Kaino, Whitelock, Smith - talking to the team trying to calm things.
Sure we didn't play scintillating running rugby but we did put ourselves in a position to win the test match.
-
What utter bullshit.
But what really shits me is the decision to go to Dagg off the back of that scrum near the end there. Wtf was that shit?
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in All Blacks v BI Lions Test #3:
What utter bullshit.
But what really shits me is the decision to go to Dagg off the back of that scrum near the end there. Wtf was that shit?
That was our box of tricks right there. Shit boys, big time attacking scrum here, what have we got up our sleeves? Fuck, I've got it, Smith goes one off to Dagg who hits it up! Brilliant!
