Public Address | System (Home)

Posted at 3:50PM on 1 Dec 09. Permalink.

Is it possible that we don't actually like rugby? Probably not. I think we're just annoyed that the game plan we'd like our team to employ is also easily thwarted. And this weekend it wasn't.

I think there's a wider valid point which McCaw commented upon when the English suddenly discovered that maybe they should have supported to ELVs after all. There is no ideal set of rules to govern rugby, but a set of rules that discourages teams from expansive running play, running the ball, taking risks, making exciting play doesn't help the game in front of either current or potential fans. Ice hockey came to this conclusion about six years ago and started to penalised all the holding and crosschecking and hooking that had been preventing talented ice hockey players from showing their true potential on the ice.

In the end, you want to watch a rugby game which has speed, excitement, strength, talent, physical contests. Kicking should be part of that, but the current rules encourage it too much so it'll be good when they adjust it further and come to the conclusion that part of the point of the rules is to push the sport towards events that are entertaining to play in and watch.

That would benefit NZ rugby players, but also France, Australia etc. If it leads to more games like the French one, and less like the English one, that seems to be all good to me.

Posted at 4:01PM on 1 Dec 09. Permalink.

I did enjoy this test.

The thing that gets me, though, is that we were playing this run-it-from-anywhere game all year and the pundits were all "we need to play a kicking game, like South Africa".

Ok, the execution was a bit shit, but still, it was the same game plan.

What do we think the AB coaching line-up will be for next year?

Posted at 4:06PM on 1 Dec 09. Permalink.

The All Blacks weren't losing

Dude, they lost a bunch of tests this year, including one at home against the French.

Posted at 4:13PM on 1 Dec 09. Permalink.

France flirted with a game plan of how to beat the All Blacks.

They won’t make that mistake again, and neither will the other teams looking on.

Posted at 4:26PM on 1 Dec 09. Permalink.

I completely agree with you Hadyn. It took me two days to write this, because I had no idea what to do.

Personally, the Wellington test against Aus was better. The forwards were more dominant, the midfield exploited the rush D - if Sivi, Jane and Mils had broken the line as often as they did against France, that would have been a cracker.
But then again, I don't like games where one side isn't in it. The game against England was the most enthralling. If it's tries the masses want, then just give up now and play Fiji and Samoa in the first test of the year again.

PS: The uniforms were good? So you're fine with the ABs not having white socks? And I prefer the tracksuit tops that France wore down here to the ones they had on the weekend.

Posted at 4:31PM on 1 Dec 09. Permalink.

One for the uniform experts:

Why did the All Blacks (away) change jersies last weekend yet a couple of weekends ago it was England (home) who changed when playing their friends Argentina?

Posted at 5:00PM on 1 Dec 09. Permalink.

The All Blacks weren't losing

Dude, they lost a bunch of tests this year, including one at home against the French.

I meant up north. When we lose it's easy to complain, complaining when we win takes skill

Posted at 5:05PM on 1 Dec 09. Permalink.

Can I link whore? ta.

WTF was going on with the TV coverage? We may bitch and moan about Nisbo and Mexted, but technically, our camera work is awesome.

Or maybe I just think about it too much.

Posted at 5:08PM on 1 Dec 09. Permalink.

Why did the All Blacks (away) change jersies last weekend yet a couple of weekends ago it was England (home) who changed when playing their friends Argentina?

The home team chooses the colour they play in and England had those pretty purple uniforms to wear.

So you're fine with the ABs not having white socks?

Rugby teams shouldn't change their socks unless they absolutely have to (boom boom) and the French wear red socks so there'd be no confusion in the rucks. In fact the only thing the ABs changed were their jerseys.

Did anyone else notice Owen Franks run out with his jersey tucked into his shorts? He should've got a yellow card for that.

Also after the game, Richie did his interview in a black jersey. Who the fuck thought that was a clever idea?

And I prefer the tracksuit tops that France wore down here to the ones they had on the weekend.

yes, that's true

Posted at 5:10PM on 1 Dec 09. Permalink.

The home team chooses the colour they play in

OK then; when did that change?

Posted at 5:11PM on 1 Dec 09. Permalink.

I meant up north. When we lose it's easy to complain, complaining when we win takes skill

Seems to me it's what you're doing! :-)

But you might be right, perhaps the French saw the writing on the wall early and folded. Still, it was a good game, thoroughly enjoyed the razzle dazzle and the All Blacks' defence was just superb.

Posted at 5:23PM on 1 Dec 09. Permalink.

WTF was going on with the TV coverage?

Yeah, the French and their super slow-mo glory shots. My favourite bit was when we lost a line-out and they decided to show a slow-mo replay of one we won from about 15 minutes earlier.

We may bitch and moan about Nisbo and Mexted, but technically, our camera work is awesome.

Having said that, to this day no one at Sky TV has learnt how to film the haka. I know they're not allowed to film it from in-front, but is it that difficult to point the camera at one of the Maori players instead of whoever's blackest? They do it best. And can we stop cutting to the opposition side looking stoic? Jesus it's annoying.

Posted at 5:31PM on 1 Dec 09. Permalink.

The home team chooses the colour they play in

OK then; when did that change?

Never, as far as I'm aware they have always done it. It's just now some teams have different strips they want to show off.

Posted at 5:32PM on 1 Dec 09. Permalink.

France flirted with a game plan of how to beat the All Blacks.

They won’t make that mistake again, and neither will the other teams looking on.

I fear you're right.

But ... look back at the game again and you'll see superb games from the likes of Hore and Smith (the players the know-nothing British scribes never mention). The speed and accuracy of their work at the breakdown was phenomenal.

Tracey Nelson's stats are up and have Smith as the no. 2 tackler, behind only McCaw. Woodcock and Hore were right behind McCaw in first-three-to-the-breakdown and only McCaw and Read took the ball up more than Hore.

Sivivatu was the top back at the breakdowns, which must have contributed to the threat out wide.

Some of the usual bad habits (from Cowan and Nonu) were on display, but a number of other players really stepped up.

It would be nice to see Brendan Leonard stay fit long enough to properly challenge for his position, because Cowan's inevitable tendency to jog around holding the ball before passing gives me the shits. The receivers seem to have adjusted their timing to allow for it, but it could be so much better.

And McCaw. What a freak.

So it wasn't just that they let us play.

Posted at 5:35PM on 1 Dec 09. Permalink.

HG,

Sorry to butt in on your specialist subject, but NZ has always played in white at home v Scotland. Unlike football, rugby has made the home side wear the alternate strip. But this must've changed recently.

@RB,

Leonard is no better than Cowan in the 2-step-pass department.

Posted at 5:46PM on 1 Dec 09. Permalink.

God I love Sivivatu. Not just for his deceptive running, which must be the best in the world - any arguments? - more coz he thinks he's a forward half the time: he pops up in the middle of the field to dive into a ruck he's really got no business being in, or carries the ball in a pick and go. Just the work rate.

I wish NZ had played South Africa up north, they woulda spanked 'em. Bit late I know for the ol' Tri Nations, but man I hate the Boks' boring but deadly effective gameplan. IIRC I THINK I saw them construct a try in the Lions series... first one for a few years if I did. I was probably hallucinating... Oh that's right, it was that one-off TN game when they spanked the Wallabies in Aussie. Now THAT was out of character.

And: Cory Jane. Wing or fullback? Muliaina stepped up coz he sure has to...

Posted at 5:46PM on 1 Dec 09. Permalink.

Russell Brown wrote :

... and have Smith as the no. 2 tackler, ...

But for some reason, he almost never appears in the missed/slipped tackles column ! He is an awesome player.

Posted at 5:49PM on 1 Dec 09. Permalink.

Yeah gotta love Smith. For a slow, skinny lawyer he is an exceptional player.

Obviously I mean slow as in, only compared to other All Blacks... skinny, I definitely mean next to me.

Posted at 6:48PM on 1 Dec 09. Permalink.

It would be nice to see Brendan Leonard stay fit long enough to properly challenge for his position,

I might just be a parochial Wellingtonian but I'd pick a fit Piri as my starting halfback.
Give me a backline of Piri, Carter, Sivi, Nonu, Smith, Jane, Mils and you've got a superb set of players!

I think C. Jane isn't getting the plaudits he deserves. He is truly truly world class. That Hutt Fend he's got is brutal and he's quick, awesome under the high-ball and can tackle well.

Posted at 6:58PM on 1 Dec 09. Permalink.

I think C. Jane isn't getting the plaudits he deserves. He is truly truly world class. That Hutt Fend he's got is brutal and he's quick, awesome under the high-ball and can tackle well.

I think his balance is extraordinary. That was the key to his try, for sure.

Posted at 7:11PM on 1 Dec 09. Permalink.

Great--I have found the rugby discussion.

It would be nice to see Brendan Leonard stay fit long enough to properly challenge for his position

In the Waikato Times tonight he is talking about perfecting his dive pass from the base of the scrum as he reckons it gives a split-second advantage over rampaging forwards. The biggest disappointment for me has been that Aled de Malmanche hasn't been given a run, after dragging him away from holidaying in Bali.

Posted at 7:42PM on 1 Dec 09. Permalink.

You know, as soon as I saw the post's header, I immediately thought "this is going to be about that test against Pakistan" rather than the (admittedly satisfying) All Blacks victory.

So I'm going to be disingenuous and talk about the test match. Christ, it was a beauty, the only bum note is the news that Bond injured himself again in the aftermath. This time it seems more explicable, though, he pretty much bowled himself to a standstill. Some of his spells- particularly his first one on Day 2, and then in the final session of the test match- were as good as any I've seen by a NZer bowler. He really managed to put the fear of god in the opposition and there was a sense that he was always only one delivery away from turning the match back in the Black Caps' favour.

Jeez, the players made hard work of it, really, it should've been a canter after setting up the 100 run lead, but you've got to hand it to the Pakistan bowlers' in the second innings- they were tight, sensible and attacking- as well as the young Umar Akmal, who was just astonishing.

But Bond- along with the astute captaincy of Vettori (and his first innings with the bat)- was the difference. It's been a while since test cricket has seen proper fast bowling, too- him and Steyn aside, there really isn't anyone around to match the giants of the 70s, 80s and 90s- which may be the reason (along with the advent of 20/20) as to why the match has become so depressingly batsman-dominated this decade.

Posted at 8:08PM on 1 Dec 09. Permalink.

I was keen to talk cricket too Matthew, but didn't want to derail. But since you went there...

The victory was satisfying, but should have happened a lot more comfortably than that - Im just getting tired of the second-innings capitulations our top order seem to specialise in.

Im also frustrated by Bond's injury. Not with Bond himself, who (as Matthew noted above) was a class apart, but by the fact he was put in that position in the first place. It is ridiculous taking only 4 specialist bowlers into a test, given our bowling attack's propensity for injury. I mean it's Bond's first test after how many years, and he's given that kind of workload? Madness.

OTOH, Its undeniable that strengthening the batting lineup paid dividends. I mean, where would we have been without Peter Fulton's contribution, for example?

Posted at 8:25PM on 1 Dec 09. Permalink.

I agree with everything you said there, Andy. While I thought Fulton deserved another chance (despite his poor showing here), the makeup of the team left our resources dangerously stretched.

Actually, a swap of Elliot for Franklin or Tuffey would've been enough- having Tuffey there may have even provided a touch more force to the bowling attack, and while Franklin hasn't yet convinced as a no.6, he he's good enough in both the batting and bowling department to cover some cracks, as long as you've got Bond and Martin at full pelt.

Bond bowled nearly 50 overs, never once dropped his speed below 138km/h., and regularly got up close to 150km/h. I think that in itself gives an idea of how much he put his body through during that match.

Posted at 9:16PM on 1 Dec 09. Permalink.

It seems they'll persist with the same team makeup for wellington too, albeit with Elliott chucking down a few more overs. That doesn't seem that smart either, with both Elliot (knee) and Vettori (shoulder?) also carrying injuries. Losing one mid test would be a huge problem, but both... who do you go to next, Taylor to lob down a few?

This kind of side is OK in a one-day game, but the imbalance could be horribly exposed in the next test.

Posted at 9:48PM on 1 Dec 09. Permalink.

I reckon Justin Marshall is going to be an awesome commentator when he fully retires, just the tonic we need in the commentary box.

I can't understand how everyone is talking up this win as showing how rugby should be played. I would have thought the lesson every coach in the world would have seen in 10 metre high flashing neon lights is "DON'T TRY AND PLAY THE ALL BLACKS AT THEIR OWN GAME".

Surely the advice you'd give your players up against the All Blacks would be kick the ball downfield, play offside as often as possible and kick the penalties - i.e like the Springboks?

Posted at 10:52PM on 1 Dec 09. Permalink.

@Matthew,

It's the turf scientists, acting on instructions (a guaranteed 5 day test... TV etc) that are ruining not only test cricket but also the shorter versions.

IMO that was a great test.

We got to the final session of the last day, and the team ahead by at least a neck lost. This has been floating around the cricket blogs over the last few days and no-one else can recall that happening before.

As for the bowling; in this test we had 3 seamers, all of whom had good matches, with a combined age > 100. And then there's Tuffey in the wings keeping up the average.

And then there's Southee aged 20. We lost a genration somewhere.

Posted at 11:45PM on 1 Dec 09. Permalink.

It's the turf scientists, acting on instructions (a guaranteed 5 day test... TV etc) that are ruining not only test cricket but also the shorter versions.

Absolutely. The series against India, while entertaining solely for the sheer talent of the tourists, was also oddly depressing in that the pitches offered very little for the bowlers and thus lessened the chance for a genuine contest- even in the second test, when NZ forced India to follow on still trailing in their second innings by close to 300 runs, a draw still seemed the most likely result.

The Dunedin pitch was great- there was clearly enough for the batsmen if they applied themselves (as Umar, and to a lesser extent, Taylor, proved), but enough stuff in it for the bowlers to give the batsmen a fright.

Both Asif and Bond swung it like crazy, while that delivery Martin bowled to Yosuf in that second innings was an absolute peach. For it to still be that lively on the fifth day was a credit to the groundsmen.

It was absolutely a proper test match and you could tell both sides enjoyed the hell out of it. I was actually in Dunedin this weekend and managed to catch most of the last day. I also saw quite a few of the cricketers out on the town, Taylor, Guptil and Martin were unsurprisingly swamped by people, but the Pakistani cricketers were no less popular. Which was good to see.

It dawned on me it may have been quite a culture shock for some of the younger Pakistan players, such as Umar and Annear, though they seemed to be enjoying the attention.

Bond's injury is depressing because this was shaping up to be a classic series and he was the key.

Posted at 6:06AM on 2 Dec 09. Permalink.

And McCaw. What a freak.

So it wasn't just that they let us play.

Thank you Russell. There were some brilliant individual performances in that match, and it was really fun to watch. I'm going to stop complaining now until next season.

And is this the first time we've ever won rugby and cricket tests on the same day?

Speaking of cricket, is anyone going to be there this week? I'll be there on Thursday.

Posted at 9:04AM on 2 Dec 09. Permalink.

What Matthew said. IOB's dismissal of Malik in the same fashion as Martin getting Yousuf was also a peach, and came from nowhere.

@Megan. You bet.