ABs2011
First XV
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2011
- Messages
- 1,520
- Country Flag
- Club or Nation
The Doomsayer wasn't aimed at you, it was aimed at your response to the other post. Sorry for being a bit vague.
I think Hansen is taking a bit of a gamble.
Changes at Hooker and 2 new backrow changes plus inside centre. Those are 4 vital tactical positions. If your Hooker gets frazzled or is under pressure, then your first phase ball possession is lost. Having 2 new flankers can be detrimental to getting momentum. And Nonu, after just coming back from injury could be a defensive liability.
All this considered, they are quality players, and shouldn't have any problems. I just think that this is more fuel to the fire for the Boks to win.
Some other interesting stats:
The last time the All Blacks lost the Tri-Nations was when they were smashed the previous EOYT by a NH team.
Saturday is the Jewish holiday of Yom Kippur, and interestingly enough, in 1937 when the Boks last won at Eden Park, it was also on the Yom Kippur holiday.
The Stars are aligned!!
I don't agree with that at all really. A gamble?
Firstly, as everyone knows, Sam Cane is a forced change, and he is the logical replacement. Can't be considered a risky move seeing as Hansen was forced into the change.
The second change in the backrow, to most Kiwis I would imagine, was predictable. Messam is the incumbent #6, and for reasons already discussed in detail it is logical he returns. Again, not risky at all, as Hansen knows exactly what Messam will give, not to mention he is preferred tactically for such a game, and he has a developed combination with Sam Cane as well.
Nonu was rested last week, while it might be technically correct to say he is "returning from injury". The reality is he's been playing through the high ankle sprain for months and I promise you he would have played last week if last weeks game was v SA. Again, he is the incumbent and this was not a unexpected change at all, nor a risk.
The only positional change which might be considered a risk is at Hooker. As mentioned, it appears to be a trade-off between superior lineout abilities and ball carrying vs experience and maybe scrummageing. Risky?? Meh, maybe, but with Mealamu on the bench if it doesnt go well, he gets pulled. I think it's a good call to be honest. I'm not a big fan of Coles (unpleasant experience on the turps in Wellington) but I respect his Rugby game, and think he probably offers a bit more than the two older blokes Hansen could have gone with.
I don't think Hansen is taking a gamble at all.
I guess Hansen could have gone with Hore or Mealamu at hooker and that might be considered less risky, but who do you consider would have been less of a gamble re the other 3 changes?
Last edited: