First 2 pages of this thread was about throwing Benji on. Lolz. Surplus to requirements yesterday. JK learnt a harsh lesson last year, so I'm a little bit more tolerant about how they progress this year. It was Sir GH that pushed for SBW - So I think they have some kind of judgement on when or how it's best to use Benji.
Our forwards need alot more work. Not just in the set pieces but just in the grind of the game. We're gonna get torn apart by the Saffers if they don't get it right.
Tuipolotu was outstanding last week and last night and hopefully when Kaino gets on board and Kevvie starts, we have a little bit more penetration from our forwards from the get go. Luatua dropping off tackles but for mine, Tom Donnelly was probably the best forward on the park.
Hickey was fantastic, he did what he needed to do, was smart and just let his outside backs dictate when they needed the ball. I think after Carlos, we've been stuck on a rotation of first fives who just presume to think they should be the show, rather than running the show. He had better support from Weepu which Noakes didn't get last week. (imo)
The Saders' seem to lack some imagination. They had a fair bit of dominance but couldn't do anything with it. Andy Ellis was fantastic. Not a big fan of his but it was hard to deny his influence. I thought the crusaders lacked some genuine x-factor in their backline. No real penetration in their midfield and when they weren't able to use their smarts to get around the blues, they didn't have anything.
The trials are over, first game jitters should have been gone, now is the time for the teams to have, at the very least, their defensive systems in place. A little bit of x-factor will go along way.
I've always had a bit of time for Andy Ellis. He is an excellent support player, has a very good kicking game, and I think he reads the game better than any other halfback in the country. The thing that has always held him back is his passing - indeed that is the main reason he isn't still in the AB's now. At best is passing can be described as 'ok', but I thought it was very poor last night. It lacked any speed, and was very inaccurate. I can't remember a single time Tom Taylor was given a flat pass he could actually run onto - a lot of the passes he took well above his head or down very low. Ellis's passing has never been fantastic but is usually ok - the Crusaders need much better service from him if they want to create anything on attack.
I don't think Heinz is half the player that Ellis is - he doesn't control the game near as well and is prone to the odd shocker, but he does have a much better pass. I just wonder whether they will consider starting Heinz next week and see what the backline can do with a bit more time and space (Ellis can always come on if Heinz is struggling).
Only time will tell if they are right about Benji... in the meantime they can either win or loose the competition while they fluff around with three other 10's.
Im still not convinced any of the other first five options for the blues will last more than a season or two. Face it they struck a Crusaders team that was very very poor for over half of this match. That is not the way a Crusaders outfit usually plays. When the Blues started getting every bounce of the ball the Crusaders looked like a bunch of stunned mullets. No way are the blues going to get THAT lucky in every game.
In saying that i do think Henry and Co out thought blackadder in this game... it seemed alot like they almost worked the crusaders out in this game and played to their own strengths instead of to the Crusaders which put them out of there comfort zone bigtime.
There is no guarantee either Kerr or Hickey last more than a season or two, but based on the evidence thus far I think they are clearly better options than Benji Marshall. I can understand people calling for Marshall ahead of Noakes - Noakes is as good as he will ever be - but Kerr and Hickey are both very talented young players with the potential to be excellent Super Rugby players. Let's compare the players:
Marshall is 29, has basically no experience at rugby union, and showed nothing in the pre-season to suggest he is ready for Super Rugby. He can however pass the ball behind his back.
Kerr is 24, has been outstanding for Counties over the last two ITM Cup seasons, and has not looked out of place at Super Rguby level so far. He is a strong defender, can take the ball to the line, and seems to know how to control the game.
Hickey has just turned 20, and is one of the most talented young 10's in NZ rugby. He is an excellent goal-kicker, has a good tactical kicking game, is a courageous defender, and doesn't mind taking the ball to the line. He started for the NZ U20 side last season, and is still eligible for them this season. He had a very good ITM Cup last season for Auckland as a 19 years old, and had just made a very promising debut for the Blues.
I'm sure the Blues will feel obliged to play Marshall given the price the paid for him, but investing in Kerr or Hickey would be far better bets if they are looking to the future (as well as being the best option right now). I'm not saying that Marshall won't develop into a quality Rugby Union player, but if he does it will take some time (I'm thinking years rather than weeks), especially given 10 is a very specialist position (how many league players have successful been transformed in 10's in union?).
I do agree with you though - if the Crusaders want to win the ***le they really want to top the NZ conference. Hamilton has not been very happy hunting ground for them recently.....
