Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
Forums
Rugby Union
Super Rugby
2014 Super Rugby: Crusaders v Stormers (Round 4)
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Shaggy" data-source="post: 628601" data-attributes="member: 43400"><p>I wasn't suggesting that the quality of the attack be solely judged on the number of tackles made, but also on the quality of the defense/where and when the tackles were made, and that the number of clean line breaks by either team was as a result of the good defense ... I say the attack wasn't as good as it could have been because of the good defense, you say the defense looked better because of the poor attack ... I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on that.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I agree that I would like to see Taufua get some game time, and that the blindside flank is the likely position that that will occur, but I feel that it will have to occur off the bench because the Whitelock brothers offer a lineout option that Taufua probably doesn't</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I don't think your being completely fair to the Stormers there ... I would suggest that their effort (particularly on defense), suggests that "normal business has, or is close to resuming ... you can't really compare them to how they were playing a couple of weeks ago. my comment about normal business resuming for the Crusaders was more to do with them not making the mistakes, like over running the passes on attack (like they id against the Chiefs), and chasing down and making the covering tackles (a better defensive effort than against the Blues). It's hard to put my finger on it, but I think that they aren't trying to play as a bunch of individuals as much, and the forwards seem to have a much better performance in open play, than in previous weeks ... as I said, it was an indication that "normal business <strong>will </strong>resume" not "<strong>has </strong>resumed"</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>No, I'm not convinced about Fonotia at this level yet either ... but, Lee-lo has yet to fire, and my case for giving him a go, is that the Crusaders in previous years, have relied on their 13 to break the gain line for them, and they have used big players to do it ala Fruean and Laulala. While I don't profess to being an expert on back play by any means, I have noted that a good pairing of 12 and 13, that know each others play, seems to go a long way towards a teams success, and Crotty and Fonotia have been playing together since they were nippers ... not suggesting that Fonotia is definitely the solution, just worth starting to see if he's up to it ... they can always bring Slade on to take over the 10 sport, and move Taylor and Crotty out to 12 and 13, if things go wrong</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Shaggy, post: 628601, member: 43400"] I wasn't suggesting that the quality of the attack be solely judged on the number of tackles made, but also on the quality of the defense/where and when the tackles were made, and that the number of clean line breaks by either team was as a result of the good defense ... I say the attack wasn't as good as it could have been because of the good defense, you say the defense looked better because of the poor attack ... I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on that. I agree that I would like to see Taufua get some game time, and that the blindside flank is the likely position that that will occur, but I feel that it will have to occur off the bench because the Whitelock brothers offer a lineout option that Taufua probably doesn't I don't think your being completely fair to the Stormers there ... I would suggest that their effort (particularly on defense), suggests that "normal business has, or is close to resuming ... you can't really compare them to how they were playing a couple of weeks ago. my comment about normal business resuming for the Crusaders was more to do with them not making the mistakes, like over running the passes on attack (like they id against the Chiefs), and chasing down and making the covering tackles (a better defensive effort than against the Blues). It's hard to put my finger on it, but I think that they aren't trying to play as a bunch of individuals as much, and the forwards seem to have a much better performance in open play, than in previous weeks ... as I said, it was an indication that "normal business [B]will [/B]resume" not "[B]has [/B]resumed" No, I'm not convinced about Fonotia at this level yet either ... but, Lee-lo has yet to fire, and my case for giving him a go, is that the Crusaders in previous years, have relied on their 13 to break the gain line for them, and they have used big players to do it ala Fruean and Laulala. While I don't profess to being an expert on back play by any means, I have noted that a good pairing of 12 and 13, that know each others play, seems to go a long way towards a teams success, and Crotty and Fonotia have been playing together since they were nippers ... not suggesting that Fonotia is definitely the solution, just worth starting to see if he's up to it ... they can always bring Slade on to take over the 10 sport, and move Taylor and Crotty out to 12 and 13, if things go wrong [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rugby Union
Super Rugby
2014 Super Rugby: Crusaders v Stormers (Round 4)
Top