[2014 TRC] New Zealand v Argentina in Napier (06/09/2014)

[squirrel]

I think people are a touch harsh on Carlos for that pass, it was a great read by Mortlock which probably stopped one of the ABs brown brothers from scoring in the corner, sometimes it pays off sometimes it doesn't, the next year he threw a great pass for Howlett to score in the corner to beat the Boks, don't know why I'm defending him cos I think the guy was a prick but I guess I'm not as biased as saintly nick likes to accuse me of.

 

[TheSaffycen]

Barrett is an incredible 10. He has the lot with ball in hand, I think that he is the best running 10 in the world with Quade Cooper, and i believe that he is worth what he misses in kicks with tries. The savea try is just incredible with the delayed pass and the weight is perfect that most will not make.

 

[Darwin]

yeah Barrett's goal kicking was just scary yesterday. It's okay to miss or have a bad game every once in a while, but when the kicks are that easy, and kicked THAT wide, and twice in a row the same easy kick just as wide both times, I'm wondering wtf he's doing on the pitch kicking for the New Zealand All-Blacks. So unless this was an absolute freak accident and he's usually 15x better, this is worrying and I don't want that guy taking responsibility when it's RWC time in a year for my team.

Barrett's goal-kicking is usually "15x better" so it isn't too worrying

That is the worst I have ever seen him kick, and I believe a lot of it may have been down to the ankle issues he was having late last week, which was the reason Dagg rather than Barrett was kicking to touch from penalties. I have no doubt his kicking will be substantially better next match.

I agree with that. Those are the two things. Looking at Cruden's kicking % stats I'm a bit surprised, as he just doesn't look like a sound kicker to me. I've seen him miss a lot as an AB, and it's often from the same points (slightly on the right for e.g.) and his kick is the flattest thing I've ever seen, no arc on his kicks...plus he doesn't seem to have a lot of range or force on those kicks either.
If I were a NZ'er, those would be the two areas I'd be concerned with, and I wouldn't be as comfortable with these two as all the rest.

Cruden's kicking is flat, and he doesn't get a lot of distance (40m max), but it is reasonably accurate. I had a quick look through his kicking stats at test level (collated from here). He has kicked 91/120 at test level - 76% - which is IMO an acceptable level. That certainly isn't in the same realms of Halfpenny, Steyn etc, but he isn't a liability in this regard. Does it concern me we don't have a world class goal-kicker? Slightly. The AB's game-plan does revolve somewhat about accumulating points and building scoreboard pressure, so we do need someone who can reliably accumulate points. Having a goal-kicker averaging 85%+ would be ideal, but I would rather have Cruden with all his skills kicking at ~75% than a Morne Steyn (with all his "skills") kicking at 90%

In terms of the front row, again I do agree it is a weaker area for NZ, but I won't be losing too much sleep thinking about it. For me our lack of depth is a bigger concern that our starting front row. Despite missing out first choice LH we actually held up pretty well at times against the Pumas (unlike South Africa before us). Obviously Argentina won the scrum battle, but we certainly weren't destroyed - 2/4 of our tries were directly from scrums! A front-row of Woodcock, Coles, and Owen Franks can hold it's own against most sides. If one of these starters are injured we are in a bit more trouble though. Crockett did ok against Argentina, but I still worry he will be penalised every scrum he packs down in. Moody made a good impact from the bench, but is still very inexperienced at this level. On the TH side Charlie Faumuina - our anointed backup to Owen Franks - has been disappointing and recently dropped from the bench due to lack of fitness. Ben Franks did well against Argentina but I still think he is better on the LH side, and he does have discipline issues. At hooker Coles is backed up by the 102 year-old Keven Mealamu, followed by Nathan Harris. I would love to point out he strengths and weaknesses of Harris but I don't know if anyone has actually seen him play before (I think he has a total of 4 starts at Super rugby level).

 

[smartcooky]

To be fair Argentina also got some very bad calls their way. Julian Savea being taken without the ball which likely stopped a try - while there was a bizarre moment where the referee basically prevented the All Blacks from getting a ball he got in the way of, blocking Aaron Smith and then not even awarding a scrum when he blatantly interfered with play. The result was a kick that brought play 40m down field.

To be fair regarding the Law as regards to the referee getting in the way, there is no Law that allows him to stop play of he gets in the way of play, only if the ball actually touches him.

[TEXTAREA]6.A.10 THE BALL TOUCHING THE REFEREE
(a) If the ball or the ball carrier touches the referee and neither team gains an advantage, play
continues. If either team gains an advantage in the field of play, the referee orders a scrum
and the team that last played the ball has the throw-in.

(b) If either team gains an advantage in in-goal, if the ball is in possession of an attacking
player the referee awards a try where the contact took place.

(c) If either team gains an advantage in in-goal, if the ball is in possession of a defending
player, the referee awards a touch down where the contact took place.[/TEXTAREA]

There was also another incident where all of the TO4 got it wrong. They penalised Savea for a late tackle when the Pumas receiver saw him coming and batted the ball on instead of catching it. Savea hit him a millisecond later. There is no way that can be called a late tackle. Savea was committed to tackle a player he reasonably expected to become the ball carrier at the time he tackles. He was not to know that the player would bat the ball on. Call this a late tackle, and it will make it very easy for players to "buy" a penalty.

 

[Larksea]

Argentina have picked up a Draw with the Boks and have almost beaten them a couple of times. Springboks have needed intercept trys/against the run of play to save games against Argi. I think its only a matter of time till they pick up a win against AUS or SA and they can pick up home bonus points against the All Blacks.

Good Game, I don't think all the bad calls were against the Argi's, remember the refs missed a blatant early tackle on Savea early in the game that probably saved a try.

As for that knock on/charge down.

Maybe smartcooky or someone with better nose for the rules can clear it up but I think there is a difference between a "charge down" when a player actually only tries to block the ball and not catch it and if a player actually tries to catch a kick but only knocks it forward. Maybe I need to look at it again but to me he looked like he was actually trying to catch it and knocked it on, he was not going for a charge down.

I thought Barrett was fantastic, apart from his kicking obviously. Conditions must have been tricky Slade came on a missed on from the same spot Barrett had been missing them.

Dagg was up and down, first min of the game he didn't commit to a high ball that I'd bet my life Ben Smith would have done everything to Nail. He made some really strong runs but also made a couple knock ons and totally butchered a pass that would have allowed Ben Smith to score.

Probably Ben Smiths quietest test, nothing wrong with that I guess play just didn't go his down that side. Actually it was a quiet game for a lot of All Blacks who were mostly solid while Barrett and Savea were the stars. And generally defense was superb.

No Messam or Sam Whitelock for the next few games. Locks are running low, Thrush is likely to start and Luatua to cover lock from the bench. Sam cane to start and McCaw to move to 6, Maybe Matt Todd to get a Bench slot? Or maybe someone like Shields or Luke Whitelock, Vito has been recovering from injury as well I think?

on a side note I thought Thrush did a good job when he came on.

 

[smartcooky]

As for that knock on/charge down.

Maybe smartcooky or someone with better nose for the rules can clear it up but I think there is a difference between a "charge down" when a player actually only tries to block the ball and not catch it and if a player actually tries to catch a kick but only knocks it forward. Maybe I need to look at it again but to me he looked like he was actually trying to catch it and knocked it on, he was not going for a charge down.

This is another decision that I thought he got wrong. This looks like a charge-down to me. I was taught the key to assessing a charge down is;

"did the opponent try to block the kick before or as it was made, or did he react to the kick after it was made?"

Before/As = charge down
After = knock forward

In this case, the Pumas player clearly has his arms up to block the kick before its made.

For mine, that is a charge down all day long. There is no way that the Pumas player was trying to catch the ball, so if the referee decides this was a knock-on, then it can only be intentional, therefore a penalty.

At the very least, he should have gone to the TMO.

 

[nickdnz]

To be fair regarding the Law as regards to the referee getting in the way, there is no Law that allows him to stop play of he gets in the way of play, only if the ball actually touches him.

[TEXTAREA]6.A.10 THE BALL TOUCHING THE REFEREE
(a) If the ball or the ball carrier touches the referee and neither team gains an advantage, play
continues. If either team gains an advantage in the field of play, the referee orders a scrum
and the team that last played the ball has the throw-in.

(b) If either team gains an advantage in in-goal, if the ball is in possession of an attacking
player the referee awards a try where the contact took place.

(c) If either team gains an advantage in in-goal, if the ball is in possession of a defending
player, the referee awards a touch down where the contact took place.[/TEXTAREA]

There was also another incident where all of the TO4 got it wrong. They penalised Savea for a late tackle when the Pumas receiver saw him coming and batted the ball on instead of catching it. Savea hit him a millisecond later. There is no way that can be called a late tackle. Savea was committed to tackle a player he reasonably expected to become the ball carrier at the time he tackles. He was not to know that the player would bat the ball on. Call this a late tackle, and it will make it very easy for players to "buy" a penalty.

I was under the impression he did touch the ball whilst skipping over it.

 

[Larksea]

on Cruden vs. barrett goal kicking its worth also considering that barrett has considerably more range than Cruden. In Barretts kicking record he will have taken a lot of kicks that Cruden would not even attempt.

Also note Barrett has been carring an injury to his right ankle since the aussie tests.