Rugby Championship: New Zealand - Australia (25/08/2012)

[welshglory]

Oh yea i remember that. You can't really be a prat to your coach

 

[Draggs]

Oh yea i remember that. You can't really be a prat to your coach

Yeah, that ends poorly.
Giteau often seemed to get blamed for losses. His goal kicking did cost the Aussies, but they knew it was his weakness and kept him first choice kicker.
He has looked very good at Toulon outside Wilkinson.

 

[Zapphod]

It makes sense for those guys to talk up NZ having just been soundly beaten by them twice. After all, if you lose to a supposedly great team it can't be your fault, right? Personally, I wouldn't read too much into it.

I agree I think all this talk of the All Blacks being so far ahead of their opposition is just arse covering by Deans and co. to try and negate two horrible performances by a Wallabies team that has looked decidedly lost for the last 12 months but for all of our supposed dominance we failed to score in the last 35 minutes of a match that had we dominated should have become a route.

My guess for the remainder of the 4N is two close matches against Argentina and a win and an away loss to South Africa.

 

[psychic duck]

Yeah, that ends poorly.
Giteau often seemed to get blamed for losses. His goal kicking did cost the Aussies, but they knew it was his weakness and kept him first choice kicker.
He has looked very good at Toulon outside Wilkinson.

I also think Giteau was thrown aside too quickly. They could have just selected another player in the team to goal kick.

I would definitely prefer Giteau at 12 than Ant Finger or Pat McCabe.

 

[Gavin]

With James O'Connor now first choice kicker it would have helped Giteau concentrate on his game. Australian back-line of Genia, Cooper, Giteau, AAC, Ioane, O'Connor, Beale looks bloody fantastic to me. Everyone bar Genia and Ioane could interchange with other positions and there is four possible goal kickers as well in the side.

 

[Larksea]

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/rugby/news/article.cfm?c_id=80&objectid=10830094

I don't mean to burst his bubble or attack the Aussies.

But Australia have been the Young Guns for four-five years now. I said all along the biggest mistake Deans made was to basically get rid of his old guard. George Smith, Phil Waugh, Stirling Mortlock, Matt Giteau and a number of others. Rather than trying to find a good mix he went for almost all youth and 5 years later it still hasn't really paid off.

The other major problem with this argument is that calling the AB's oldies is a mistake too. There are a large number of players in the AB's squad under 25 who are going to haunt the Aussies for a long time. Sam Whitelock, Brodie Retalick, Sam Cane, Owen Franks, Israel Dagg, Julean Savea, Aaron Cruden. And a lot who are only 25-28 Importantly these young guys have the experience around them to make sure they develop to their potential. In fact the only area of real concern for 2015 and beyond is Hooker. Maybe the worst thing for Australia in the trans Tasman battle is that the AB's now have genuine options at 7 and 10 other than McCaw and Carter and that their gameplan does not revolve around them as much as it used too.

I honestly think the one area Uncle Ted aced Deans in was bringing in the right amount of young talent and keeping an adequate number of experienced players in the squad and in good form wanting to contribute. If Deans run ends early and without success I think this will be his biggest mistake - thinking he could coach an Australian under 25 side to beat the All Blacks.

EDIT: interesting you're talking about Giteau, I did not see that till after I posted this.

 

[psychic duck]

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/rugby/news/article.cfm?c_id=80&objectid=10830094

I don't mean to burst his bubble or attack the Aussies.

But Australia have been the Young Guns for four-five years now. I said all along the biggest mistake Deans made was to basically get rid of his old guard. George Smith, Phil Waugh, Stirling Mortlock, Matt Giteau and a number of others. Rather than trying to find a good mix he went for almost all youth and 5 years later it still hasn't really paid off.

The other major problem with this argument is that calling the AB's oldies is a mistake too. There are a large number of players in the AB's squad under 25 who are going to haunt the Aussies for a long time. Sam Whitelock, Brodie Retalick, Sam Cane, Owen Franks, Israel Dagg, Julean Savea, Aaron Cruden. And a lot who are only 25-28 Importantly these young guys have the experience around them to make sure they develop to their potential. In fact the only area of real concern for 2015 and beyond is Hooker. Maybe the worst thing for Australia in the trans Tasman battle is that the AB's now have genuine options at 7 and 10 other than McCaw and Carter and that their gameplan does not revolve around them as much as it used too.

I honestly think the one area Uncle Ted aced Deans in was bringing in the right amount of young talent and keeping an adequate number of experienced players in the squad and in good form wanting to contribute. If Deans run ends early and without success I think this will be his biggest mistake - thinking he could coach an Australian under 25 side to beat the All Blacks.

EDIT: interesting you're talking about Giteau, I did not see that till after I posted this.

A good post.

Deans actually also discarded Sharpe for a season as well but he was missed to an extent he had to bring him back.

Even though Pocock was coming through, in the periods he was injured you would have surely had a better chance beating the All Blacks with George Smith or Phil Waugh than Matt Hodgson or Michael Hooper.

Giteau was also discarded to rapidly as mentioned above, and most seem to agree above they would still have him in the squad. Probably starting above Barnes or Ant Finger at 12.

Deans also threw in some rookies into the team who weren't really ready to challenge at the top level. James Slipper for example wasn't starting for the Reds when he was first called up, and was then destroyed by England and has continually struggled on occasions (it was when he came on against Scotland that Euan Murray found an advantage in the scrum).

 

[Draggs]

Barnes is up and down. The problem is he is either played inside McCabe or outside Cooper. Barnes-Giteau would offer stability and attacking skill as they can alternate first receiver.
Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't Giteau's contract ending next year, meaning he could make the Wallabies (provided Deans is gone).

 

[TRF Mr Fish]

Giteau was one of the few players that I actually worried about. Cooper's more off than on, and the other's are just very good players.

 

[admartian]

You would think that, wouldn't you! However the opening line of "Hey babe, did you know that I have known that Ben Smith is awesome for years?" never seems to work for some unknown reason This is perhaps a good thing though , as I can't imagine my wife would be that impressed if I got "all the laaaadieees"....

In the event that women are throwing themselves at you, and fear you might get in trouble with your wife just think - "what would Ben Smith do?"

Any Aussie fans starting to regret Matt Giteau heading to Toulon for so long? He has been playing very well at both 10 and 12.

Yep - I was wtf when Giteau went.

If I'm not mistaken, wasn't it due to 1 or 2 kicks? Which is understandable if it was someone like Lachie Munro (who's prime reason for being included in the first place is because of his kicking) but Gitreau is a well rounded player.

Especially at the time.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/rugby/news/article.cfm?c_id=80&objectid=10830094

I don't mean to burst his bubble or attack the Aussies.

But Australia have been the Young Guns for four-five years now. I said all along the biggest mistake Deans made was to basically get rid of his old guard. George Smith, Phil Waugh, Stirling Mortlock, Matt Giteau and a number of others. Rather than trying to find a good mix he went for almost all youth and 5 years later it still hasn't really paid off.

The other major problem with this argument is that calling the AB's oldies is a mistake too. There are a large number of players in the AB's squad under 25 who are going to haunt the Aussies for a long time. Sam Whitelock, Brodie Retalick, Sam Cane, Owen Franks, Israel Dagg, Julean Savea, Aaron Cruden. And a lot who are only 25-28 Importantly these young guys have the experience around them to make sure they develop to their potential. In fact the only area of real concern for 2015 and beyond is Hooker. Maybe the worst thing for Australia in the trans Tasman battle is that the AB's now have genuine options at 7 and 10 other than McCaw and Carter and that their gameplan does not revolve around them as much as it used too.

I honestly think the one area Uncle Ted aced Deans in was bringing in the right amount of young talent and keeping an adequate number of experienced players in the squad and in good form wanting to contribute. If Deans run ends early and without success I think this will be his biggest mistake - thinking he could coach an Australian under 25 side to beat the All Blacks.

EDIT: interesting you're talking about Giteau, I did not see that till after I posted this.

Absolutely agree.

Teams with 1 or 2 older prominent players are always going to get this label. Even though if you average the age of the current 28-30 man squad (plus other prospects on the fringe) that the mean age would be pretty young.

I would go to say around 24-27 years old.

 

[Draggs]

I think Ben Smith is quickly approaching TRF-god status.

 

[admartian]

I think Ben Smith is quickly approaching TRF-god status.

Next to Gordon D'Arcy and Ed Fairhurst?

 

[TRF Mr Fish]

Average age of the kiwi team is just under 27. Dunno about the Oz team.

The key thing, however, is that the Oz team wouldn't be far off in caps - perhaps they have more potential, but that doesn't explain why they do so poorly against NZ, at least based on experience.

 

[Draggs]

Next to Gordon D'Arcy and Ed Fairhurst?

D'Arcy isn't a TRF god, is he?
Chabal (as overrated as he is) and Fairhurst are the two I know.

 

[admartian]

Average age of the kiwi team is just under 27. Dunno about the Oz team.

The key thing, however, is that the Oz team wouldn't be far off in caps - perhaps they have more potential, but that doesn't explain why they do so poorly against NZ, at least based on experience.

I've never seen potential win anything in life or sport.

D'Arcy isn't a TRF god, is he?
Chabal (as overrated as he is) and Fairhurst are the two I know.

Hm, not sure either.

Maybe some of the TRF-Priests/Clerics can shed some more light on this.

 

[Colombia]

Carter has always been a world class kicker, both from hand or at goal. I do agree in some ways though that Carter isn't the attacking threat that he used to be, but he is still far and away the best 10 in world rugby. There is no way either he nor McCaw will be 'phased out' anytime soon, as they are still playing world class rugby.

Not really, he is no Morne Steyn or Jonny Wilkinson in that respect and he's no JMH in terms of his tactical kicking but his dangerous running game and ample opportunities afforded to him by his pack tended to gloss over that. I would still rate him as the best flyhalf in test rugby albeit the level of competition is not great as it had been in the past. Definitely not the player he was and McCaw's decline is also visible, I think they will be phased out over the next year. It's emotive for NZ supporters so I would expect their views to differ, father time however waits for no man.

 

[Darwin]

Not really, he is no Morne Steyn or Jonny Wilkinson in that respect and he's no JMH in terms of his tactical kicking but his dangerous running game and ample opportunities afforded to him by his pack tended to gloss over that. I would still rate him as the best flyhalf in test rugby albeit the level of competition is not great as it had been in the past. Definitely not the player he was and McCaw's decline is also visible, I think they will be phased out over the next year. It's emotive for NZ supporters so I would expect their views to differ, father time however waits for no man.

How many times have you watched Dan Carter play? Not trying to sound smart or anything, it just sounds like you are describing a different player to the one I know!

Carter hasn't always been on his best goal-kicking form at Super Rugby level, but when he gets a black jersey on there is no doubt he is a world class goal-kicker. For some reason they don't seem to keep goal-kicking percentages at test level (or, if they do, they are difficult to find!), but I would be surprised if there are many goal-kickers in the history of test rugby with a better goal-kicking percentage than Carter. This suggest that up until September last year Carter had kicked 439/530 at test level (83%) - if that doesn't make him a world class goal-kicker I don't know what will! He has kicked 24/29 (83%) in tests so far this season (so continues to be a quality test goal kicker), meanwhile Morne Steyn has kicked 21/35 (60%) over the same period......

Likewise there is little doubt that Carter is a world class tactical kicker too. Tactical kicking is in some ways a harder thing to gauge as it cannot be measured statistically, but I don't know of any players in world rugby with a better tactical kicking game than Carter. He has a massive punt on him, and reads the game so well that he can often find space. There are plenty of 10's even within the New Zealand game that having better running games than him (Cruden, Barrett, Sopoaga all immediately come to mind), but there are none even close to him in terms of tactical kicking (though Cruden is still improving in this aspect of his game). I haven't seen a huge amount of JMH (so I could be off the mark with my assessment of him), but to be honest I didn't think he had a very strong tactical kicking game at all. He can kick the ball very high (and he does that a lot), but that doesn't make him a great tactical kicker in my books!

Again, while there is a chance that Carter and McCaw will be 'phased out' before the next Rugby World Cup, it certainly wont happen any time soon. They have been signed for 4 years, and are both still the best players in their positions in New Zealand (/ the world in terms of Carter). I'm not sure whether McCaw will make it to the next Rugby World Cup, but I would be surprised if Carter is not there.

 

[Shaggy]

McCaw and Carter may not both make the starting open side or five-eight for the next world cup, but they won't relenquish their starting spots in the near future. Even if they aren't starting in 2015, I think they would be immense as subs, closing out those close games ... they would bring that composure that you need in those types of games

 

[Captain Fantastic]

Not really, he is no Morne Steyn or Jonny Wilkinson in that respect and he's no JMH in terms of his tactical kicking but his dangerous running game and ample opportunities afforded to him by his pack tended to gloss over that. I would still rate him as the best flyhalf in test rugby albeit the level of competition is not great as it had been in the past. Definitely not the player he was and McCaw's decline is also visible, I think they will be phased out over the next year. It's emotive for NZ supporters so I would expect their views to differ, father time however waits for no man.

Morne draws as much emptions from his supporters (though negative) as did JW did from the Pom brigrade when he had a brief stay at the top of the mantle as best fly half. Interesting that JW had the results with a pack that gave him the platform that the NZ pack has always given DC. Yet JW has never reached the heights, consistency and longevity that DC has. As for Morne I dont even know how you can put him into the same bracket as DC and JW as he sincerely is a "kak" fly half!

You are right that the competition is a click or two down particuarly from the NH where the game bar the Welsh is becming weaker. The Argentinians will benefit iimmensely from their inclusion into the RC and will in due time move into the top 3/4 teams of the world.

 

[admartian]

Not really, he is no Morne Steyn or Jonny Wilkinson in that respect and he's no JMH in terms of his tactical kicking but his dangerous running game and ample opportunities afforded to him by his pack tended to gloss over that. I would still rate him as the best flyhalf in test rugby albeit the level of competition is not great as it had been in the past. Definitely not the player he was and McCaw's decline is also visible, I think they will be phased out over the next year. It's emotive for NZ supporters so I would expect their views to differ, father time however waits for no man.

Are you watching rugby or a different game?

No one is saying he hasn't slowed down - strictly speaking of speed/acceleration. To deny him of the completeness is very Stephen Jones of you. In fact, welcome to the forums Stephen! You're trying to paint him as just a runner that can kinda kick...

Carter may not have the out and out percentage, but he's definitely amongst the top tier. Not to mention, his situation goal kicking is probably the best.

His kicking from hand is where everything about the post really falls down, Stephen. And to argue against it, really is a waste of time. Don't get me wrong, this is not a cop out. More to a 'do not feed the trolls'.

How many times have you watched Dan Carter play? Not trying to sound smart or anything, it just sounds like you are describing a different player to the one I know!

Carter hasn't always been on his best goal-kicking form at Super Rugby level, but when he gets a black jersey on there is no doubt he is a world class goal-kicker. For some reason they don't seem to keep goal-kicking percentages at test level (or, if they do, they are difficult to find!), but I would be surprised if there are many goal-kickers in the history of test rugby with a better goal-kicking percentage than Carter. This suggest that up until September last year Carter had kicked 439/530 at test level (83%) - if that doesn't make him a world class goal-kicker I don't know what will! He has kicked 24/29 (83%) in tests so far this season (so continues to be a quality test goal kicker), meanwhile Morne Steyn has kicked 21/35 (60%) over the same period......

Likewise there is little doubt that Carter is a world class tactical kicker too. Tactical kicking is in some ways a harder thing to gauge as it cannot be measured statistically, but I don't know of any players in world rugby with a better tactical kicking game than Carter. He has a massive punt on him, and reads the game so well that he can often find space. There are plenty of 10's even within the New Zealand game that having better running games than him (Cruden, Barrett, Sopoaga all immediately come to mind), but there are none even close to him in terms of tactical kicking (though Cruden is still improving in this aspect of his game). I haven't seen a huge amount of JMH (so I could be off the mark with my assessment of him), but to be honest I didn't think he had a very strong tactical kicking game at all. He can kick the ball very high (and he does that a lot), but that doesn't make him a great tactical kicker in my books!

Again, while there is a chance that Carter and McCaw will be 'phased out' before the next Rugby World Cup, it certainly wont happen any time soon. They have been signed for 4 years, and are both still the best players in their positions in New Zealand (/ the world in terms of Carter). I'm not sure whether McCaw will make it to the next Rugby World Cup, but I would be surprised if Carter is not there.

Agreed.