RWC: New Zealand - Japan (16-09-2011)

[TRF Mr Fish]

Regardless of what pool NZ is in, unless they have both SA and OZ in their pool they're probably going to go into the knock out stages undercooked. It's inevitable...

 

[Darwin]

I agree really. We've got Kahui and Sonny Bill Williams being experimented with on the wings, Piri Weepi being brought in at first receiver and it still looks like we haven't nailed down who is the best lock to partner Brad Thorn. These things should have been done in the Tri Nations already. You don't try out moving your second 5/8th to the wing in a Rugby World Cup. The terrible thing is, I think the AB selectors have immediately regretted selecting Guildford, so they see Kahui/SBW as a better/safer left wing than him. If Hosea Gear played in the last two matches, I think everyone can admit he'd have destroyed.

Any New Zealand wing could have 'destroyed' against Tonga and Japan - we don't need wings that can destroy against Tonga and Japan though, we need wings that can perform against the top teams. If Hosea Gear had had a strong Super Rugby season (rather than just an average one), and had strong performances for the AB's this year he would have had a chance to 'destroy' Japan and Tonga - however his form wasn't good enough to warrant him a spot in the squad. I don't think SBW is considered as a genuine starting wing option, they just wanted to see whether he is capable of covering the position from the bench (and give him some more gametime).

Anyways, a pretty convincing win for the AB's. The scrum was dominant - it probably doesn't mean much given the opposition, but it is sure to give them confidence. Kaino was absolutely immense again. Whenever it looks like he has been stopped with ball in hand he somehow just manages to power his way another 5m. I thought Thomson had a pretty strong game - mainly because he didn't get penalised too often! Vito did make a couple of good offloads, but was pretty quiet apart from that.

I thought Ellis played pretty well - his kicking was good, he generally got good ball out to the backs, and his support play was impressive. I actually thought Slade had a reasonably good game in general play. He made two mistakes (an early knock-on, and the intercept pass in Onozawa's try), but he created number of linebreaks with his passing (SBW's try immediately comes to mind). His kicking was pretty good - one try came directly from a beautifully weighted chip from him, and his defence was solid as always. His goal-kicking was poor, and remains a worry. However much better kickers than him have looked decidedly average at this RWC! Nonu and Smith were superb in the midfield, as was Kahui on the wing. SBW made a nice impact too when he came off the bench. Jane didn't get many chances, but did well whenever he got the ball, and I thought Toeava looked much more comfortable at fullback. He was generally creating for his team-mates, rather than trying to bust the line himself, but when he did run he looked very dangerous.

 

[William18]

I agree with all of that.

My backline would look something like this:

9. Cowan
10. Carter
11. Kahui
12. Nonu
13. Smith
14. Jane
15. Muliaina

20. Weepu
21. Williams
22. Dagg

Slade would be out to make avaliable that extra spot on the bench.

Edit: I'd only have Muliaina starting if he shows he still has the desire to be in the top XV. His experience and sturdyness will be needed in the playoffs but only if he can still provide for the team. We don't need a John Smit.

I completely agree with your team except I would have Ellis in for Cowan. I like Ellis as he seems to be the best at doing the basics and would still have Weepu off the bench to make the impact. Honestly, I don't think it matters who our wingers are as long as we don't pick Guildford. The rest of them are all world class players who will all do the job. I hope if we do lose the world cup people don't blame it on who is selected in the outside backs. There is just nothing to choose between the options.

Embarrassing. The japanese should be ashamed of themselves.
Kirwan needs to give himself an uppercut. Shame on him. He selected a very weak japanese side and he wanted his troops to go into the match EXPECTING to lose. Shameful. He should have played his best team and put them out so they can expect to WIN.
SHAME SHAME SHAME!

Also didnt help that Kaplan is blind and biased trying to give tries to the ABs when they didnt deserve it and also trying his best to prevent the japs from scoring any points at all. Shame on you Kaplan.

IRB, this match did NOTHING for Rugby. Hopefully the IRB prevent further Rubbish matches like this.

Really? Kirwan can choose his own selection policy and I thought the Japanese at least tried to attack and played with pride.

 

[nickdnz]

I think people are all actually wrong about SBW being offside. I've looked at the try in slow motion, and he's behind Kahui when the ball touches his foot, so he's never offside. Because it's on mysky, I can't upload it, but if you can find it and pause it from when Kahui's foot touches the ball, you can see SBW is actually behind him. I also agree that Toeava looks better at fullback, and it's what I've consistantly being saying since the EoYT. When he has time and space he's a creative, skillful player, when he's on the wing he becomes pressured and makes a few more errors. I'd rather see Toeava start at fullback and see Dagg move to the wing.

 

[SelimNiai]

I think people are all actually wrong about SBW being offside. I've looked at the try in slow motion, and he's behind Kahui when the ball touches his foot, so he's never offside. Because it's on mysky, I can't upload it, but if you can find it and pause it from when Kahui's foot touches the ball, you can see SBW is actually behind him. I also agree that Toeava looks better at fullback, and it's what I've consistantly being saying since the EoYT. When he has time and space he's a creative, skillful player, when he's on the wing he becomes pressured and makes a few more errors. I'd rather see Toeava start at fullback and see Dagg move to the wing.

There's a close up replay just before Kahui (bless you) kicks it where you think SBW must be off but no he wasn't offside.

 

[Colin]

What backline would you guys reckon we'll see against France?

 

[Black Heart]

What backline would you guys reckon we'll see against France?

It all depends on injuries and whether Graeme Henry is still willing to stick his fat, greedy finger into the experimentation pot again.

I think they'll keep Kahui on one wing and probably put Dagg on the other. The midfield is already a certainty with Nonu and Smith and they won't pull Muliaina out of fullback.

They'd then have Williams and Slade on the bench leaving no room for Jane or Toeava. Not my ideal lineup but I imagine it would look something like this.

 

[Larksea]

still some un-answered questions in the NZ backline and in some cases a scenario where they maybe have too many options.

I don't think Jane has secured his wing spot but if anything he's very safe under the high ball and he's been ok overall on defense but he never made much impact on attack against Japan which is a worry. I said before the game I expected him to have a big game and he needed one, he didn't have one.

Mills should be back at 15, Carter at 10, Cowan at 9 it really all comes down to that right wing spot.

Dagg you would say is just as effective with the high ball and defense but for sure he would offer more on attack than Jane currently so the coaches could be tempted to run him there, they have before on the left wing but a 15 should be happy either side if not Kahui can swap sides at the drop of a hat.

It's been a bit of a surprise not to see Guildford involved at all. No he didn't have such a good game against Aussie, still a bit of a shame. Zac is such a good player that when things are going his way he makes a very positive impact on the game with his superb work ethic and ability to run off Carter and find holes or run around the park following the ball and pop up as an extra man to create overlaps. It just may be now that he has found himself behind Jane and Toeava in the pecking order and may not get a chance unless there is an injury.

One thing I'd really like to see is Hore in the starting 15, he is one guy who can win turnovers in the current squad and his work in the tight is up with the best in the world, he's not the ball carrier Mealamu is but he will be involved in more rucks and tackled ball and he's more likely to make a turnover than McCaw or Thompson.

Either way the AB's will field what they see as their best lineup against france, they will see each game as a must win and the import thing to improve each game.

top team?
1, woodcock
2, Hore/Mealamu
3, Owen Franks
4, Thorn
5, Whitelock
6, Kaino
7, McCaw,
8, Vito
9, Cowan
10, Carter
11, Kahui
12, nonu
13, Smith
14, jane
15, Mills

16, Hore/Mealamu. 17, Ben Franks. 18, Boric/Williams. 19, Thompson. 20, Weepu. 21, Slade. 22, Williams/Dagg

If I were coach I would start Boric at 5 and consider my options at 14. maybe Start Williams and have Dagg in 22 as cover. Williams is a very good player and I'd like to see him involved but at the same time Dagg is awesome in the 22 role and can destroy teams in the last 20min. To have them both involved and preserve Nonu at 12 that would require SBW to start at 14. I don't see him having major issues there on defense Mills will help out with Kahui Rock Solid on the other side and It's not like Williams is a butterfingers - he has great hands, he's tall and reads well on defense. The other option obviously being to start Dagg on the wing with SBW in 22.

Have to wait and see

 

[donmcdazzle]

I really rate Boric too and would love to see him and Thorn as the starting locks. He has the same height and athleticism of Whitelock and Williams but is more physical.. give him a run!

Can't see how Mils would be picked given he hasn't played in ages. Stick with Dagg at the back. Jane has been hard done by so far, bugger all gametime against Tonga, and then dragged after half time. Compare that to Toeava who played big minutes both games. I'd like to see Jane and Kahui on the wings, Dagg at the back. SBW surely can't be seriously considered as a winger after one game against Japan B.

 

[Larksea]

I really rate Boric too and would love to see him and Thorn as the starting locks. He has the same height and athleticism of Whitelock and Williams but is more physical.. give him a run!

Can't see how Mils would be picked given he hasn't played in ages. Stick with Dagg at the back. Jane has been hard done by so far, bugger all gametime against Tonga, and then dragged after half time. Compare that to Toeava who played big minutes both games. I'd like to see Jane and Kahui on the wings, Dagg at the back. SBW surely can't be seriously considered as a winger after one game against Japan B.

he has played ~98 test matches I really don't think that's an issue for such an experienced player. I'm 99% sure he will be selected. He knows what test rugby is about and more importantly he knows what test rugby against France as an all black is all about

I do see the point about Williams and the wing but at the same time Jane had ~44 min against "Japan B" and did almost nothing - Williams got into the game in a big way and made an impact.

I kinda have a feeling Jane will be given one more run to produce the goods, but I doubt the coaches would have giving SBW a run on the wing if they did not see that as an option for him. They are obviously keen to have Nonu and SBW involved in the games. And I personally don't see SBW as a "risky" player. His defense is solid, he has great hands, his offloads don't find opposition hands very often and the vast majority when they do go to ground it's because a teammate didn't take the pass. I think SBW is a very safe player for the number of genuine points scoring chances he creates on attack.

 

[Dizzy]

Look as much as I love Cory Jane and think he deserves to be on the starting line up because of the performances he has put in when in a Black jersey, He didn't go looking for work, which is the reason why Guildford is so good[I dont rate Guildford at all]. Sure Jane can beat players here and there, but its the work rate that the coaches are looking at.
When SBW came on, he was at centre, on the other wing and made a good bust. So the coaches will be looking at that, and also, SBW does have an impact whenever he plays, and the coaches wont want to break up the safe option of Nonu and Smith but they will be wanting a gamebreaker like SBW in the mix, so why not on the wing?

The way the modern game is played nowadays, backs stand in different positions all the time now, so with SBW and Nonu, with certain plays I should say, they could at one point put Nonu on the wing for a few phases with SBW at 2nd five, then switch back and so on.

 

[donmcdazzle]

he has played ~98 test matches I really don't think that's an issue for such an experienced player. I'm 99% sure he will be selected. He knows what test rugby is about and more importantly he knows what test rugby against France as an all black is all about

I do see the point about Williams and the wing but at the same time Jane had ~44 min against "Japan B" and did almost nothing - Williams got into the game in a big way and made an impact.

I kinda have a feeling Jane will be given one more run to produce the goods, but I doubt the coaches would have giving SBW a run on the wing if they did not see that as an option for him. They are obviously keen to have Nonu and SBW involved in the games. And I personally don't see SBW as a "risky" player. His defense is solid, he has great hands, his offloads don't find opposition hands very often and the vast majority when they do go to ground it's because a teammate didn't take the pass. I think SBW is a very safe player for the number of genuine points scoring chances he creates on attack.

Apply the same criteria to the SBW v Jane debate which shouldn't even be a debate. Jane has played outstanding numerous times against hard teams, SBW hasn't. If we wanted a centre/wing who is a gamebreaker then Ranger is better than SBW in that regard. It woud be crazy to drop Jane for a guy who has no experience in the same position. Unlike Dagg who has pretty much been a fullback the whole time and has lit it up against hard teams.

 

[Dizzy]

Apply the same criteria to the SBW v Jane debate which shouldn't even be a debate. Jane has played outstanding numerous times against hard teams, SBW hasn't. If we wanted a centre/wing who is a gamebreaker then Ranger is better than SBW in that regard. It woud be crazy to drop Jane for a guy who has no experience in the same position. Unlike Dagg who has pretty much been a fullback the whole time and has lit it up against hard teams.

As much as I like Ranger, I have to completely disagree with you here. Ranger is at times a loose cannon, he has a reputation for being greedy and making errors. SBW on the other hand, doesn't make much errors and he looks to put players into space and does it quite well, alot better than Ranger does. What teams need in the modern era because defense lines are so good is a player who is able to put his team mates into space and create opportunities.

 

[donmcdazzle]

As much as I like Ranger, I have to completely disagree with you here. Ranger is at times a loose cannon, he has a reputation for being greedy and making errors. SBW on the other hand, doesn't make much errors and he looks to put players into space and does it quite well, alot better than Ranger does. What teams need in the modern era because defense lines are so good is a player who is able to put his team mates into space and create opportunities.

I wasn't really comparing their all round games; just meaning if SBW is meant to be used as an impact player who can cover wing and centre then I think Ranger is better. Ranger (and Nonu I suppose) would be the best tackle breakers going round in NZ rugby. SBW for his physical attributes doesn't run aggressive lines or break many tackles.

 

[Dizzy]

I wasn't really comparing their all round games; just meaning if SBW is meant to be used as an impact player who can cover wing and centre then I think Ranger is better. Ranger (and Nonu I suppose) would be the best tackle breakers going round in NZ rugby. SBW for his physical attributes doesn't run aggressive lines or break many tackles.

Yes but like I said in another post, the modern game allows players to chop and change positions during different phases, this is where SBW would be more potent than Ranger because at one point Nonu could slot to the wing with Bill in the midfield, draw two defenders, get the pass away to Smith, draw and pass to the blockbusting Nonu in for the corner.
I do see where you're coming from though, I just feel SBW has more to offer than Ranger does.

 

[Shaggy]

That's very true. To an extent the games we've got this year are definatly more competitive. Tonga gave us a good run, as should France. And hopefully Canada should have something to offer as well, if their last match is anything to go by. But consider this also, at the time the All Blacks came out to play Scotland in 2007, Dan Carter openly remarked that he was frustrated with the lack of game time. Now I'm not suggesting our top players are being rested to the same extent as they were back then but one could start to draw parallels with certain players. Not only that, but the QF loss can also be blamed on the selection changes. Henry put a rocky Luke McAlistar in ahead of an in-form Aaron Mauger. I said at the time that it was going to be a disasterous move and sure enough, the concept backfied. This must not happen again, that is, not deciding on our top side well before the playoffs.
Injuries will no doubt become a problem variable later in the tounament but you can only cross with that bridge when you come to it. At present, the one variable Henry has absolute control over is the selection of his top side and to ensure that they know each other's game and the team game inside out.

I totally get the desire for continuity in selection where possible, but I also get Graham Henry's desire to not unnecessarily risk crucial players like Carter if he's slightly injured, and to not show his hand too soon (the SBW experiment)

I disagree with the injuries/cross the bridge when you come to it remark too ... you can do something about it before it happens, by giving all of the players (the first choice and the backups) game time, so if they are needed, they are ready.

I've no doubt that all the guys are there for the purpose of getting the job done. I guess the argument I was making was that they need to be cohesive as team on the field. Sure they may be all unselfish players and genuinly happy for their mates who get ahead of them in the pecking order but it all becomes pointless if they can't translate that into forming the true team juggernaut they are capible of simply because they've been chopped and changed too much.

I get what you saying, but surely unselfish play resulting in tries for other players and bench player fitting in seamlessly into the team when they get their opportunities, are examples of a team playing as a cohesive unit on he field

I wasn't really comparing their all round games; just meaning if SBW is meant to be used as an impact player who can cover wing and centre then I think Ranger is better. Ranger (and Nonu I suppose) would be the best tackle breakers going round in NZ rugby. SBW for his physical attributes doesn't run aggressive lines or break many tackles.

Why are we even talking about Ranger, and Gear on this thread, when they aren't in the squad, and have no prospect of playing

... personally, I'm more concerned about the depth in the forwards, and how they'll perform against some of the bigger sides, than any combination of the backs they choose to put out, but if I was pick the backs to run out against the french (subject to fitness), it might be:

9/ Cowan
10/ Carter
11/ Kahui
12/ Nonu
13/ Smith
14/ Dagg
15/ Muliaina

Reserves

Weepu
Slade
SBW

... It wouldn't upset me too much if Jane, Toeava, Ellis etc are in the mix instead

 

[Larksea]

Apply the same criteria to the SBW v Jane debate which shouldn't even be a debate. Jane has played outstanding numerous times against hard teams, SBW hasn't. If we wanted a centre/wing who is a gamebreaker then Ranger is better than SBW in that regard. It woud be crazy to drop Jane for a guy who has no experience in the same position. Unlike Dagg who has pretty much been a fullback the whole time and has lit it up against hard teams.

The difference with Jane is that you don't need to apply this theory because he has actually had recent game time.

I'd like to see Jane given another run but you wouldn't be selecting him on current form. He hasn't really done much since the first Springbok test.

 

[UilamOsa]

I totally get the desire for continuity in selection where possible, but I also get Graham Henry's desire to not unnecessarily risk crucial players like Carter if he's slightly injured, and to not show his hand too soon (the SBW experiment)

I disagree with the injuries/cross the bridge when you come to it remark too ... you can do something about it before it happens, by giving all of the players (the first choice and the backups) game time, so if they are needed, they are ready.

Agreed and take it from a Samoa and AB's supporter - If there's no need to put your best asset at risk why do so?

Instead of Pisi starting against Wales we got Lavea. If anything Samoa has lesser amount of resources and we paid the price.

Sonny Bill shouldn't be in the starting team against france. It's one thing to be a dominant player against the Japanese, it's another to take on full time professionals (test match hardened) at their own positions.

I hope he proves me wrong.

I think Kahui has sewn up one spot, so it will be Toeava/Guilford/Jane for the either.

Jane & Guilford deserve some starting time or at least decent off-the-bench time.

 

[donmcdazzle]

Having a look on Stuff.co.nz it looks like Guildford is paying for some off field indescretions after the game in Brisbane. Obviously he had already been named in the WC squad so couldn't be dropped. Maybe that's why he hasn't had a look in.

 

[nickdnz]

Jane did almost nothing in his ~44min. SBW comes on and replaces him and scores 2 trys, sets up at least one other and does some good work on defence and is heavely involved in the game overall and are slaming the idea?

I wouldn't have been sure about a move like that last week but it worked in my eyes and is an option for the next game. The only thing really to be unsure about SBW is under the high ball at the back but he's got great ball skills and he's very tall and with Mills supporting him I think he'd be fine.

I think this situation has been forces but the horid fact that neither Jane, Toeava or Guildford have done the job as wingers in recent times. Toeava maybe the best of them but he's lacked a bit in finishing some chances that should have been finished. Thank Odin Kahui has nailed one wing spot, he's been pretty much flawless on either side of the park. I was looking forward to Jane having a big game but he didn't deliver which makes things complicated.

People need to take it easy on Slade, he's a good player and backing up Carter is the hardest job in NZ rugby. Your chances are limited and every mistake you make gets 4million people on your back and if you're not as good as the best 10 in the world that's not good enough. If the NZ public had got behind donald When things were tough NZ would be better off right now. People still giving donald ****, how many people said he peaked at ITM cup level in this thread alone? Donald is the only 10 outside Carter to be an established first choice 10 at super level in NZ over the last 4 years and he's the only 10 other than Carter to take a team to the super rugby final in at least the last 4-5 years and though his haters hate to admit it he has had match winning performances for the All Blacks to and at the very least his goal kicking for the all blacks was 73-74% which was the same as Carter's %age over the same period.

Time to get behind slade IMO nuf said. Slade's goal kicking started out a bit rough in blustery conditions (one of his kicks looked like it moved right then left then right again...) and he made a couple handelling errors (knock on and intercept pass). The important thing is that he learns from it, I think he did get a bit better as the game went on which is a good sign.

If anything what worried me about that game is the lineout, I didn't like the AB's losing some of their own throws to Japan. And the kickoff where Japan caused problems kicking off to Conrad Smith close to the 10m line.

But overall the game gets a pass mark from me because I think in some ways it was an improvement from the Tonga game and many players played well and combinations worked well together after a lot of changes. Plus chances that were created almost always resulted in trys.

For the AB's this game is really going to come down to winning three games in a row which we all knew anyway. But unlike 2007 at least out last two pool games will be good hit outs and at least the Refs aren't being as negative or as yellow card happy as they were in 2007. yes Carter is critical but we know that anyway.

Man, you can be a hipocritical. How can one game against a weakened Japan side convince you that Sonny Bill Williams is a viable/better option at wing over Cory Jane! Cory Jane was quiet in the small time he has got this RWC, but he's still proven the difference between NZ winning and losing on several tests, being magnificant in his game against South Africa in the first test of the Tri Nations. You just seem amazingly willing to mismiss proven world class wingers like Jane and Gear, for someone who scored two tries against a weak Japan side (and 2/13 tries to be exact). He didn't look exceptionally quick either, he was just in the right place really, with his first try he went through a gap untouched and his second try no one else chased.

You then go on to say people need to take it easy on Slade, who has underperformed in every test match barring the one he replaced Aaron Cruden, late in the third quarter.

Apply the same criteria to the SBW v Jane debate which shouldn't even be a debate. Jane has played outstanding numerous times against hard teams, SBW hasn't. If we wanted a centre/wing who is a gamebreaker then Ranger is better than SBW in that regard. It woud be crazy to drop Jane for a guy who has no experience in the same position. Unlike Dagg who has pretty much been a fullback the whole time and has lit it up against hard teams.

Agreed 100%. SBW is not a winger, and to play him on the wing now is crazy. He's never played wing against a top team, and to select him over established world class wingers is just stupid. As you mentioned with Rene Ranger, he's a player who can cover the utility position and break open a game, where as SBW's biig attribute is his offload, which is **** all when playing wing. He's not a player who breaks the line all that often, and wing doesn't suite his style of play at all.