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

[donmcdazzle]

Cruden was better against the Wallabies than Slade was tonight against Japan. At least Cruden has been awesome in the ITM cup, when has Slade ever lit it up. I've never actually seen him carve a game up like Cruden's 28 point game against Waikato. I was annoyed at him getting chosen on the back of no footy - he isn't proven at any level let alone test level. Anyway that's an argument for a different time. Long story short is Slade should now be relegated from the bench to waterboy duties. Weepu to cover 10.

 

[donmcdazzle]

Henry is an idiot. SBW isn't a wing and the only reason he did well was because it was basically touch rugby against Japan, positional play didn't really matter. Stick him on the wing versus France or Australia and he will be punished all night long. He was also smashed into touch by one of the Japanese locks and then smashed again by the same guy forcing a knock on. For someone who is supposed to be incredibly big and strong, he didn't seem to bring any physical presence and felt Jane brought more physical presence than SBW.

Nonu, Smith and Kaino were the keys tonight, just like Kaino and Nonu last week. I think those three players do far more than any other player in the All Blacks. Mccaw is passed it and Carter wouldn't be much anymore without Nonu and Smith outside him.

Almost a good post until you blew it with that last sentence. Carter is still the best 10 in the world, who would you replace him with? Trinh-Duc? The house burglar?
And McCaw is definitely not past it, check the stats from the Tonga game, he was immense.

 

[Rhyer]

If I remember correctly, Nonu and Smith played in first receiver during that game against the Wallabies as Cruden was no where to be found. So on the basis that Slade was actually present on the field I think he had a better game. Doesn't matter anyway, you'll choke against Australia at some stage or France.

 

[Rhyer]

Almost a good post until you blew it with that last sentence. Carter is still the best 10 in the world, who would you replace him with? Trinh-Duc? The house burglar?
And McCaw is definitely not past it, check the stats from the Tonga game, he was immense.

I just think other players make them look incredible. Kaino goes largely unnoticed and gives a real physical presence allowing Mccaw to do what he does. This then frees up space for Carter and because Nonu and Smith are absolutely incredible in attack and defence, Carter's job is so easy. Carter is still certainly the most reliable flyhalf in the world but a lot of his game comes from Nonu and Smith. You can't deny that Mccaw is long gone, Pocock and Brussouw completely demolish him.

 

[donmcdazzle]

If I remember correctly, Nonu and Smith played in first receiver during that game against the Wallabies as Cruden was no where to be found. So on the basis that Slade was actually present on the field I think he had a better game. Doesn't matter anyway, you'll choke against Australia at some stage or France.

That was when Slade came on, go watch the game again. Given Aus are ranked 2 in the world I would hardly call losing to them a choke, although if we lose to France that is less acceptable although not really what I would call a choke given any of the top 4 or 5 teams can beat each other on their day.

 

[donmcdazzle]

I just think other players make them look incredible. Kaino goes largely unnoticed and gives a real physical presence allowing Mccaw to do what he does. This then frees up space for Carter and because Nonu and Smith are absolutely incredible in attack and defence, Carter's job is so easy. Carter is still certainly the most reliable flyhalf in the world but a lot of his game comes from Nonu and Smith. You can't deny that Mccaw is long gone, Pocock and Brussouw completely demolish him.

Too much of an overstatement. It could definitely be argued those two are better at getting turnovers, but McCaw makes more tackles and carries far better than either of them so I don't think they completely demolish him as a player.

 

[Seaton]

You can't deny that Mccaw is long gone, Pocock and Brussouw completely demolish him.

Pish.

Not an invigorating debate I know, but that is my thoughts/ 'denials' on this matter

 

[Black Heart]

Cruden was better against the Wallabies than Slade was tonight against Japan.

Well that's a matter of opinion.

At least Cruden has been awesome in the ITM cup,

This is exactly the point I was making about Stephen Donald. If we're going to pick an All Blacks squad based on provicial performances then there is just as much cause to have Donald in there and at least he would have about 20 more tests behind him than Cruden. Look there's no denying Cruden was fantastic this year and like I said, in hindsight he probably should have been selected over Slade. But quality provincial efforts do not necessarily translate onto the test arena (as we frequently see with players like Stephen Donald) And let's be fair, if Slade had played in the ITM Cup this year he probably would have shone too.

when has Slade ever lit it up. I've never actually seen him carve a game up like Cruden's 28 point game against Waikato. I was annoyed at him getting chosen on the back of no footy - he isn't proven at any level let alone test level.

Slade has always been a decent footballer and I still think he has a better all round game than Cruden but for all that I can't understand why he has been playing so poorly in these last 3 or 4 games. But as you said, it's a pointless argument now. I do agree that Weepu needs to be #1 cover.

Nonu, Smith and Kaino were the keys tonight, just like Kaino and Nonu last week. I think those three players do far more than any other player in the All Blacks. Mccaw is passed it and Carter wouldn't be much anymore without Nonu and Smith outside him.

Carter would be nothing without Nonu and Smith? What a load of rubbish. When did the outside player ever make the inside player? Carter's performances against the Boks and Wallabies in New Zealand this year were fantastic. Why? Because the entire team was focused and functioning as one unit. Carter single handedly beat the crap out of the Wallaby backline - just look at the stats.

The same goes for McCaw. Pocock had nothing on him in Auckland because the All Blacks foward pack was doing its job. When they got to Brisbane the whole team failed to ignite, so every player (Carter and McCaw included) were made to look poor.

 

[ranger]

This is exactly the point I was making about Stephen Donald. If we're going to pick an All Blacks squad based on provicial performances then there is just as much cause to have Donald in there and at least he would have about 20 more tests behind him than Cruden. Look there's no denying Cruden was fantastic this year and like I said, in hindsight he probably should have been selected over Slade. But quality provincial efforts do not necessarily translate onto the test arena (as we frequently see with players like Stephen Donald)

No. Don't buy this at all. It isn't simply a case of provincial performances being poor indicators of test match rugby; you just need to focus on the player and see why he is doing well at the provincial level, what hes is doing, how he is doing it (are surrounding players/gameplans a major factor, and most importantly, whether the his means of success are translatable to test match level.

For instance:

Donald is one of the biggest, strongest and fastest players around, let alone for a first five. At provincial level he manages to break the line and score a large chunk of his tries simply through putting his head down and running through/over the top of the defense.
-This is an example of a tactic that will make you look good at provincial level, but wont work at test level.

Cruden made his line breaks through taking the ball to the line, reading the defence, accelerating into gaps and offloading.
-This is an example of a tactic that works at provincial level and has the potential to be translated to test level. Sure he won't have as many opportunites and space will be tighter, but his skills show the potential to work in that arena.

Cruden showed enough transferable skills to warrant selection, where Donald didn't show enough, and Slade showed literally nothing. It shouldn't take a genius to figure who should have got the call up..

And let's be fair, if Slade had played in the ITM Cup this year he probably would have shone too.

"Probably" doesn't cut it. How do we know that anyway? When was the last time he actually played well for a stretch? You would have to go back to last years ITM cup. He has never played consistantly well at Super Rugby level for the Crusaders (The only time he was ever under pressure he choked) and only played a a few games for Canterbury/The Highlanders combined this year.

Even assuming he did look good in the past, selecting a player because he looked good a while ago and "probably" would have been good had he played this year simply isnt good enough.

 

[ZeFrenchy]

Too much of an overstatement. It could definitely be argued those two are better at getting turnovers, but McCaw makes more tackles and carries far better than either of them so I don't think they completely demolish him as a player.

Suggesting that any person in the universe can make more tackles than Pocock needs definitely be backed by stats. It may be true, I just don't see it as an evidence.

 

[rusty_lock]

Personally, I was hoping that NZ put 100 points on the Japanese. It's a bloody disgrace to field a 2nd 15. People have come from all over the world, hell your own fans have shelled out thousands and gotten on airplanes and flown halfway around the world then spent hundreds on a ticket to watch that shite. It's one thing to sit through a shellacking when one team just isn't good enough its another to have to sit through it when one team could be better but has other objectives other than winning the game. John Kirwan has successfully embarrassed not only Japan but RWC2011 as well.

 

[TRF C A Iversen]

Personally, I was hoping that NZ put 100 points on the Japanese. It's a bloody disgrace to field a 2nd 15. People have come from all over the world, hell your own fans have shelled out thousands and gotten on airplanes and flown halfway around the world then spent hundreds on a ticket to watch that shite. It's one thing to sit through a shellacking when one team just isn't good enough its another to have to sit through it when one team could be better but has other objectives other than winning the game. John Kirwan has successfully embarrassed not only Japan but RWC2011 as well.

How many times can someone be wrong, obnoxious, precious and exaggerative in one post? :huh:

 

[Shaggy]

Personally, I was hoping that NZ put 100 points on the Japanese. It's a bloody disgrace to field a 2nd 15. People have come from all over the world, hell your own fans have shelled out thousands and gotten on airplanes and flown halfway around the world then spent hundreds on a ticket to watch that shite. It's one thing to sit through a shellacking when one team just isn't good enough its another to have to sit through it when one team could be better but has other objectives other than winning the game. John Kirwan has successfully embarrassed not only Japan but RWC2011 as well.

Kinda have to disagree on this one Rusty, it's not unusual for teams in pool play to give there second team a run against the AB's in pool play, particularly if their first choice XXII isn't likely to win either, and they have must win matches against opponents that they could potentially beat, in Tonga, and Canada, coming up (didn't say they would beat them)

... A few general comments (not related to your post) ... this match was by no means, a complete performance by the All Blacks, but I find it hard to be too critical of them when they've scored 13 tries

... The SBW experiment seemed to go okay ... sure, he was playing on the wing against pretty weak opposition, but i'd rather see this experiment done first against Japan, than try it first against France ... yes he was off side for his second try, but the ref said that he was on side, and it was just example of playing to the whistle.

... I was pleased that Slade seemed to grow in confidence after an atrocious start, and the whole Slade V Cruden V Donald debate, is getting a bit tiresome to be honest - as is the debate about wingers that aren't in the squad, that in the opinion of some, should be, or whether Andy Ellis should be there or not ... as i've said before, i'm not a big fan of Ellis, but the fact is, he's been selected, he's playing, and I would like the Ellis's, Slade's, etc, to be playing to the best of their abilities, and playing with confidence

The debate over better players being left out is largely irrelevant until an injury occurs, and a replacement is called for ... I thing the blood letting can wait, and the finger pointing can occur, if or when a loss occurs ... yes, things could be going better in the AB camp, but let them do their jobs

... another couple of positives - the rolling maul being used, and the continuity was good as the bench was cleared

... negatives - the dropping of the scrums, and lack of protection in the rucks and mauls

 

[Amobokoboko]

Didn't see the game yet, but quiet happy with the result.

 

[rusty_lock]

How many times can someone be wrong, obnoxious, precious and exaggerative in one post? :huh:

Excuse my emotional outburst but from the perspective of a tier II country this kind of stuff hurts all of us. Tier II countries have to fight and scrap to get opportunity to play matches against good quality competition. We don't have an extended international season, no 6 nations, no tri-nations. Sometimes only two or three games in the November window and june we get maybe 1 or 2 against really good opposition. So when a tier 2 country throws a game like Japan did to save themselves for a winnable game it only reinforces the stereotype in the minds of the blokes in Dublin that tier 2 countries can't and won't compete with the best. Then when they sit down and work out their schedules we get the shaft because who wants to schedule an 83 to 7 blowout. And that, my friend, hurts the growth of rugby around the world.

 

[ZeFrenchy]

Excuse my emotional outburst but from the perspective of a tier II country this kind of stuff hurts all of us. Tier II countries have to fight and scrap to get opportunity to play matches against good quality competition. We don't have an extended international season, no 6 nations, no tri-nations. Sometimes only two or three games in the November window and june we get maybe 1 or 2 against really good opposition. So when a tier 2 country throws a game like Japan did to save themselves for a winnable game it only reinforces the stereotype in the minds of the blokes in Dublin that tier 2 countries can't and won't compete with the best. Then when they sit down and work out their schedules we get the shaft because who wants to schedule an 83 to 7 blowout. And that, my friend, hurts the growth of rugby around the world.

This.
Besides, it is possible that this pool will end with a triple tie in points for the third place, I think that the points difference may be important.

 

[james5000]

No. Don't buy this at all. It isn't simply a case of provincial performances being poor indicators of test match rugby; you just need to focus on the player and see why he is doing well at the provincial level, what hes is doing, how he is doing it (are surrounding players/gameplans a major factor, and most importantly, whether the his means of success are translatable to test match level.

For instance:

Donald is one of the biggest, strongest and fastest players around, let alone for a first five. At provincial level he manages to break the line and score a large chunk of his tries simply through putting his head down and running through/over the top of the defense.
-This is an example of a tactic that will make you look good at provincial level, but wont work at test level.

This is BS, Donald does many things that would transfer over well to the test arena. Donald doesn't lack skill, he lacks mentally. When put under pressure he chokes up.

On a side note, does any one think Jane may be over looked for the french game? Why would he only get 44mins.

I predict Toeava and Kahui will be the wings vs France. (May be SBW could start instead of Toeava)

 

[Tricia McMillan]

Almost a good post until you blew it with that last sentence. Carter is still the best 10 in the world, who would you replace him with? Trinh-Duc? The house burglar?

Clearly the only choice is Stephen Brett.

 

[SelimNiai]

Excuse my emotional outburst but from the perspective of a tier II country this kind of stuff hurts all of us. Tier II countries have to fight and scrap to get opportunity to play matches against good quality competition. We don't have an extended international season, no 6 nations, no tri-nations. Sometimes only two or three games in the November window and june we get maybe 1 or 2 against really good opposition. So when a tier 2 country throws a game like Japan did to save themselves for a winnable game it only reinforces the stereotype in the minds of the blokes in Dublin that tier 2 countries can't and won't compete with the best. Then when they sit down and work out their schedules we get the shaft because who wants to schedule an 83 to 7 blowout. And that, my friend, hurts the growth of rugby around the world.

Even a Japan team at full strength would have lost by at least 40+, so whats wrong in giving squad players a crack at Nz and save your best players for 2 winnable games in Tonga and Canada. Its a brave move and he will get flack from it but I can understand why he did it

 

[Black Heart]

No. Don't buy this at all. It isn't simply a case of provincial performances being poor indicators of test match rugby; you just need to focus on the player and see why he is doing well at the provincial level, what hes is doing, how he is doing it (are surrounding players/gameplans a major factor, and most importantly, whether the his means of success are translatable to test match level.

For instance:

Donald is one of the biggest, strongest and fastest players around, let alone for a first five. At provincial level he manages to break the line and score a large chunk of his tries simply through putting his head down and running through/over the top of the defense.
-This is an example of a tactic that will make you look good at provincial level, but wont work at test level.

Cruden made his line breaks through taking the ball to the line, reading the defence, accelerating into gaps and offloading.
-This is an example of a tactic that works at provincial level and has the potential to be translated to test level. Sure he won't have as many opportunites and space will be tighter, but his skills show the potential to work in that arena.

Cruden showed enough transferable skills to warrant selection, where Donald didn't show enough, and Slade showed literally nothing. It shouldn't take a genius to figure who should have got the call up..

Again, It's all hindsight. And in hindsight, yes, Cruden should have been picked. But justifying the base of an argument on hindsight is always going to be pointless.

"Probably" doesn't cut it. How do we know that anyway?

1. We don't. That's why I used the term "probably."
2. This: "When was the last time he actually played well for a stretch? You would have to go back to last years ITM cup." Slightly hipocritical on your part there don't you think?
3. How do we know that Cruden will "probably" play as well for the All Blacks as he does for Manawatu? When given the chance last year he buckled big time. So as far as test rugby is concerned both he and Slade are in the same boat.
4. I only made the argument that Slade would probably play well in the ITM Cup because most test players (either frequents or occasionals) play very well when it comes to playing provincial rugby against semi-professionals - It was a comment aimed at Cruden, not to justify Slade's position in the WC squad.

Even assuming he did look good in the past, selecting a player because he looked good a while ago and "probably" would have been good had he played this year simply isnt good enough.

Again, I only made the ITM Cup statement to illustrate that it's not too difficult for such players to shine in that environment. I was not implying that he should have been selected because he would have played well regardless, I think you're confusing the point I was making.