Spring Tour: New Zealand vs Ireland - 2nd Test. (16/6/2012, 07:35 GMT)

[donmcdazzle]

Someone asked why N.Z. are playing at night, the answer is so that us Irish can actually watch our team!

When the AB's go on tour in the Northern Hemisphere or in SA we have to get up at 3am to watch them, nobody schedules the games for a nice convenient time for us. It sucks that the best team in the world has to hamstring themselves by playing in bad condidtions cause of the TV audience.

 

[big ginger 8]

That's the way the tv market works. The other team is hamstrung as well and they have the skill to play in the conditions which didn't seem at all bad.

 

[donmcdazzle]

That's the way the tv market works. The other team is hamstrung as well and they have the skill to play in the conditions which didn't seem at all bad.

The weather is the ultimate leveller. We are better in dry conditions, we just are. Playing a night game in winter means slippery ground, slippery ball, we aren't as good and the rugby isn't as good. I'm not suggesting conspiracy or anything, I just get frustrated that we have to continually play in conditions that don't really suit us just to appease the TV people. I'd much prefer getting up at 3am to watch a good game of rugby than watching a bad one at 8am.

 

[Shaggy]

First of all, congrats to Ireland ... you guys were very unlucky not to win.

It will be interesting to see the ABs match day 22 for the third test, as its probably a case of whos fit as opposed to who should be there.

I guess Ali Williams's injury is timely, as he wasn't picked on form, but rather his experience, and so you'd expect that he'd be a calming influence, rather than talking back to the ref etc.

I think the ABs long term need to consider picking a bigger player, that would play a tighter role ... perhaps they could consider Hoeata or Nick Crosswell


Sent from my LG-P925g using Tapatalk

 

[nickdnz]

I guess Ali Williams's injury is timely, as he wasn't picked on form, but rather his experience, and so you'd expect that he'd be a calming influence, rather than talking back to the ref etc.

I think the ABs long term need to consider picking a bigger player, that would play a tighter role ... perhaps they could consider Hoeata or Nick Crosswell
Sent from my LG-P925g using Tapatalk

I agree in the sense that I'm not overly unhappy about Ali Williams not being avalible (although I'd bet a lot of money he'll be in the Tri Nations squad), as I think he avoids the tight work and has an overinflated sense of his own value. On top of that he has pretty poor discipline. That being said, he is still bigger than both Hoeata and Crosswell by quite a bit, he just doesn't do the grunt that hey do.

I'm against picking both Hoeata and Crosswell as well to be honest. Hoeata is 28 years old so should be in his prime now, but still seems to have massive discipline problems. He not especially big either, as he's 6'4'' and 112kgs, which is 3'' and 3kgs smaller than Ali Williams. Crosswell has got a very good work ethic but is a bit lighter still than Hoeata and I don't think he'd compete that well at international level, especially at lock.

For me if they call in another lock I'd go with Josh Bekhuis who is almost perfecty suited for test rugby and is only 26 or even reward Craig Clarke.

 

[Darwin]

I agree in the sense that I'm not overly unhappy about Ali Williams not being avalible (although I'd bet a lot of money he'll be in the Tri Nations squad), as I think he avoids the tight work and has an overinflated sense of his own value. On top of that he has pretty poor discipline. That being said, he is still bigger than both Hoeata and Crosswell by quite a bit, he just doesn't do the grunt that hey do.

I'm against picking both Hoeata and Crosswell as well to be honest. Hoeata is 28 years old so should be in his prime now, but still seems to have massive discipline problems. He not especially big either, as he's 6'4'' and 112kgs, which is 3'' and 3kgs smaller than Ali Williams. Crosswell has got a very good work ethic but is a bit lighter still than Hoeata and I don't think he'd compete that well at international level, especially at lock.

For me if they call in another lock I'd go with Josh Bekhuis who is almost perfecty suited for test rugby and is only 26 or even reward Craig Clarke.

Bekhuis would be my first choice too, though if they wanted a loose-head lock I wouldn't mind Eaton getting another shot at test rugby. I quite like Clarke too, but I just wonder whether he has what it takes to make the next step up to test rugby. Like you I wouldn't go near Hoeata - he does some good things, but has series discipline issues, and often seems more intent on proving he is the toughest player on the park than actually playing rugby. I've got much more time for Crosswell - it has been unfortunate that he missed quite a bit of the season through injury, as I think he can bring similar attributes to Hoeata, but is far more disciplined and seems a smarter player. As you mention though, his height (or lack there-of ) may be an issue at the next level.

 

[TRF Mr Fish]

I have questions over Hoeata's aerial ability - considering the majority of the Highlanders' lineout ball is taken by Thomson.

 

[Darwin]

I have questions over Hoeata's aerial ability - considering the majority of the Highlanders' lineout ball is taken by Thomson.

I don't really have any concerns over Hoeata's aerial ability. Thomson may be the first-choice target, but Hoeata has been very secure at the front of the lineout when required (he was used a lot last year too). Crosswell's lack of aerial ability (as a lock) is probably a major reason he won't be a realistic option at test level.

 

[Shaggy]

I agree in the sense that I'm not overly unhappy about Ali Williams not being avalible (although I'd bet a lot of money he'll be in the Tri Nations squad), as I think he avoids the tight work and has an overinflated sense of his own value. On top of that he has pretty poor discipline. That being said, he is still bigger than both Hoeata and Crosswell by quite a bit, he just doesn't do the grunt that hey do.

I'm against picking both Hoeata and Crosswell as well to be honest. Hoeata is 28 years old so should be in his prime now, but still seems to have massive discipline problems. He not especially big either, as he's 6'4'' and 112kgs, which is 3'' and 3kgs smaller than Ali Williams. Crosswell has got a very good work ethic but is a bit lighter still than Hoeata and I don't think he'd compete that well at international level, especially at lock.

For me if they call in another lock I'd go with Josh Bekhuis who is almost perfecty suited for test rugby and is only 26 or even reward Craig Clarke.

Geez ... I should stop using my phone to post ... what I mean't to say is the selectors should look at either Hoeata or Crosswell in the blindside flanker role.

... I agree that the locks need to be genuine locks, and not smaller players like the ones I suggested, I agree with your two suggestions, as they really need a tight head lock ... Brodie Retallick is doing a good job, and should only get better, but he's on the loose head side for the Chiefs, If they had someone like Clarke (or Bekhuis) coming off the bench, they could take either Retallick or Sam Whitelock off ( and just move Retallick to the loose side).

 

[big ginger 8]

The weather is the ultimate leveller. We are better in dry conditions, we just are. Playing a night game in winter means slippery ground, slippery ball, we aren't as good and the rugby isn't as good. I'm not suggesting conspiracy or anything, I just get frustrated that we have to continually play in conditions that don't really suit us just to appease the TV people. I'd much prefer getting up at 3am to watch a good game of rugby than watching a bad one at 8am.

Wasn't a bad game though! Loads of people have being saying how good it was. Pretty much every team apart from Scotland play better in dry conditions. Also rugby is a winter sport moving it to summer would maybe make it a better spectator sport but I think it would rune a lot of what's good about the sport.

 

[Darwin]

Wasn't a bad game though! Loads of people have being saying how good it was. Pretty much every team apart from Scotland play better in dry conditions. Also rugby is a winter sport moving it to summer would maybe make it a better spectator sport but I think it would rune a lot of what's good about the sport.

No, it certainly wasn't a bad game. However I have no doubt you would get a much better spectacle if the game was played in the middle of the afternoon. I think there is a noticeable difference in the quality of afternoon rugby and the quality of night time rugby. No matter how clear and dry the conditions are, there is invariably dew in at 7.30pm at night in winter, and it is usually freezing cold (it was around 0 degrees for this test) - these are not ideal conditions for playing (or watching!) rugby. We are unlikely to see another afternoon test in NZ, and we get few Super Rugby games in the afternoon now too - the only time I get to watch rugby in the sunlight now is during the ITM Cup and the odd club match I go to...

 

[Feicarsinn]

No, it certainly wasn't a bad game. However I have no doubt you would get a much better spectacle if the game was played in the middle of the afternoon. I think there is a noticeable difference in the quality of afternoon rugby and the quality of night time rugby. No matter how clear and dry the conditions are, there is invariably dew in at 7.30pm at night in winter, and it is usually freezing cold (it was around 0 degrees for this test) - these are not ideal conditions for playing (or watching!) rugby. We are unlikely to see another afternoon test in NZ, and we get few Super Rugby games in the afternoon now too - the only time I get to watch rugby in the sunlight now is during the ITM Cup and the odd club match I go to...

I do. You would have hammered us, which I would not have enjoyed

 

[donmcdazzle]

Wasn't a bad game though! Loads of people have being saying how good it was. Pretty much every team apart from Scotland play better in dry conditions. Also rugby is a winter sport moving it to summer would maybe make it a better spectator sport but I think it would rune a lot of what's good about the sport.

Was it good because it was a good game or because it was a close game that came down to the wire? Close games can be a great based on the fact that there is tension or whatever but that doesn't necesarrily mean the rugby played was very good. Like Darwin said the rugby would have been of a better quality during the day. (I think it would have suited Ireland more too to be honest, they looked more threatening with ball in hand).

I don't want rugby moved to summer or anything like that, and playing to the conditions and being able to adapt to them are a big part of rugby. But forcing conditions on people is what gets me. If it was a rainy afternoon in Christchurch then so be it, play to those conditions. But if it was a clear fine day then why the hell would you wait until it got frosty, cold and slippery to play?

 

[smartcooky]

.....forcing conditions on people is what gets me. If it was a rainy afternoon in Christchurch then so be it, play to those conditions. But if it was a clear fine day then why the hell would you wait until it got frosty, cold and slippery to play?

I agree 100% with you. Rugby was NEVER meant to be played at night; its a daytime winter game, and should have remained so.

Yes, I understand all about the money yada yada yada, but why one earth would you want to create a great product, and then cripple it by using it in totally unsuitable conditions.

 

[Dizzy]

I agree 100% with you. Rugby was NEVER meant to be played at night; its a daytime winter game, and should have remained so.

Yes, I understand all about the money yada yada yada, but why one earth would you want to create a great product, and then cripple it by using it in totally unsuitable conditions.

I absolutely agree,... I wanted something done when the Foggy Super Rugby final happened.. I honestly believe if the conditions were better the Hurricanes would have toppled the Crusaders that day... If you can postpone cricket, why not rugby?

 

[Sam Owen]

If you can postpone cricket, why not rugby?

Because in Cricket heavy wet rainy conditions make it really tough to play (e.g. ball wont bounce of the pitch etc) where as Rugby you can still play. You just have to adjust.

Did I really need to answer that?...

 

[TRF_heineken]

I agree 100% with you. Rugby was NEVER meant to be played at night; its a daytime winter game, and should have remained so.

Yes, I understand all about the money yada yada yada, but why one earth would you want to create a great product, and then cripple it by using it in totally unsuitable conditions.

In all fairness that just applies to certain countries and certain stadiums... in others, it's usually better to play at night as the conditions becomes better.

it also takes away that blinding light of sun which at some stadiums can become a real pain in the ass, especially for kickers, and it also gives the other team an unfair advantage.

Rugby is a game of adaptability, the conditions are just one of those things you have to adapt with.

I for one prefer games at night, the wind usually dies down, no sun in your/opponent/fans eyes, everyone has equal ray's of light flashing down on them. as for the dew, well that is debatable, some stadiums which doesn't get as much sun as others, usually have dew throughout the day, so that can't be an excuse either...

 

[Darwin]

In all fairness that just applies to certain countries and certain stadiums... in others, it's usually better to play at night as the conditions becomes better.

it also takes away that blinding light of sun which at some stadiums can become a real pain in the ass, especially for kickers, and it also gives the other team an unfair advantage.

Rugby is a game of adaptability, the conditions are just one of those things you have to adapt with.

I for one prefer games at night, the wind usually dies down, no sun in your/opponent/fans eyes, everyone has equal ray's of light flashing down on them. as for the dew, well that is debatable, some stadiums which doesn't get as much sun as others, usually have dew throughout the day, so that can't be an excuse either...

Perhaps smartcooky should have said "Rugby was never meant it be played at night in New Zealand...". As you have pointed out, night time rugby may be a good option in other countries, but I agree with smartcooky - we should not be playing night time rugby in New Zealand....

 

[Gena_ZA]

Perhaps smartcooky should have said "Rugby was never meant it be played at night in New Zealand...". As you have pointed out, night time rugby may be a good option in other countries, but I agree with smartcooky - we should not be playing night time rugby in New Zealand....

Agree here, why would you say do they play these at night in NZ, is it to comply to some TV viewing timeslot or to get more people to attend or what would you say is the logic from the administrators behind it?

 

[Darwin]

Agree here, why would you say do they play these at night in NZ, is it to comply to some TV viewing timeslot or to get more people to attend or what would you say is the logic from the administrators behind it?

As I understand it, it has everything to do with it being the best TV viewing timeslot.