Tri Nations: Springboks - All Blacks @ Nelson Mandela Bay Stadium (20-8-2011, 15:05)

[Shaggy]

Coz this game proved that NZ are great and glitzy but without Carter NZ are rather fragile and can be beaten!

Actually, the likelihood of any team playing against that line up of players in the knock out stages of the cup, are very remote, and if they did, that combination (like the Boks from last week), would play a lot better, as they would have had more game time together ... Carter missing for whatever reason is going to weaken the ABs side, but Slade or Weepu (like Carter) would undoubtedly play better behind a stronger forward pack, with forward momentum, and with an established centre pairing, like Nonu and particularly Smith, playing outside them.

... no one claimed that the All Blacks were invincible and could not be beaten - congrats to the Boks, they exerted the dominance, and played their own game, and won the game ... they were the better team on the day.

Funny how NZ supporters were ******, and rightly so when Michalak's forward pass which resulted in a try and NZ demise at the RWC 2007. Now that the right call has been made NZ supporters are still ******.

The correct RESULT is what is important here and no try on this occasion is the correct result!

Which New Zealand supporters are ******? ... I think most are okay with the call ... even Graham Henry's okay with it - the whole TMO thing just highlights another area that the IRB should have sorted out a long time ago, and that is, that the TMO should be able to rule on the phases immediately leading up to a try being scored, and if it's OBVIOUS that a forward pass has occurred, a defending player has been taken out, a knock on has occurred, they should be able to rule on it.

... If it leads to more consistent and better/more accurate calls being made, then most NZers would be right behind it

 

[SavageLez]

Hi Shaggy, you are right. I was generalising when I said New Zealanders and that was wrong. If you go back a few pages there are 1 or 2 NZ chaps that complained about the call. I agree with the TMO law changes needed but guys can't be ****** about the call made. It was the correct call at the end of the day and that is what everyone wants!

I think it will be a big test for the AB's. I'm not worried about Slade - he has looked very composed whenever he has played at test level. I don't think he has that many weaknesses - my only slight concern is his goal-kicking, as he is really unproven as a goal-kicker. He may not be Dan Carter, but I'd certainly prefer him over the man he is facing (Morne Steyn)...

Still prefer Slade over Steyn, lol?

 

[Shaggy]

Hi Shaggy, you are right. I was generalising when I said New Zealanders and that was wrong. If you go back a few pages there are 1 or 2 NZ chaps that complained about the call. I agree with the TMO law changes needed but guys can't be ****** about the call made. It was the correct call at the end of the day and that is what everyone wants!

I agree that it was the correct call that it was the correct call in terms of it being a forward pass, I guess the few complaints are concerning the TMO exceeding what they are allowed to rule on, and they may be concerned that the TMO may rule like they did in this match, and not in others ... so it's a consistency issue - it would have been interesting what the reaction would have been if an incorrect decision had been made (if the pass hadn't gone forward), or if the forward pass was a lot flatter ... I definitely support changes to allow the TMO to make a decision where it's obvious, but the onus should be put back on the ref if it's going to be a marginal call

I see that Paddy O'Brien, as referees boss, isn't happy with the breach of the rules by the officials ... i'm bracing myself for the barrage of "Paddy's biased towards New Zealand", and making a pre-emptive strike

... Just because it relates to a game where New Zealand was on the receiving end, it doesn't mean he's biased ... he does comment on other matches where the refs got it wrong (the try scored with the quick throw in with the wrong ball in the six nations for example) ... he doesn't make the rules, he just monitors the performance of the referees rulings on the laws the IRB is made

 

[Darwin]

Andy Ellis: Listening to Justin Marshall talk about how Ellis delivers the quickest ball in New Zealand annoyed me. Every ruck touches the ball, looks around, picks it up, makes a decision as to whom he'll pass to, takes two steps and then finally passes. He played alright a part from that, but I don't think he made any real impact. I'd still much rather see Mathewson brought in for him - 6/10

I actually slightly agree with Marshall, though I don't think he explained what he meant properly. I think halfbacks fit into two categories: those who decide what they will do before they pick up the ball, and those who pick up the ball then decide what they are going to do. Of the current AB's halfbacks Weepu and Cowan fit into the first category, and Andy Ellis into the second. Even when the AB's get quick ball Cowan/Weepu sum up the options before passing - therefore the ball isn't that quick. In contrast Ellis picks up the ball immediately once it becomes available - even though he takes a while to pass, it actually gets to the backs faster than it would with Cowan/Weepu. I actually think Ellis's style is quite effective against South African teams, as they can take a while to get back in the defensive line, hence can be exposed by the quick ball. However once the defensive line is set Cowan/Weepu's style is far more effective, as it gives the first-five more time to make decisions.

Personally I still wouldn't pick Ellis (as I'm a huge fan of Mathewson) but I do understand what the AB's selectors see in him.

Still prefer Slade over Steyn, lol?

For the All Blacks... yes. For South Africa.... no. Steyn suits the South African style of play - he sits deep in the pocket and kicks well for territory and at goal. He doesn't take the ball to the line at all, and his defence is a bit questionable. I really wonder how Morne Steyn would have been judged if the AB's had converted even half of their try scoring opportunities ..... Steyn looked great sitting behind a dominant pack, but as has been shown all year he is far less effective behind pack going backwards (as the AB's pack was at times on Saturday). Slade had a poor game, but it doesn't suddenly make him a bad player. He has had a very positive start to his test career - there are few players than can claim they never had a poor test.

The tactics that the AB's adopted (bombs/chip-kicks) were interesting, and didn't really suit Slade game at all. I'm assuming it was a tactic derived for this game, but Slade has never been a great at chip kicks (and it showed!); I feel Cruden would have been far more effective with this game plan. His kicking in general was pretty poor, especially at the kickoff, where the AB's didn't even look like they could compete for the ball. Slade seemed very anxious to make something happen whenever he got the ball in hand, which is not his strength - hopefully he learns from this match, and is better next time he gets a chance.

It will be interesting to see how this match affects the AB's RWC selections. Dagg, Toeava, and Kahui certainly did enough in my mind to secure their spots. It will be interesting to see who of Gear, Guildford, Sivivatu, and Jane make the final squad - I'd pick Guildford and Jane, but I really have no idea who the AB's selectors will take. Despite having a poor match I still think Slade has done enough in earlier matches to secure his spot as Carter's backup. While he hasn't stood out, Andy Ellis has probably done enough to keep his spot too.

I think this match again showed that the AB's need a specialist 7 to backup McCaw (I'm favouring Luke Braid at the moment), but it is probably far too late to introduce him now. It sounds like Anthony Boric is playing for North Harbour on Friday, so will (hopefully) be included ahead of Hoeata. In proving his fitness I think Woodcock has done enough to secure his spot, and I think Crockett will miss out to Afoa due to Crockett's lack of versatility.

 

[Larksea]

So have the people that hated Donald for so long thought up a name for Colin Slade yet? maybe Colin Spade?... Tough one, not as obvious as Duck is for Donald.

I thought it was a good game, very interesting really you may never see a game with such contrasting styles. Crazy stuff.

The All Blacks cut the boks to shreads but ultimately failed to convert that to points on the scoreboard. Which does line up with my prediction of the game that if the All Blacks gel and play to their potnetial they would win easy but that is a tough ask for a team full of new combinations and players on injury comeback. I honestly think with a couple more games together that side would gel and be able to beat anyone. Though I do have some concerns over a few players.

The naughty Chair:

Hosea Gear - such a powerful player and dominant at the end of last year but he's now had 4 or so tests against Either SA or AUS and he hasn't had a good game in any of those tests. Of The 6 wing options in the squad (Jane, Zac, Sivi, Toeava, Kahui & Gear) right now I'd rate him 6th. He didn't do anything bad as such though the boks did make hay kicking into his corner. But he didn't do anything worthy of note either. Gears strength has always been his finishing, the all blacks created so many chances but Gear wasn't around when they needed finishing.

Colin Slade - kinda cracked a bit, his kicking around the field was pretty poor and it was often the reason the boks got the field position they needed to kick for 3 points. 0 from 2 at goal - both should have been slotted.

Adam Thompson - Just too many penalties and out muscled at the breakdown, he does ok at times but I've always felt that he becomes a passenger in games that become a physical battle. He has come out and complained about the ref at the breakdown and he does have a point, his oppoite did get a way with murder but I still think thompson put himself in too many 50/50 situations within range of the goal. At the end of the day he gave 4 penalties and didn't win a single turnover. He needed to be more patient and trust in the All Blacks defence. The Boks never really looked like scoring a try it wasn't worth going for desperate turnovers.

The Good Guys:

Dagg - he was impressive, though I dont buy into all this talk about how he should become the #1 fullback straight away. The reality is Mills has been very good too and looking at the first game against SA he setup a number of trys and importantly was better at linking with his wingers - Dagg seemed to go out on his own and run away from his support rather than put his supporting players into space like Mills does.

Sam Whitelock - He's been pretty average lately but he was a lot better in this game. I can't give him a glowing report because he lacks the physical grunt the AB's needed but he was much busier around the park and better in the lineout.

Toeava - looked good though that knock on will haunt him - like Dagg & kahui he looked deadly but lacked the killer strike needed to score the try.

Kahui - Impressive for only like his 2nd game in a loong time, though he did drop off a few tackles, a couple of times when covering more than one attacker. he also came up with two big tackles that forced turnovers. Like Toeava and others a couple of times he missed the finishing touch to get the ball over the line, though at least he did get over once his try was a very impressive effort.


Overall Bad Aspects:

Physicality - I think Kaino, Messam and Afoa (though his side of the scrum was ok at best) were loan rangers in this area, Maybe the forwards just needed a couple more bigger guys to sure up the scrum and maul area, A franks brother and a Thorn/Boric.

Breakdown, yes the boks 6 got away with murder but the AB's could have done better. Players got Isolated and too many penalties were given away.

Kicking - overall the kicking was bad 0/2 at goal and poor around the park. The boks live off field position and they were given the position they needed to win the game from some bad kicks. in some ways it was how the game was lost, that and the lack of finishing.

Finishing - about 6 genuine try scoring chances created (6 more than the boks) only one converted to points. This is the area I expect Gear to shine, he was nowhere to be seen.

Good:

The All Blacks tore the boks up, Dagg, Toeava and Kahui in particular created a lot of chances. A side with more time together will convert a lot more of those chances.

We know a lot more about where players are at going into the world cup. Should be much easier to pick the 30man squad now.

Other observiations of mine:

I think Hore is NZ's #1 hooker, Both Mealamu and Hore have had their chance - Hore is clearly better.

piri weepu is more important than ever to the All Blacks at 9, I dont think Cowan or Elis are giving the backs the fast ball they need. I'd have Mathewson, Leonard or Aaron Smith over Elis and all these guys get faster ball than cowan too - though Cowans strengths are other aspects of his game.

As far as the TMO stuff that went on. It was just bizzare, I've never seen anything like that, refs know the TMO can't rule in that area and professional refs should know the rules and stick to them. So many trys in rugby come from passes that look forward it is part of the game. I would be happier if they did go back and look for forward passes because if they did then the All Blacks would have made it to the Semi finals of the 07 world cup and prob would have won it. This call which both the TMO and standing ref are at fault for has thrown a cloud of doubt over the way the game is ruled. And the level of professionalism in that area of the game.

Also give some credit to the boks, Morne Steyn in particular for his kicking. They followed their gameplan and kicked their points perfectly. bismarck du plessis was uber good and their defence had a lot of desperation under huge pressure and it paid off. Any other side would have crumbled under the huge pressure the AB's put down.

 

[Natas]

I agree with most of what you say there darwin, what you did not touch on was the Monny Bill question. IMO he has not shown enough to be picked for the RWC. Thoughts for the Kiwis would be good.

 

[Darwin]

I agree with most of what you say there darwin, what you did not touch on was the Monny Bill question. IMO he has not shown enough to be picked for the RWC. Thoughts for the Kiwis would be good.

$BW will definately be going to RWC. He is the only genuine backup for Nonu at 12 (Toeava/Kahui/Carter could cover there though), and while he wasn't a stand-out on Saturday, he didn't play too badly. His defence was good, and when he actually took on the line (which admittedly was seldom) he was very effective. I think it is clear that Nonu is the first choice 12, but $BW will certainly be in the squad as a backup midfielder (hopefully sitting watching from the stands for the big games).

 

[donmcdazzle]

So have the people that hated Donald for so long thought up a name for Colin Slade yet? maybe Colin Spade?... Tough one, not as obvious as Duck is for Donald.


Adam Thompson - Just too many penalties and out muscled at the breakdown, he does ok at times but I've always felt that he becomes a passenger in games that become a physical battle. He has come out and complained about the ref at the breakdown and he does have a point, his oppoite did get a way with murder but I still think thompson put himself in too many 50/50 situations within range of the goal. At the end of the day he gave 4 penalties and didn't win a single turnover. He needed to be more patient and trust in the All Blacks defence. The Boks never really looked like scoring a try it wasn't worth going for desperate turnovers.

You haven't looked at the stats then? Thomson was the busiest forward on the park. Granted he didn't have a great "7" game but he had a decent game nonetheless, although as you say penalties let him down. He was certainly more impressive than Messam who proved again he just can't step up. The gap between him and Read is massive. They'll both make the squad either way.

You're right Donald would have likely turned in a very similar performace as Slade so they are very comparable.

 

[Darwin]

You haven't looked at the stats then? Thomson was the busiest forward on the park. Granted he didn't have a great "7" game but he had a decent game nonetheless, although as you say penalties let him down. He was certainly more impressive than Messam who proved again he just can't step up. The gap between him and Read is massive. They'll both make the squad either way.

The problem is he never has a good "7" game - whenever he has the sole responsibility of an openside he struggles (and the team struggles at the breakdown because of this). It is the same no matter what level he plays - even when he has started at 7 for Otago in the ITM Cup he struggles. He is far more effective when he has a genuine openside flanker alongside him, which allows him to play his natural game. I would probably have him in the RWC squad - as you say he had a huge work rate this match (as always), but I would include another openside flanker as well. Messem again didn't really play to his potential - I'd happily replace him with a genuine 7 (with McCaw/Thomson covering 8), but I think it is far too late for this (and I'm sure the AB's selectors will stick with him).

You're right Donald would have likely turned in a very similar performace as Slade so they are very comparable.

Your probably right, though I do remember Cruden having a similar performance on his starting debut vs Australia last year It doesn't necessarily mean that they are not good enough for test level - it simply suggests they had a poor game. You were certainly correct when you questioned before the game whether Slade would step up (and I was clearly wrong when I thought he would!), but I still have a lot of faith in Slade. The AB's game plan certainly didn't suit Slade either - not an excuse at all, I just think Cruden would have been far more effective with the game plan, as I mentioned above. If Slade continues to struggle at test level I will definately concede he is not ready for test rugby, but he has had a reasonably good start to his test career, so I wouldn't write him off after one poor game.

 

[Larksea]

You haven't looked at the stats then? Thomson was the busiest forward on the park. Granted he didn't have a great "7" game but he had a decent game nonetheless, although as you say penalties let him down. He was certainly more impressive than Messam who proved again he just can't step up. The gap between him and Read is massive. They'll both make the squad either way.

You're right Donald would have likely turned in a very similar performace as Slade so they are very comparable.

Bulldust, Donalds record suggests that he would have done better than 0/2 at goal and at the very least his kicking would have been better around the park. He gets a lot more air on his high kicks which was needed. And Slade didn't produce anything with ball in hand to suggest his strength as a playmaker contributed more to the game than Donald could have.

I like slade, he's a good player. But so is donald, it's hilarious that people crucify Donald for every mistake he's made yet they are so philosophical about any mistake Slade makes. Donald was never given that margin for error time time to imprive by the NZ public. Donald only had a few bad games in his ~22 tests for the AB's, in comparison slade's not doing any better so far. Cruden either.

Yes I've looked at thompson's stats, the most important one being he conceded 4 of the Teams 10 penalties, he made a good number of tackles yes. Kaino & Messam didn't give away one between them. Thompson Made more tackles but missed two Messam missed none.

Messam Didn't have a standout game but he didn't have a bad game either, Solid off the back of the scrum, no big runs though he did bump a few off and Commit defenders and importantly he didn't give any ball away. Messam and Thompson were 3rd equal at breakdown arrivals though it should be noted that Messam only played about ~68min or so to Thompson's 80. Which makes Messam 3rd outright, thompson 4th.

Kaino & Messam had similar games, solid but not standout. It was a shame for Messam I had hoped he would do better but he wasn't bad either and at least he didn't hand the boks points in front of goal.

honestly I think the AB's should be smart about loose forward selections, in full strength lineups they should select messam on the bench against the boks and Thompson on the bench against Australia.

 

[Larksea]

Your probably right, though I do remember Cruden having a similar performance on his starting debut vs Australia last year It doesn't necessarily mean that they are not good enough for test level - it simply suggests they had a poor game. You were certainly correct when you questioned before the game whether Slade would step up (and I was clearly wrong when I thought he would!), but I still have a lot of faith in Slade. The AB's game plan certainly didn't suit Slade either - not an excuse at all, I just think Cruden would have been far more effective with the game plan, as I mentioned above. If Slade continues to struggle at test level I will definately concede he is not ready for test rugby, but he has had a reasonably good start to his test career, so I wouldn't write him off after one poor game.

Another classic example, Donald Was never afforded this leeway when he was Dan's backup. So philosophical all of a sudden. And people call me bias.

 

[Darwin]

Another classic example, Donald Was never afforded this leeway when he was Dan's backup. So philosophical all of a sudden. And people call me bias.

What? Donald was given more than 20 tests before he was finally dropped. Surely that is plenty of time for the AB's selectors to decide whether he is good enough or not. I'm certainly not as critical of Donald as many; I think he is a very good NPC and Super Rugby player, but I don't think his game is suited to test level. I'm simply saying you shouldn't write a player off after one poor game (especially when they have shown some promise in earlier games) - what is remotely biased about that?

 

[donmcdazzle]

What? Donald was given more than 20 tests before he was finally dropped. Surely that is plenty of time for the AB's selectors to decide whether he is good enough or not. I'm certainly not as critical of Donald as many; I think he is a very good NPC and Super Rugby player, but I don't think his game is suited to test level. I'm simply saying you shouldn't write a player off after one poor game (especially when they have shown some promise in earlier games) - what is remotely biased about that?

I agree Darwin I'd stick with Slade, I just didn't think he would handle that game very well due to him having not really played for a long long time and having new combo's all around him. Couple that with a fired up SA team rushing at him, led to a poor game. I don't necessarily think Cruden would've played any better either, even though I am a die hard Cruden fan. I was always amused by the people saying he was so cool and composed etc, and his reputation was growing all the time he was out injured this year. I think he is a good player, but never thought he would do well in this game. His goal kicking is a worry though, hopefully if he gets on again in a tight game Weepu is on and can do the kicking.

Larksea Donald would've struggled (as would have Cruden I reckon), Donnie always plays awful when he is rushed, and in that game he would've been very rushed. Donald's last pressure goalkicking and field kicking game (Hong Kong) was just as bad as Slade so I don't think there's any ground to suggest he would have been any better.

 

[Shaggy]

What? Donald was given more than 20 tests before he was finally dropped. Surely that is plenty of time for the AB's selectors to decide whether he is good enough or not. I'm certainly not as critical of Donald as many; I think he is a very good NPC and Super Rugby player, but I don't think his game is suited to test level. I'm simply saying you shouldn't write a player off after one poor game (especially when they have shown some promise in earlier games) - what is remotely biased about that?

The reality is that Donald has no chance of being selected he isn't wanted by the current coaching set up regardless of whether you are pro-Donald, anti-Donald, or Donald-neutral. Cruden has a slightly better chance than Donald, but not by much, as they surely would have included him on the bench in this match (instead of two halfbacks) if he was still in the frame.

... So yes, the reality is that Carter's back ups are Slade and Weepu, and they will be named in the 30 man squad, regardless of how they performed in this match - the only impact may be who sits on the subs bench for the big matches

 

[ozmanoshe]

You haven't looked at the stats then? Thomson was the busiest forward on the park. Granted he didn't have a great "7" game but he had a decent game nonetheless, although as you say penalties let him down. He was certainly more impressive than Messam who proved again he just can't step up. The gap between him and Read is massive. They'll both make the squad either way.

You're right Donald would have likely turned in a very similar performace as Slade so they are very comparable.

With the selectors now out of time to replace either Messam or Thompson with a specialist openside, I would advocate seriously considering dropping Flynn as the 3rd Hooker and taking an additional specialist openside in the 30 man squad. I really don't see the point of naming a 3rd hooker like Flynn who will essentially be a traveling reserve unless there is an injury to Hore or Mealamu. It also gives the selectors the perfect opportunity to introduce a specialist openside to the team's systems and perhaps even play in a few of the pool matches to get the combinations going. After all the tournament is in NZ how hard will it be to call up Flynn if they do get an injury and he's also had enough time to get up to speed with the ABs systems.

What does everyone else think - to me ABs need better options in the loose a whole lot more than they need a 3rd wheel at hooker.

 

[Darwin]

I agree Darwin I'd stick with Slade, I just didn't think he would handle that game very well due to him having not really played for a long long time and having new combo's all around him. Couple that with a fired up SA team rushing at him, led to a poor game. I don't necessarily think Cruden would've played any better either, even though I am a die hard Cruden fan. I was always amused by the people saying he was so cool and composed etc, and his reputation was growing all the time he was out injured this year. I think he is a good player, but never thought he would do well in this game. His goal kicking is a worry though, hopefully if he gets on again in a tight game Weepu is on and can do the kicking.

Larksea Donald would've struggled (as would have Cruden I reckon), Donnie always plays awful when he is rushed, and in that game he would've been very rushed. Donald's last pressure goalkicking and field kicking game (Hong Kong) was just as bad as Slade so I don't think there's any ground to suggest he would have been any better.

Yeah Slades goal-kicking is a worry for me, as he's really not a proven goal-kicker at any level. He seemed to hitting the ball alright on Saturday, it just looked like he was aiming in the right direction (well at least it looked that way ). I'm assuming (or at least hoping) his goal-kicking must be reasonably good in training, otherwise the AB's selectors would be very dubious about picking him. Like you, I would feel a lot more comfortable with Weepu kicking for goal, as Weepu is someone who actually seems to kick better the more pressure he has one him. If Carter does get injured I think you would have to start Weepu alongside Slade (and arguably Weepu should be starting alongside Carter in any case).

 

[Shaggy]

Yeah Slades goal-kicking is a worry for me, as he's really not a proven goal-kicker at any level. He seemed to hitting the ball alright on Saturday, it just looked like he was aiming in the right direction (well at least it looked that way ). I'm assuming (or at least hoping) his goal-kicking must be reasonably good in training, otherwise the AB's selectors would be very dubious about picking him. Like you, I would feel a lot more comfortable with Weepu kicking for goal, as Weepu is someone who actually seems to kick better the more pressure he has one him. If Carter does get injured I think you would have to start Weepu alongside Slade (and arguably Weepu should be starting alongside Carter in any case).

Israel Dagg is another goal kicking option ... my gut feeling is that he's likely to feature as an impact player off the bench, and maybe start during at least one pool match (possibly with Slade at 10) - i'd feel a lot better with two guys on the paddock at any given time, that can kick goals ... even DC has off days with his kicking

 

[Darwin]

With the selectors now out of time to replace either Messam or Thompson with a specialist openside, I would advocate seriously considering dropping Flynn as the 3rd Hooker and taking an additional specialist openside in the 30 man squad. I really don't see the point of naming a 3rd hooker like Flynn who will essentially be a traveling reserve unless there is an injury to Hore or Mealamu. It also gives the selectors the perfect opportunity to introduce a specialist openside to the team's systems and perhaps even play in a few of the pool matches to get the combinations going. After all the tournament is in NZ how hard will it be to call up Flynn if they do get an injury and he's also had enough time to get up to speed with the ABs systems.

What does everyone else think - to me ABs need better options in the loose a whole lot more than they need a 3rd wheel at hooker.

It is actually not a bad idea. The issue with taking two hookers (e.g. Mealamu and Hore) is that if one suffers a minor injury (say ruling them out for a week) the AB's will have not option but to drop them from the squad (ruling them out for the rest of the tournament) and replace them with Flynn, as they need to have 2 hookers in the matchday 22. They seemed to have abandoned the idea of Afoa covering hooker, which is unfortunate, as he would have been a great option to cover in a situation such as that. Potentially they could take 2 hookers, but I don't think they will take the risk.

Israel Dagg is another goal kicking option ... my gut feeling is that he's likely to feature as an impact player off the bench, and maybe start during at least one pool match (possibly with Slade at 10) - i'd feel a lot better with two guys on the paddock at any given time, that can kick goals ... even DC has off days with his kicking

Yeah, I wonder how much goal-kicking Dagg has been doing? He is certainly another handy option. Hopefully he is doing lots of practice. I too get the feeling he may be used as an impact player of the bench for the AB's, as he's shown he can certainly make an impact!

 

[donmcdazzle]

I'd love for Dagg to start. He just seems like one of those guys who thrive under pressure and in big games. Weepu is the same, they never seem to look rushed or flustered.

The way Dagg played after his big injury layoff and half a game for Hawkes Bay was incredible.

 

[Shaggy]

It is actually not a bad idea. The issue with taking two hookers (e.g. Mealamu and Hore) is that if one suffers a minor injury (say ruling them out for a week) the AB's will have not option but to drop them from the squad (ruling them out for the rest of the tournament) and replace them with Flynn, as they need to have 2 hookers in the matchday 22. They seemed to have abandoned the idea of Afoa covering hooker, which is unfortunate, as he would have been a great option to cover in a situation such as that. Potentially they could take 2 hookers, but I don't think they will take the risk.



Yeah, I wonder how much goal-kicking Dagg has been doing? He is certainly another handy option. Hopefully he is doing lots of practice. I too get the feeling he may be used as an impact player of the bench for the AB's, as he's shown he can certainly make an impact!

Yep, if Afoa got his lineout throwing right, and he hadn't gone off injured in the Aussie game, he may have got some game time at hooker against the Boks ... but they will certainly name the three hookers and the three half backs from this squad, for the injury cover reasons you've stated.

... I guess the selectors are in a bit of a quandary as to whether they include an additional specialist openside or not ... I guess with 20/20 hindsight, they should have swapped Thomson and Messam around in the second half of the Bok match, to see if Messam was any better at openside. Messam seems to have a quieter game than Thomson, but he seems to do the basics right, but Thomson seems to be a better option in the lineout, so I guess if they go for a specialist 7, I guess Messam would miss out.

I think they'll go with what they've got, but the next player on injury standby, regardless of which loose forward got injured, will probably now be an openside (not an 8/6 like Vito)

... I think Dagg will have definitely been told to get his kicking tee out at practice after this last match