Leigh Halfpenny player of the tournament.

Just saw it on the bbc

Obviously really.

t1000advancedprototype wrote:Obviously really.

+1

Although it is the BBC, so it was probably Ashton!

nathan wrote:

t1000advancedprototype wrote:Obviously really.

+1

Although it is the BBC, so it was probably Ashton!

Or Sheridan - he didn't play either

Bravo

2nd place - Zanni (ITA); 3rd place - Hogg (SCO). Also

Yeah deserved player of the tournament, very consistent

Zanni 2nd, Hogg 3rd. Did not expect Zanni to be 2nd, but fair enough, good on him.

Not being harsh but Tuppance had a good tournament but didn't really show how good he is. I can not remember him doing much in attack at all, and he wasn't really put in any sticky situations defensively. That said he was very solid in the air and kicking off the tee, so I can see why me was chosen.

Personally I would have gone foe Piccamoles, he was a stand out in most games, even in a losing side.

Halfpenny doesn't score as many tries as he did before, because..

a) He's fullback and fully committed to that position
b) Wales have TWO good wings now

Halfpenny could play anywhere in the backs and give 8billion percent. He's not even small. 5'10 isn't short. His arms are huge it makes him look short plus the rest of the backline is over 7'2" tall.

It reminds me of the early 70's

RubyGuby wrote:It reminds me of the early 70's

What does? Onllwyn? More like 1870's!

No t1000, In the early 70's you got so much for just 1/2p - This feels the same - Thanks for biting anyway

2 fruit salads, 1 black jack and a refresher all for 1/2p

ScarletSpiderman wrote:Not being harsh but Tuppance had a good tournament but didn't really show how good he is. I can not remember him doing much in attack at all, and he wasn't really put in any sticky situations defensively. That said he was very solid in the air and kicking off the tee, so I can see why me was chosen.

Personally I would have gone foe Piccamoles, he was a stand out in most games, even in a losing side.

Agree. Can't agree with a player of any tournament being a FB if he wasnt involved in attack the way 1/2p wasnt. Means the most he could have done was the usual FB house keeping stuff, high balls and defensive work. The modern Fullback must attack and if anything this was one major flaw inthe Welsh gameplan. Telegraphing the fact that the 15 is not going to be used on attack makes it far easier for opposition defences. If hes FB in Oz and the status quo remains it will make it that much harder to keep Oz guessing.

Imo a good fullback ought to be able to defend before he can rightly be called a good fullback. Ideally everyone wants a fullback who can add electricity in attack but why overemphasise that trait at the potential detriment of his defensive qualities? What's the use if he ships points whenever the opposition get behind the defensive line? Defence is a critical part of the FB's agenda not unlike what scrummaging is to props. Unless the opposition attack is totally inept, you generally look to the FB to catch those high balls, put in those clearances and generally mop up dangerous situations.

Bravo 1/2p on a well-deserved award

If Haflpenny wasn't a goal kicker, would he get player of the tournament? He did what was required of him by the coach but I can't help but feel that he's representative of the entire tournament: a distinct lack of attack. Just because you have two good wingers doesn't mean you can't add a third attacking option.

Don't get me wrong. He was Wales' most reliable player in the tournament but that shouldn't be confused with player of the tournament. I agree with Taylorman that you should also stand out more than do what is asked of you. Although he didn't play the entire tournament, I thought Tipuric had more of an impact than Halfpenny did.

Picamoles is a good shout Scarlet. I guess these things get given to the winning team and among the Welsh players who played throughout the tournament Halfpenny was the pick of them. I really like Halfpenny as a player and I just feel that this award is not helping him as it encourages Gatland or Howley to keep him playing the same way within himself. I just can't see the harm of him entering the line from time to time causing doubt in the opposition's minds. I see it similar to Scotland's approach of having Visser and Maitland and not utilising them. Obviously Wales were more effective in other areas but if you have an attacking string to your bow, it seems criminal not to use it.

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:If Haflpenny wasn't a goal kicker, would he get player of the tournament? He did what was required of him by the coach but I can't help but feel that he's representative of the entire tournament: a distinct lack of attack. Just because you have two good wingers doesn't mean you can't add a third attacking option.

Don't get me wrong. He was Wales' most reliable player in the tournament but that shouldn't be confused with player of the tournament. I agree with Taylorman that you should also stand out more than do what is asked of you. Although he didn't play the entire tournament, I thought Tipuric had more of an impact than Halfpenny did.

Picamoles is a good shout Scarlet. I guess these things get given to the winning team and among the Welsh players who played throughout the tournament Halfpenny was the pick of them. I really like Halfpenny as a player and I just feel that this award is not helping him as it encourages Gatland or Howley to keep him playing the same way within himself. I just can't see the harm of him entering the line from time to time causing doubt in the opposition's minds. I see it similar to Scotland's approach of having Visser and Maitland and not utilising them. Obviously Wales were more effective in other areas but if you have an attacking string to your bow, it seems criminal not to use it.

Yes goalkicking made the difference and I agree, he epitomised the tournament. Get your goals, defend your line and you have a good chance of not losing. Halfpenny is an excellent defender and kicked some crucial goals. I'd have gone for Tipuric more so for the positive difference he made in the decider. As good as he is Halfpenny is obviously seen as a risk on attack for whatever reason- whether it be simply that if hes up in the line he cant stop the potential intercepts etc. But I still see that as negative thinking. Just an opinion as I see attacking fullbacks first and formost as attacking weapons in the Cullen, Mils, Dagg, Beale mould. Having them sit at the back all day just rules out so many match winning potential options.

Hogg however is an excellent counter-attacker. 2 best FBs in the 6Ns . Zanni terrific too

If Halfpenny wasn't a goal kicker, would he get player of the tournament?

He scored a try, made a try, saved two certain tries, apart from the 20 minute first half blip against us he probably would have been the most accurate dead ball kicker. Tackles above his weight every time, hasn't missed a tackle not only during the 2013 6Ns but for TWO WHOLE YEARS, and I cannae recall him missing the high balls that came to him. He follows the game plan precisely and I am sure if his coaches tactics changed you would see him as a devastating offensive FB............. what more can he do?.

A country mile ahead of any other player in the tournament in my eyes.

Completely agree with the comments re halfpenny not joining the line. Some have argued on other threads that to attack the line is to leave no one at home behind if you're turned over. However, I think that's just such a negative mind set. For me, when a team is attacking, and all being equal there will be the same number of people involved in a tackle and ruck situation from both teams, the defending team usually have a full back stuck at full back to mop up any mess or breaks in defence. This is a perfect opportunity for the attacking team to add an extra man from fullback into the line and create an overlap, or become the extra man that is not picked up. Kevin Morgan for Wales used to do it brilliantly, and Lee Bryne joined the line well too. To choose not to is to turn down the over lap option, and I think this has led to the one on one bish bash bosh that we have seen from Wales of late. It works in the 6N, clearly. Against the 3/4N and PI teams, who are more physical arguably that in Europe, then we come out of the arm wrestle worse off.

I appreciate that I'm over simplifying and generalising here, but with Halfpenny staying back in attack unless close to the opposition try line (all pre planned I'm sure) we are essentially a man down in attack unnecessarily. Great for defence though.

And its not Halfpenys fault he's back there, so its no reflection on the player.

The culture of not letting a player find his own way through a match to that extent is slightly disturbing though, but in fairness it worked this time, helped by Englands inability to score more tries in the 3 matches prior to this, only setting an eight point margin from 3 straight wins.

In the end the combination of one side scoring them, the other not, made the difference.

1/2p tends to get a lot of credit for his goalkicking (which is great) and he makes his tackles last up (which a lot of FB'sdo) but he then plays a defencive game ball in hand.

I thought he was very good, but I can't look beyond Picamoles and Robshaw personally

The other thing about Halfpenny not attacking is you simply cannot adopt that stance against the SH. Not having an attacking fullback popping up in different places makes defending that much simpler and predictable. To expect his defensive abilities to counter that completely is frought thinking. That is Gatlands dilemma.

Does he put Halfpenney at Fullback and ask him to do something he hasnt all tournament against supposedly stronger foe?

Time will tell but it has to be something Gatland and co. will be pondering over.

Parisse or Picamoles for me but Halfpenny was pretty awesome. Best home nations player for sure and a shoe in for the Lions.

Halfpenny did his job well and Robshaw was everywhere for the entire tournament. Hibbard was excellent too, but my vote would go to either Mike Philips or Picamoles.

flyhalffactory wrote:

If Halfpenny wasn't a goal kicker, would he get player of the tournament?

He scored a try, made a try, saved two certain tries, apart from the 20 minute first half blip against us he probably would have been the most accurate dead ball kicker. Tackles above his weight every time, hasn't missed a tackle not only during the 2013 6Ns but for TWO WHOLE YEARS, and I cannae recall him missing the high balls that came to him. He follows the game plan precisely and I am sure if his coaches tactics changed you would see him as a devastating offensive FB............. what more can he do?.

A country mile ahead of any other player in the tournament in my eyes.

Sean Maitland did exactly that too, probably more i think, yet he's not on even on the list.

I think 1/2 penny was the obvious choice, but mainly for his all round contribution, including goal kicking. I also think the BBC pundits spoke about him A LOT during the 6N which probably helped boost his votes a bit. But he deserves the award, he is a fantastic player, always looked special. I remember his first game for Wales, looked like a little kid but he played very well. He has the composure of a much more experienced player, which I think is a very good quality in a player.

t1000advancedprototype wrote:He's not even small. 5'10 isn't short. His arms are huge it makes him look short plus the rest of the backline is over 7'2" tall.

There is no chance he is 5'10, 5'8 at most, not that it makes that much difference in a game of big men.

flyhalffactory wrote:

If Halfpenny wasn't a goal kicker, would he get player of the tournament?

He scored a try, made a try, saved two certain tries, apart from the 20 minute first half blip against us he probably would have been the most accurate dead ball kicker. Tackles above his weight every time, hasn't missed a tackle not only during the 2013 6Ns but for TWO WHOLE YEARS, and I cannae recall him missing the high balls that came to him. He follows the game plan precisely and I am sure if his coaches tactics changed you would see him as a devastating offensive FB............. what more can he do?.

A country mile ahead of any other player in the tournament in my eyes.

You ask the question what more can he do? As you say, he followed the game plan precisely so there isn't much more he can do. My criticism is not of the player Halfpenny. I think he's a terrific player. But take the Welsh front row. After Ireland, they turned the scrum into a powerful attacking weapon and easily had the best scrum of the tournament. They did everything that was asked of them but I don't see the plaudits for them. To me this is a bit like the IRB player of the tournament. Certain positions stand out and if you do the goalkicking then so much the better. I can't praise Carter enough but no way was he the player of the year last year.

A country mile ahead of any other player in the tournament? In terms of consistency I think he was the most consistent or reliable but Picamoles made more an offensive impact for me. If Wales are to be serious about beating SH opposition, they can't be fooled into thinking that their current gameplan is going to be their best way of winning. I think the linking between forwards and backs was a step up from last year and the twin fetchers of Tipuric and Warburton were more effective offensively speaking (I include on defence in terms of being effective offensively) than the defensive wall of Lydiate and Faletau and the fetching of Warburton last year.

Where Wales have to step up is their use of the ball in set play. Many of their tries by the wingers came from counter-attacks where the opposition line was not set for defending. They were very well taken opportunities but you can't just expect to be able to have those chances and take them to win the game. In order to place real pressure on the SH teams, you have to keep the scoreboard ticking over. Much has been said of the Welsh defence and rightly so but despite the tags thrown at Super rugby of turnstile defence and basketball rugby, the SH teams are no mugs when it comes to defending. They are smart at the breakdown as well and so to take the game to them you have to be more varied in attack. I'm not suggesting Halfpenny stays up in the line on every attack but he needs to be given freedom to add himself when the situation is apt. Why? Because when you do so, you create space for other players in future movements as the defensive line is in doubt. Wales played the best in the RWC against SA, for example, when they took the game to SA. They cannot hope to hold them out like other teams in the 6N this year. Your best chance of winning is putting points on the board and that comes from not all-out willy-nilly attack but assessing each situation and exploiting the numbers. After five games you need to have done more than score a try, set up a try and make a few crucial tackles. Halfpenny is capable of much more. It's like owning a Ferrari and only driving it in the city never getting out of first gear.

IronMike wrote:

t1000advancedprototype wrote:He's not even small. 5'10 isn't short. His arms are huge it makes him look short plus the rest of the backline is over 7'2" tall.

There is no chance he is 5'10, 5'8 at most, not that it makes that much difference in a game of big men.

He is never 5'10 in a million years. I bumped into him at the arms park this season a few times and he was actually shorter than my missus 5'6 with heels, I'd say he's 5'8 at best. As we walked past him he barely reached my shoulders height wise.

Whatever height he is..he got an award that he didn't deserve!





..AHA! That concentrated minds back onto the topic at hand....

Absolutely deserved. And glad to see Zanni got 2nd.

I'd say he was probably 5'9. 5'10 is the average male height, which seems short these days.

Halfpenny clearly was the player of the tournament IMO.

Hard to dispute. Although I'd have picked Ben Morgan if he'd played against Wales, and I think he would have made the difference in the England backrow and with his ball carrying.