Ireland v New Zealand ptII

I have a question - when kickers, having got themselves in the right place, and standing perfectly stil - looking at the posts, looking at the ball, and at the posts again - going through their ritual - why do so many of them shuffle their feet just before they begin.

I often wonder if its a deliberate attempt to try and encourage an early charge. In fairness most players would see feet moving and think thats the kicker stepping forward.

I suppose though its like feinting a penalty kick in football.



Also, the penalty with 30 seconds to go. No doubt Ireland went off their feet, but I also thought the all blacks tackler didn't (couldnt) get away quick enough. Richie McCaw also had hands in the ruck. owens told him to stop, but it could potentially have slowed down our ability to recycle.

Anyways... I think thats enough sour grapes for this morning!

I wasn't a kicker myself back in the time, but I thought it was something to do with freeing up their boots in poorer conditions (then you would build that into the standard kicking process).

There is a comment about NZ players running to the ref pleading for the conversion to be retaken.  Them running to the ref, and even McCaw going over didn't win them the re-take.  Owens knew the rules and would have allowed the conversion if successful and did in fact give the option to kick again after the miss.  Didn't see much of the running up to him myself.

TBH, we have drawn with NZ before, as soon as they drew level it didn't matter.  Neither a draw or a loss make a win.  And we have to aim for a win over NZ.

In the past displays like that from Ireland were on the back of displays from Best/Wallace/POC/BOD/ROG.  Wallace/ROG have retired and we are getting to a position where we have strength in those two areas.  Cronin did well replacing Best so early.  BOD isn't our best backline player any more (this is a season too far at international level for him, but he deserves everything for the effort he has put in over the years, and the drive he continues to have).  Other than POC, this display was routed more in the current generation of players.  If D Ryan gets back fit, and Touhy gets a run of games in green that could be a potent second row.  McCarthy gives depth and Toner can add something if needed.  No the strongest depth coming through but not a disaster.

What is needed in the coming 6Ns is for the ownership and drive of the team to move from Best/POC over to Healy/POM/SOB/Heaslip/Sexton/Kearney (not all of them but a couple need to assume control now on the field).

thebandwagonsociety wrote:I wasn't a kicker myself back in the time, but I thought it was something to do with freeing up their boots in poorer conditions (then you would build that into the standard kicking process).

That makes sense right enough! But you can understand how easy it is to charge early when you see movement after a prolonged period of statue-like concentration. Rules are rules I guess.

I guess I'm a bit late with this but anyway... congratulations to NZ. An incredible achievement and fully deserved. Also a huge admiration to the way the Irish took the game to them. I know this will offer little comfort to the irish fans, it must be hard to accept being so close but for a neutral what a game!

Well done to both teams yesterday!  

clivemcl wrote:I have a question - when kickers, having got themselves in the right place, and standing perfectly stil - looking at the posts, looking at the ball, and at the posts again - going through their ritual - why do so many of them shuffle their feet just before they begin.

I often wonder if its a deliberate attempt to try and encourage an early charge. In fairness most players would see feet moving and think thats the kicker stepping forward.

I suppose though its like feinting a penalty kick in football.



Also, the penalty with 30 seconds to go. No doubt Ireland went off their feet, but I also thought the all blacks tackler didn't (couldnt) get away quick enough. Richie McCaw also had hands in the ruck. owens told him to stop, but it could potentially have slowed down our ability to recycle.

Anyways... I think thats enough sour grapes for this morning!

Posted a long response where biltong had sliced it up and part two' the thread.

Anyway...here goes.
The shuffle is about finding the timing of the run in that you've practised a million Times to get the plant foot next to the ball around which the kicking foot pivots. Every kick is different. Ground. Weather. Field position etc. The shuffle is about getting the familiar steps into the ball from practice right.
Kickers don't give a toss about the chargers. Over their careers they know how far to place the ball out from the line and their own style so well that its never an issue. Cruden knows it too which is why he didn't flinch. He knows what he's doing. The chargers didn't. The rules are about forward movement. Not the shuffle. Cruden knew this.

Just reading the stats here, Heaslip made 21 tackles...

Huge credit I thought to Cruden for nailing the second kick. Massive pressure to seal the 14 wins for New Zealand and I was hugely impressed with Nigel Owens for ordering the re-kick which was entirely fair and the right thing to do. Under those circumstances and in that context credit where credit is due.

In fact I thought his performance was generally excellent, and he allowed that epic contest to unfold. I have no doubt had Joubert been in charge the game would have been quite different with his pedantic whistle being blown every 5 seconds. Hats off to Nigel Owens.

I should also say that I've never found myself supporting a non-Scots side quite like I found myself cheering on Ireland yesterday. It was a wonderful effort, and perhaps had Cruden missed that 2nd kick the result would have been reflective of the game, but the ABs are not the best side in the world for nothing and their competitive spirit was a wonder to behold (and no small amount of skill from Cruden either who was superb throughout).

A wonderful match, and huge credit to Ireland for turning things around after last week. Just a shame you didn't play that way against Australia, because I don't think they'd have coped.

Ordering the rekick was made easier because not very intelligently the same chargers did the same...and wrong thing with the previous try. They charged early. That time cruden got the kick.
So you could say...a bit like sexton...pressure made them do the wrong things n the heat f the moment. Sure costed them.

I agree that chargers make little difference to a kicker in the zone. Thats why its hard to stomach. I think Cruden was missing the first attempt whether the chargers were early or not.

But sure, like has been said - it was the win we wanted, not the draw.

Interesting interview with D'arcy here. Perhaps the first time I've ever heard the phrase 'feck all use' on the BBC!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/25087163?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=facebook

Agree that it was totally the right decision to retake the kick and think Owens would have done it without any appealing by NZ. Just a shame to see football style appeals creeping more and more into rugby. Also, to be very clear, it isn't just NZ that do this (far from it), more of a general comment.

NZ showed why they are a great team yesterday, they never gave up and always backed themselves to win. The handling from almost the entire team for their winning try was impressive. Compare that to the balls up made by Scotland when Maitland (ironically a NZer) failed to commit the defender and then his pass caused Lamont to check his momentum meaning the defence were able to get back to him. NZ would have scored that 99 times out of 100, possibly more.

I would say "congratulations Ireland" for such an awesome game. However that would be patronising given the final gripping climax.

But wow, don't think I've ever seen NZ so comprehensively outplayed for 40 minutes.

I always felt though that NZ would claw it back somehow. As the second half unfolded particularly. Ireland started to wind the clock down far too early - taking an age to do anything, they spoiled their own momentum And gave NZ time to regroup and focus.

From there it was clinical All Blacks stuff. Wave after wave of ball retention, forcing over 180 tackles from Ireland. People have been blaming Ireland's fitness - not so in my mind. It's the disparity in the number of tackles made that wore them out. As the fatigue came, so did the errors, the injuries and the penalties. Finally the gaps opened and crotty with fresh legs waltzed home. The All Blacks bench and the timing of the injection of it was awesome.

17 - 0 to New Zealand in the second half tells a tale. Any kind of score from Ireland and it might have been a bridge too far. But what a Test match!

A game of two halves was never more fittingly described. Hansen resisted the urge to dress the players down at half time. He knew they knew what they needed to do.

It was a great experience watching it with Irish mates to give me an insight into how they lived the match. The first half was utter bewilderment at how well Ireland played but the pessimism came out in the second half and there were eerie echoes of the 6N game against Wales two years ago when the same friend said after the Sexton miss, we've lost. So he's your man to blame!

Seeing the hurt on their faces brought home how close I was to feeling the same. Truly a cruel blow but the cliche should be now you need to put in an 81 minute performance.

This match hurt more than Australia in 1991 and I never thought that could be possible at the time. On the plus I have always said that we have a great bunch of players and enough talent to compete with the best. We may not have had enough to win but hopefully at least our players will be recognised as of a high standard now.

Post match I had to turn off my phone for three hours. I couldnt speak to anyone I was so furious. I am still in ribbons over it to be honest. Im not sure a rugby match will ever hurt as much again.

I really dont care that Cruden was allowed kick it again and nailed it the second time. A draw is the same as a loss IMO.

I think what most frustrates me about Ireland is the inconsistency. It looked like a completely different side to the one humbled by Australia, and I think it's most epitomised by Jamie Heaslip. Undoubtedly world class at his best, he so often just disappeares for whole games at a time. I don't think I can recall Mike Ross ever handling the ball and carrying as much as yesterday, and he did it really well. Gordon D'Arcy rolled back the years and Connor Murray was epic.

Losing a game like that is horrible, but the point Schmidt should be making to the players is that performance should be seen as what's required from Ireland every game. Do that and you'll be a serious rugby force to be reckoned with.

I just hope this time is different. The last time we got close to NZ we shipped 60 points in the next game. Now I know the next game is Scotland a home but it's time to build on one of these games and identify what was wrong. We shouldn't be conceding 60+m so easily at any stage in the game. It was reminiscent of the welsh game two 6N ago when they walked us up the pitch before ferris gave away the pen. 

No sentiment or anything like it. Move forward and build on it and evolve our game because scoring 3 points in the last 63 minutes isn't good enough. Joe is the right man though and I have every faith in him. Hopefully the players keep this and it makes them angry.

The atmosphere yesterday was immense. Ive never seen fans cheer so loud whenever we got a turnover. It was nearly as loud when we got the tries. Hopefully we can keep that up as the atmosphere has been awful the last while.

None of us could sit down for most of it.

As expected Read and Smith both nominated for world player of the year. Read may well win but I feel its between 1/2p and Smith.

Parisse and Ezebeth also nominated.

LeinsterFan4life wrote:The atmosphere yesterday was immense. Ive seen seen fans cheer so loud whenever we got a turnover. It was nearly as loud when we got the tries. Hopefully we can keep that up as the atmosphere has been awful the last while.

In my opinion its a lot to ask of a crowd to produce an atmosphere when your team isnt performing. All it takes is a good performance and any Irish crowd will get behind the team. We were awful v Australia and the crowd reacted accordingly. I think thats fair enough in some ways.

Standulstermen wrote:I just hope this time is different. The last time we got close to NZ we shipped 60 points in the next game. Now I know the next game is Scotland a home but it's time to build on one of these games and identify what was wrong. We shouldn't be conceding 60+m so easily at any stage in the game. It was reminiscent of the welsh game two 6N ago when they walked us up the pitch before ferris gave away the pen. 

No sentiment or anything like it. Move forward and build on it and evolve our game because scoring 3 points in the last 63 minutes isn't good enough. Joe is the right man though and I have every faith in him. Hopefully the players keep this and it makes them angry.

Very true Stand. I know All Blacks had a fire in their belly getting one last chance so close to the end, but at the same time, it felt like we panicked and perhaps we were hoping they would simply make a mistake if we didn't over commit in defence.

(In fairness there was a loose ball from an awful pass in their build up to the try - perhaps if our defence was more aggressive we might have been up in their faces at that point. Tired legs I guess.

I heard Schmidt mentioning they wanted to take it to the all-blacks for the full 80. Surely though circumstances should have over-ruled the strategy in the last 5minutes. I was screaming when we were playing so attacking. Going wide when we should have stuck it up our jumpers. And Murray kicking the ball to them with three minutes left was almost more than I could take!

We got the ball back and started playing it tight - But alas it still wasn't enough.

(I still believe the players went off their feet because the tackler was in the way of where they wanted their feeting needed to be.)

True Guns. I don't blame the crowd at all in the Aus match. It was such a bad performance that it would have completely taken it out of the crowd.

But even before the game started there was a serious buzz around the place. After the anthems, I turned to my brother and said, something special is going to happen. I just had a feeling that Ireland were going to play out of their skins.

SOB, Healy, POC and Murray made the Sydney Morning Herald's team of the week:

http://www.smh.com.au/photogallery/rugby-union/union-news/international-team-of-the-week-november-24-20131125-2y5iv.html

(The link is to one of those annoying slideshows)

There were actually quite a few people I know including myself that were quietly confident of a performance. In all fairness history has shown us that after a hammering we usually get a performance from the Ireland team. Just they way they are.

It was a classic and thoroughly entertaining match.

As you say, guns, we all know when the chips are down, Ireland can bounce back like no other team. The players are there... you know their capabilities... and it must have been fantastic to see them perform so well in that first half. You blew NZ off the park!

There was also that distinctive atmosphere of the crowd... sort of dancing/bobbing about en mass. It did remind me of 1991 - a very similar level of hysteria.

So I feel so sorry for Ireland losing in the circumstances they did.

There was a point there (73min) when I thought how our Kiwi cuz-bros must have been feeling... and the idea that "2013" would be forever known as the year for breaking the old All Black voodoo finally... how would we all cope with this moment in history?

On of the lads in work had €20 on ireland to score first, lead at half time and win. 40/1

Standulstermen wrote:I just hope this time is different. The last time we got close to NZ we shipped 60 points in the next game. Now I know the next game is Scotland a home but it's time to build on one of these games and identify what was wrong. We shouldn't be conceding 60+m so easily at any stage in the game. It was reminiscent of the welsh game two 6N ago when they walked us up the pitch before ferris gave away the pen. 

No sentiment or anything like it. Move forward and build on it and evolve our game because scoring 3 points in the last 63 minutes isn't good enough. Joe is the right man though and I have every faith in him. Hopefully the players keep this and it makes them angry.

Was that huge loss the time we played the whole game with 14 after Heaslip had got red carded early on??

Does anyone else think that, hard though it was, we will actually benefit more from this loss than we would have from either a win or particularily a draw in that game?

Then-NZ coach Graham Henry suggested the same when we lost to them by a point in 2004. It wasn't true for us then and it isn't true for Ireland now. All the 'lessons' in the world won't turn a defeat into a victory.

MrsP wrote:

Standulstermen wrote:I just hope this time is different. The last time we got close to NZ we shipped 60 points in the next game. Now I know the next game is Scotland a home but it's time to build on one of these games and identify what was wrong. We shouldn't be conceding 60+m so easily at any stage in the game. It was reminiscent of the welsh game two 6N ago when they walked us up the pitch before ferris gave away the pen. 

No sentiment or anything like it. Move forward and build on it and evolve our game because scoring 3 points in the last 63 minutes isn't good enough. Joe is the right man though and I have every faith in him. Hopefully the players keep this and it makes them angry.

Was that huge loss the time we played the whole game with 14 after Heaslip had got red carded early on??

Does anyone else think that, hard though it was, we will actually benefit more from this loss than we would have from either a win or particularily a draw in that game?

You never know. It could go either way. Knowing Ireland such a defeat will probably make them fairly hungry for the 6N.

MrsP wrote:

Standulstermen wrote:I just hope this time is different. The last time we got close to NZ we shipped 60 points in the next game. Now I know the next game is Scotland a home but it's time to build on one of these games and identify what was wrong. We shouldn't be conceding 60+m so easily at any stage in the game. It was reminiscent of the welsh game two 6N ago when they walked us up the pitch before ferris gave away the pen. 

No sentiment or anything like it. Move forward and build on it and evolve our game because scoring 3 points in the last 63 minutes isn't good enough. Joe is the right man though and I have every faith in him. Hopefully the players keep this and it makes them angry.

Was that huge loss the time we played the whole game with 14 after Heaslip had got red carded early on??

Does anyone else think that, hard though it was, we will actually benefit more from this loss than we would have from either a win or particularily a draw in that game?

No to both questions. Possibly a loss is better than a draw but then a draw when leading 19-0 feels like a loss. How they benefit will only be seen in the 6N so it's hard to say. If we struggle to put away Scotland at home then little will have been learnt

Oh yeah.

I think I had tried to blank that match from my memory.

And now you've brought it all back!!!!

 

This is still Ireland though isn't it. Even under DK, Ireland had these games (halves) that they were totally dominant of their opposition followed by streaks of poor games. Time will tell but I do have faith in Schmidt that he is the right man for the job but the players have to believe that as well and that's where Schmidt will have his greatest task.

IMO key to that performance was player rotation. Darcy and Murray were both replaced for the Oz game yet just look how well they both came back and played. That is very encouraging for me.

Tough on ireland yesterday, real tough.

When ireland were going through the phases at the end to run the clock out, i thought it was a risky strategy because of the potential for it to go wrong: turnover, off feet, in from the side, sealing off etc. I wondered whether they would have been better passing it out and creating a maul and just driving NZ backwards. Imagine the sight, closing the game out and ireland set a maul up of forwards and the backs get stuck in as well.

Its hard to get mad at players for trying things but when Sexton went for that cross field kick towards the end I was screaming at the tv.

A little more composure in the final 10 and we would have seen it through. I guess thats what separates the best from the rest

GunsGerms wrote:IMO key to that performance was player rotation. Darcy and Murray were both replaced for the Oz game yet just look how well they both came back and played. That is very encouraging for me.

Yeah not so sure about that Guns. Many of the players that played poorly against the Aussies upped their game amazingly yesterday (chillie for example) so I don't think that its down to rotation. To be honest, I have no idea where that performance came from, much like I have no idea where previous great Irish performance come from when considering what has led up to and happened after those performances...

GunsGerms wrote:IMO key to that performance was player rotation. Darcy and Murray were both replaced for the Oz game yet just look how well they both came back and played. That is very encouraging for me.

Dont see that at all. 12 players were the same players and there performances were completely different.

Ross, POC, Toner, POM, Bod etc etc were awful against Australia but excellent against New Zealand.
That turn around had nothing to do with player rotation.

Of the 3 players that came in - 2 D'Arcy and Dave Kearney replaced 2 of the few players who walked of the Aussie game with anything approaching respectability.

Look...I think it is clear at this point, from listening to the players pre and post game, and indeed listening to Schmidt himself, that a lot of the talk around Australia was not as heartfelt as we might have considered it to be at the time.

Were they bluffing that Australian performance?  Certainly not. They wanted to win it.  But just like our minds were focused on Australia in the last world cup...so too did Schmidt admit that the real deal this Autumn was going all out for a win against New Zealand.

And it nearly came off.  But, it's certain that minds weren't concentrating enough on the Australian game - either players or coach.

Now, I personally can see why Ireland feel the need to be selective but I'm not a fan of the policy, as it's a routine that loses us a war too often even though we might win a battle here and there.

Schmidt too - I'll give him time because he didn't really have any time - he knew the Irish public demanded a change in emphasis from their players, he knew his first goal was to get the fans on the team's side - and with the little time he had, his mind focused on New Zealand.

So, we can talk about Australia but Ireland didn't turn up for that game emotionally.  It's a selectivity issue that needs to be stamped out but I'm going to give Schmidt time to do so.  
We need to want all games, and if we think we're only good enough to select one or two games a year for all out intensity, then we're looking at more glum years to come.

We obviously ran out of steam but I don't see that as an immediate concern. We played at the absolute limit of our abilities yesterday, gave absolutely everything we had, we've not been that close to our peak for a long time, or maybe ever. But when you play like that you're going to tire, you're not used to it, you can't replicate it in training and you don't experience it day in day out for your club.

But having been there once, it at least lets the players know they can go there again, maybe next time they'll be a bit better able to stay there.

geoff998rugby wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:IMO key to that performance was player rotation. Darcy and Murray were both replaced for the Oz game yet just look how well they both came back and played. That is very encouraging for me.

Dont see that at all. 12 players were the same players and there performances were completely different.

Ross, POC, Toner, POM, Bod etc etc were awful against Australia but excellent against New Zealand.
That turn around had nothing to do with player rotation.

Of the 3 players that came in - 2 D'Arcy and Dave Kearney replaced 2 of the few players who walked of the Aussie game with anything approaching respectability.

Geoff I was specifically speaking of the players that werent the same. I dont think Marshall was as good as you make out v Australia. He made a big mistake whether you like it or not. In any case its not really relevant because the point is the guys that came back in came in very hungry and performed and that is good.

Mickado wrote:We obviously ran out of steam but I don't see that as an immediate concern. We played at the absolute limit of our abilities yesterday, gave absolutely everything we had, we've not been that close to our peak for a long time, or maybe ever. But when you play like that you're going to tire, you're not used to it, you can't replicate it in training and you don't experience it day in day out for your club.

But having been there once, it at least lets the players know they can go there again, maybe next time they'll be a bit better able to stay there.

I dont think we ran out of steam as much as we bottled it. We became too reserved and as a result ended up tackling way more than in the first half which wore the team out. The amount of tackles Ireland made doesnt refelct a team that ran out of steam.

I have a feeling Marshall would have been blown away in that game and Darcy showed his old gritty experience to the full.  That's not saying Marshall isn't going to be part of our future, or the coming 6N, or even part of a team that might go ahead and beat New Zealand next time.  

But for this game, as 'old guys' had scores to settle - and it was mostly the 'older' crew (along with Murray) who really dragged the game to the ABs - I think D'arcy was the right choice.... and thought so before the game too - not hindsight talking.

The older guys actually deserved the final crack at an old foe that wouldn't go down against them...and the selection of them didn't disappoint in performance levels.

The future of Ireland truly now is with the younger players - but they'll have to be damn hard to keep to the levels needed to beat a New Zealand virtually ever week of an International window.  All sides at the top have improved...there are few games you can take Provincial tempo to now and expect to win.

I was glad Darcy was picked. he was exceptional v NZ.

GunsGerms wrote:

Mickado wrote:We obviously ran out of steam but I don't see that as an immediate concern. We played at the absolute limit of our abilities yesterday, gave absolutely everything we had, we've not been that close to our peak for a long time, or maybe ever. But when you play like that you're going to tire, you're not used to it, you can't replicate it in training and you don't experience it day in day out for your club.

But having been there once, it at least lets the players know they can go there again, maybe next time they'll be a bit better able to stay there.

I dont think we ran out of steam as much as we bottled it. We became too reserved and as a result ended up tackling way more than in the first half which wore the team out. The amount of tackles Ireland made doesnt refelct a team that ran out of steam.

I agree that just like the Australian game - and you could drag it back to the Welsh 6N game too - but it looked a different team emerging from the tunnel both in body and spirit.  With Ireland of the old we expected that was Kidney not doing his work.  
What IS the reason though - because it's become a habit.... and surely someone was telling them in the dressing room that if they take the petrol off now they be offering the game to the ABs as sure is day is day.  Surely Schmidt and his coaches, and even the experienced players, were saying that to each other?

And yet, just as you say, that's what happened when they began the second half as you might do against Zebre in a Pro12 game..  It's something systematic and if not fitness then something else...but it needs careful attention now and fixing.

On another note. While overall the team did well it was really a forward effort both in attack and defence. A concern was that the backs only made one clean break (Kearney in the second half). Up to that point Best and Healy were nearly our two most creative players with SOB and Murray next in line.

Fair point. It was the ABs though. Fairly hard to make breaks against them without using muscle. Thats said not sure your stats are right because O'Driscoll picked off the back of a ruck at least once and made a break.

GunsGerms wrote:

geoff998rugby wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:IMO key to that performance was player rotation. Darcy and Murray were both replaced for the Oz game yet just look how well they both came back and played. That is very encouraging for me.

Dont see that at all. 12 players were the same players and there performances were completely different.

Ross, POC, Toner, POM, Bod etc etc were awful against Australia but excellent against New Zealand.
That turn around had nothing to do with player rotation.

Of the 3 players that came in - 2 D'Arcy and Dave Kearney replaced 2 of the few players who walked of the Aussie game with anything approaching respectability.

Geoff I was specifically speaking of the players that werent the same. I dont think Marshall was as good as you make out v Australia. He made a big mistake whether you like it or not. In any case its not really relevant because the point is the guys that came back in came in very hungry and performed and that is good.

I said Marshall come of the pitch with respectability nothing more - most players who came off that pitch did not.
The point is rotation had nothing to do with the turn round in performance.
Most of the players who played well this week played badly last week.

GunsGerms wrote:Fair point. It was the ABs though. Fairly hard to make breaks against them without using muscle. Thats said not sure your stats are right because O'Driscoll picked off the back of a ruck at least once and made a break.

Driscoll and Darcy did make one or two breaks from broken play but from structured play Kearneys was the only one.

ME-109 wrote:On another note. While overall the team did well it was really a forward effort both in attack and defence. A concern was that the backs only made one clean break (Kearney in the second half). Up to that point Best and Healy were nearly our two most creative players with SOB and Murray next in line.

Maybe the decision was we simply weren't going to beat the ABs with loose back play.... but perhaps expose ourselves too much. But we've opened them up before with back play and I think I saw enough to know it's something that will be available to us as confidence - hopefully - increases. This team are working on gaining confidence.

ME-109 wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:Fair point. It was the ABs though. Fairly hard to make breaks against them without using muscle. Thats said not sure your stats are right because O'Driscoll picked off the back of a ruck at least once and made a break.

Driscoll and Darcy did make one or two breaks from broken play but from structured play Kearneys was the only one.

Yeah fair enough like you say there may not have been many clean breaks but they did make good ground. Im sure you will recall the play where Drico made about 10 meters by crawling along the ground when he bizarrely wasnt held by any Kiwi defender. I was happy enough with how the backs performed. They were brave, defended well, mixed it up a fair bit in attack and made very few mistakes.