The Rugby Championship

First topic message reminder :

It starts again tomorrow. As ever the interest will wane quickly if the ABs resume their usual dismantling of all opposition. They look extremely strong with Retallick and Whitelock back in harness. Their strength in depth at 10 is frightening. The Aussies do have Pocock back, but hard to look beyond another comfortable AB win.

Argentina away in SA will be interesting I think. SA look like they are improving and Argentina play some good rugby - one to watch I think.

Hoping that somebody pushes the ABs and an Aussie win tomorrow would be the perfect tonic for the tournament, however unlikely that is.

Ben Smith is probably the classiest player in world rugby - I love eatcjoy him play.

Beauden Barrett is just ridiculous.

Why does Barrett score so many tries, does he not like passing?

RDW_Scotland wrote:Beauden Barrett is just ridiculous.

Some numbers on that:

In 112 tests Dan Carter scored 29 tries.

In 66 tests Beauden Barrett has scored 30 tries.

LondonTiger wrote:

ebop wrote:Was a good first half effort from Australia. But what about that Australian scrum and lineout? Pretty dodgy. Even England could have made hay. When the ABs cranked it up in the 2nd half the Wallabies were floundering about like a bunch of drugged up clamydia infested koalas.

Xibu b qmbol zpv usvmz bsf. Czf czf.

You said it LT. The Wallabies were well beaten twice in a row by the ABs. Something Ireland struggled with due to their inability to play unstructured rugby very well. The Wallabies put in a good shift in the first half but ran out of puff ‘again’. They blew their load and ended up playing like eucalyptus leaf munching koalas again. Feel sorry for them just a teeny weeny little bit because we beat them up and everyone (including themselves) think they’re not very good, when in reality, they’d beat most NH sides. Ah well. The good news for the Wallabies is that Eddie will be out of a job soon and could be a potential option to take over as coach.

aucklandlaurie wrote:

RDW_Scotland wrote:Beauden Barrett is just ridiculous.

Some numbers on that:

In 112 tests Dan Carter scored 29 tries.

In 66 tests Beauden Barrett has scored 30 tries.

Impressive, but to be fair they're very different players. Barrett has another 1000 points to catch up on too!

The most important thing with B.BARRET is his pace,how often in the past has he thrown an intercept,or
mis kicked.Then turned and recovered or tackled back to correct it he also performs well with his brothers
on the park.

alanmackie6 wrote:The most important thing with B.BARRET is his pace,how often in the past has he thrown an intercept,or
mis kicked.Then turned and recovered or tackled back to correct it he also performs well with his brothers
on the park.

Pace combined with a high IQ and no shortage of skill. The ABs are a high IQ team which is something people overlook sometimes.

ebop wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:

ebop wrote:Was a good first half effort from Australia. But what about that Australian scrum and lineout? Pretty dodgy. Even England could have made hay. When the ABs cranked it up in the 2nd half the Wallabies were floundering about like a bunch of drugged up clamydia infested koalas.

Xibu b qmbol zpv usvmz bsf. Czf czf.

You said it LT. The Wallabies were well beaten twice in a row by the ABs. Something Ireland struggled with due to their inability to play unstructured rugby very well. The Wallabies put in a good shift in the first half but ran out of puff ‘again’. They blew their load and ended up playing like eucalyptus leaf munching koalas again. Feel sorry for them just a teeny weeny little bit because we beat them up and everyone (including themselves) think they’re not very good, when in reality, they’d beat most NH sides. Ah well. The good news for the Wallabies is that Eddie will be out of a job soon and could be a potential option to take over as coach.

Rock, paper, scissors. Ireland suited Australia because Ireland are predictable and easy to defend against. Aus picked a physical side. NZ could pick holes in their defence while Ireland couldn't. Even if Aus beat Ireland (which nearly happened), Ireland would put up a better fight against NZ.

ebop wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:

ebop wrote:Was a good first half effort from Australia. But what about that Australian scrum and lineout? Pretty dodgy. Even England could have made hay. When the ABs cranked it up in the 2nd half the Wallabies were floundering about like a bunch of drugged up clamydia infested koalas.

Xibu b qmbol zpv usvmz bsf. Czf czf.

You said it LT. The Wallabies were well beaten twice in a row by the ABs. Something Ireland struggled with due to their inability to play unstructured rugby very well. The Wallabies put in a good shift in the first half but ran out of puff ‘again’. They blew their load and ended up playing like eucalyptus leaf munching koalas again. Feel sorry for them just a teeny weeny little bit because we beat them up and everyone (including themselves) think they’re not very good, when in reality, they’d beat most NH sides. Ah well. The good news for the Wallabies is that Eddie will be out of a job soon and could be a potential option to take over as coach.

South Africa's defence being just as garbage as it was against England recently.

Is this the same Argentina that Wales and Scotland recently humped??

SA defence has been awful to be fair.

profitius wrote:

ebop wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:

ebop wrote:Was a good first half effort from Australia. But what about that Australian scrum and lineout? Pretty dodgy. Even England could have made hay. When the ABs cranked it up in the 2nd half the Wallabies were floundering about like a bunch of drugged up clamydia infested koalas.

Xibu b qmbol zpv usvmz bsf. Czf czf.

You said it LT. The Wallabies were well beaten twice in a row by the ABs. Something Ireland struggled with due to their inability to play unstructured rugby very well. The Wallabies put in a good shift in the first half but ran out of puff ‘again’. They blew their load and ended up playing like eucalyptus leaf munching koalas again. Feel sorry for them just a teeny weeny little bit because we beat them up and everyone (including themselves) think they’re not very good, when in reality, they’d beat most NH sides. Ah well. The good news for the Wallabies is that Eddie will be out of a job soon and could be a potential option to take over as coach.

Rock, paper, scissors. Ireland suited Australia because Ireland are predictable and easy to defend against. Aus picked a physical side. NZ could pick holes in their defence while Ireland couldn't. Even if Aus beat Ireland (which nearly happened), Ireland would put up a better fight against NZ.

Yes they would, the margin would probably be less but in the basis of the june oz and RC oz the ABs are now about 20 better than the next team. Theyre better than last years side. End of year might be different but i see them going undefeated again, and in any case a loss wouldnt hurt them for mext year.

Don't over read it against this Ozzie side, they have talent but are a fair weather team. As soon as things start going against them they crumble. See how the games against SA and Arg go first.

New Zealand are remarkable.

I don't think you could safely call the result of a match between any two from South Africa, Australia, Ireland, England, Wales, Scotland, France and Argentina, and I can't recall a time when that has been the case. Certainly, there would often be favourites in those head-to-heads, and home advantage would make a difference, but a result the other way wouldn't be a surprise.

(Irish fans might feel that's slightly unfair, since they are claiming these scalps now on a regular basis, Indeed, World Rugby rankings put them five points clear in 2nd place, with NZ clear in first by another five).

Oddly, then, when you couple that with New Zealand's overall dominance, Test rugby is both more competitive than ever, and less competitive than ever.

Rugby Fan wrote:New Zealand are remarkable.

I don't think you could safely call the result of a match between any two from South Africa, Australia, Ireland, England, Wales, Scotland, France and Argentina, and I can't recall a time when that has been the case. Certainly, there would often be favourites in those head-to-heads, and home advantage would make a difference, but a result the other way wouldn't be a surprise.

(Irish fans might feel that's slightly unfair, since they are claiming these scalps now on a regular basis, Indeed, World Rugby rankings put them five points clear in 2nd place, with NZ clear in first by another five).

Oddly, then, when you couple that with New Zealand's overall dominance, Test rugby is both more competitive than ever, and less competitive than ever.

Don’t think that’s slightly unfair. There are very few gimmes at the top level.

Rugby Fan wrote:New Zealand are remarkable.

I don't think you could safely call the result of a match between any two from South Africa, Australia, Ireland, England, Wales, Scotland, France and Argentina, and I can't recall a time when that has been the case. Certainly, there would often be favourites in those head-to-heads, and home advantage would make a difference, but a result the other way wouldn't be a surprise.

(Irish fans might feel that's slightly unfair, since they are claiming these scalps now on a regular basis, Indeed, World Rugby rankings put them five points clear in 2nd place, with NZ clear in first by another five).

Oddly, then, when you couple that with New Zealand's overall dominance, Test rugby is both more competitive than ever, and less competitive than ever.

Agree that the race for second is fairly hot, and that the ABs are so far in front they might overtake the runner-up on their victory lap.

World Rugby should split New Zealand into the North and South Islands so that at least there would be two teams at the top competing with each other.

Nz ireland and england remain close when everyone's fit. I think some have been reading too much chris rattue about handing over the world cup now!

No 7&1/2 wrote:Nz ireland and england remain close when everyone's fit. I think some have been reading too much chris rattue about handing over the world cup now!

Not too sure about England in there, does anyone ever have everyone fit these days? Big part of Englands problem seems to be EJ foregoing some balance in the team and it's hurting them

To an extent yes marty. As I'm every team there's people you can't sufficiently replace and be as good. Some areas you can. Jones is still doing a rather grand job. Don't be surprised to see clean sweeps for both england and Ireland this autumn. And then of course the whining over having 2 losses from some!

I'll have some of what you're on 7.5

Under the present laws/rules any team can win against any other a card or cards mean the
difference between winning and losing.Nz cope with cards better than most come AI`s Aus
and SA may well use NH based players too.
Certainly they will in RWC,Chris Rattue is Nz version Stephen Jones,only the most Rabid AB
fan would expect a third RWC on the trot I don`t anyway.

A lot of evidence that suggests the AB's are taking the game to the new cliche I mean level again with this performance.

Nick Evans comments were telling and when Stephen Jones sides with them somethings gotta be up.

Hansen and Foster said many times beginning of the year they'll be looking at ways to counter the rush defence deployed by the Lions last year (something Pooly I recall didnt understand what I was on about when I mentioned it), and speeding the game up, adding new plays etc, and turnovers behind the gainline has been one of them.

On the weekend, Oz would take it up, get turned over, then find their defence is in pieces on the counter, because players are still on the ground and cant reform back quick enough because its all happening so fast. Theyre creating chaos from set piece play and that brings in players like Barrett who is the key to any chaos.

Hooper made the mistake of rushing too early, probably for the intercept and got passed on his way through. The NH sides probably wont have such fragile defences but theyd better not be banking on the simple Lions type blanket rush of last year. Firstly, the ABs have gone past that, and secondly, no one side has the same cattle as the Lions.

Having the players as Nick says who...don't 'paint by numbers' or play by the instruction book means everyone can play multiple rules, play on instinct. One try we had Beaudy on the wing and another Retallick as first receiver and playmaker for Squire try. Once again no ones doing stuff like that as a rule.

I've heard the rubbish about cards deciding matches before Alan. There is something to be said that cards can to a certain point be subjective but really it's teams mistakes which lead to pens and cards.

It's too much doom and gloom yappy. Look at performances as a whole there's been steady progression of the side since Lancaster took over. It comtinues.

No 7&1/2 wrote:To an extent yes marty. As I'm every team there's people you can't sufficiently replace and be as good. Some areas you can. Jones is still doing a rather grand job. Don't be surprised to see clean sweeps for both england and Ireland this autumn. And then of course the whining over having 2 losses from some!

At least it would be a first since when? 1950s?

Oops sorry, 1930s

Not the first case of whining!

No 7&1/2 wrote:I've heard the rubbish about cards deciding matches before Alan. There is something to be said that cards can to a certain point be subjective but really it's teams mistakes which lead to pens and cards.

It's too much doom and gloom yappy. Look at performances as a whole there's been steady progression of the side since Lancaster took over. It comtinues.

Can’t fault your eternal optimism 7.5

Lol. Good one ebop.

7.5, are you able to explain how England progressed in 2018? They seemed to have progressed downwards. Kind of like a regression. Is that what you meant?

ebop wrote:7.5, are you able to explain how England progressed in 2018? They seemed to have progressed downwards. Kind of like a regression. Is that what you meant?

Lulling everyone into a false sense of security, they'll roll over and get their tummys tickled by NZ in Nov to make them think they are crap

Lol good one ebop. Best parody account around.

Not likely marty.

Some in Australia are disenchanted with Cheika, and calling for him to be replaced. There are some similarities with the position Jones is in. Cheika won supporters around when Australia had a better World Cup than anyone expected. Since then, it's been a string of disappointments, with losses to England, Scotland and Ireland at home, and not coming close to reclaiming the Bledisloe. Seems to be a lot of frustration that the same problems keep recurring.

Rugby Australia say Cheika will see out his contract. To some extent, the union might not have any good replacement candidates in mind, or the resources to pursue them. There's also the matter of switching horses late in the race.

It'll be interesting to see how the Wallabies go on tour in the Autumn. Most of the top sides, aside from England and Australia, seem satisfied with the way their coaching teams are going, and it's doubtful that even some poor results would see any other unions try and change their head coaches before the World Cup.

No 7&1/2 wrote:To an extent yes marty. As I'm every team there's people you can't sufficiently replace and be as good. Some areas you can. Jones is still doing a rather grand job. Don't be surprised to see clean sweeps for both england and Ireland this autumn. And then of course the whining over having 2 losses from some!

Who are England playing?

I can see Ireland easily winning 3 from 4, Italy, Argentina and USA but not so sure about getting a win v NZ. Lets see.

Rugby Fan wrote:Some in Australia are disenchanted with Cheika, and calling for him to be replaced. There are some similarities with the position Jones is in. Cheika won supporters around when Australia had a better World Cup than anyone expected. Since then, it's been a string of disappointments, with losses to England, Scotland and Ireland at home, and not coming close to reclaiming the Bledisloe. Seems to be a lot of frustration that the same problems keep recurring.

Rugby Australia say Cheika will see out his contract. To some extent, the union might not have any good replacement candidates in mind, or the resources to pursue them. There's also the matter of switching horses late in the race.

It'll be interesting to see how the Wallabies go on tour in the Autumn. Most of the top sides, aside from England and Australia, seem satisfied with the way their coaching teams are going, and it's doubtful that even some poor results would see any other unions try and change their head coaches before the World Cup.

In 1998 Australia sacked their manager and won the RWC a year later I think but yeah there isn't really anyone available to turn them around.

Where is Ewan McKensie these days?

New Zealand press are already saying that the world cup is as good as theirs.

Are they? Can you please post some examples (other than Rattue)

LordDowlais wrote:New Zealand press are already saying that the world cup is as good as theirs.

It is, barring an injury crisis.

Collapse2005 wrote:

Rugby Fan wrote:Some in Australia are disenchanted with Cheika, and calling for him to be replaced. There are some similarities with the position Jones is in. Cheika won supporters around when Australia had a better World Cup than anyone expected. Since then, it's been a string of disappointments, with losses to England, Scotland and Ireland at home, and not coming close to reclaiming the Bledisloe. Seems to be a lot of frustration that the same problems keep recurring.

Rugby Australia say Cheika will see out his contract. To some extent, the union might not have any good replacement candidates in mind, or the resources to pursue them. There's also the matter of switching horses late in the race.

It'll be interesting to see how the Wallabies go on tour in the Autumn. Most of the top sides, aside from England and Australia, seem satisfied with the way their coaching teams are going, and it's doubtful that even some poor results would see any other unions try and change their head coaches before the World Cup.

In 1998 Australia sacked their manager and won the RWC a year later I think but yeah there isn't really anyone available to turn them around.

Where is Ewan McKensie these days?

Well they also sacked Ewan Mac before the EOYTs in 14 and Cheika took oz to the Wcup final in 15 so sacking Cheika after the RC wouldnt be a precedent. Dont see why they couldnt find a replacement but whether they would pick it up at this late stage.

Jones turned England around instantly so theres something in a sudden shock to the system. New coaches tend to start well. Its just a matter of how long they keep getting results, Cheika and Jones starting to fall off. Schmidt may be as well. The Aus tour wasnt flash.

LordDowlais wrote:New Zealand press are already saying that the world cup is as good as theirs.

If England or Ireland played as the ABs did last week the local press would demand the cup now because...well, theyve never played like that.

Press are going to do that because of what theyre seeing but also what this current AB side could do. Theyre now pointing much higher than at any time since 2015 and look as though theyre ready to improve much more. Theyre the only side doing new things, are speeding up the game more than ever.

Time to worry folks. Of course they could fail next year the fickle nature of the WCup as it is, but its going to take a very good one off to knock them out.

marty2086 wrote:

ebop wrote:7.5, are you able to explain how England progressed in 2018? They seemed to have progressed downwards. Kind of like a regression. Is that what you meant?

....they'll roll over and get their tummys tickled by NZ in Nov

That’s a distinct possibility

ABs are playing a game plan that tires teams and then they put the foot down. Extreme pace and accuracy and what people are calling fluid positionless rugby. Forwards playing like backs that aren’t just standing in the backline pretending to be useful. No more 50:50 chip kicks to beat the rush defence. Stretching, tiring, not committing players to breakdowns unnecessarily to create overlaps, finding gaps in tiring defence, deeper kicks turning teams, running all day and then bringing on players that play even faster like McKenzie!

They can also do the up-the-jumper stuff like they did in the first few minutes of the second half to score a try against Australia.

Game plans and styles coming out their ears

England have shown they don’t have the players or fitness to last the full 80 against a team like SA, little alone the ABs. They’re going to get run ragged.

The perceived wisdom according to the many things I`ve read on net on how to beat the ABs,rough them
up.Beat them at Scrum,Lineout,breakdown,etc .as that's how Ireland won in the USA,deservedly on the
day,slow things down,play at your own pace.
Just one thing wrong with that the AB`s have arguably the best pack in world rugby,they attack off
scrum/lineout and are happy without the ball.
Give them 40 percent ball they`ll still kill you forcing you to play at there pace when there fitness
will tell.

EJ turned England into winners BUT with mostly SL`s players fine tuning things fitness levels are

still way below AB levels.

ebop wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

ebop wrote:7.5, are you able to explain how England progressed in 2018? They seemed to have progressed downwards. Kind of like a regression. Is that what you meant?

....they'll roll over and get their tummys tickled by NZ in Nov

That’s a distinct possibility

ABs are playing a game plan that tires teams and then they put the foot down. Extreme pace and accuracy and what people are calling fluid positionless rugby. Forwards playing like backs that aren’t just standing in the backline pretending to be useful. No more 50:50 chip kicks to beat the rush defence. Stretching, tiring, not committing players to breakdowns unnecessarily to create overlaps, finding gaps in tiring defence, deeper kicks turning teams, running all day and then bringing on players that play even faster like McKenzie!

They can also do the up-the-jumper stuff like they did in the first few minutes of the second half to score a try against Australia.

Game plans and styles coming out their ears

England have shown they don’t have the players or fitness to last the full 80 against a team like SA, little alone the ABs. They’re going to get run ragged.

The Lions series was NZs biggest disappointment since 2009 and 2007 before that and from both they took massive learnings and this time its about how to overcome and then exploit the rush defence. Thats the key difference between a side that thinks they should always win, to those who think they can be competitive.

Oh well, we didnt win this time, but we might next time. For the ABs the key is to change the direction of the game and pull those that think they have caught up in another direction. So unless youre doing that as well, youre always going to be chasing moving goalposts.

Too true Tman. And with the long serving players and coaches that span multiple RWCs, you’d think they’d be able to draw on previous game plans and experiences if the opposition mixes it up. Unless of course the opposition comes up with something revolutionary themselves and take the initiative.

Taylorman wrote:

Well they also sacked Ewan Mac before the EOYTs in 14 and Cheika took oz to the Wcup final in 15 so sacking Cheika after the RC wouldnt be a precedent. Dont see why they couldnt find a replacement but whether they would pick it up at this late stage.

Jones turned England around instantly so theres something in a sudden shock to the system. New coaches tend to start well. Its just a matter of how long they keep getting results, Cheika and Jones starting to fall off. Schmidt may be as well. The Aus tour wasnt flash.

Yes I know re Cheika I am a fan. Ewan Mac comment was tongue in cheek. I reckon he was a good manager who had potential to be great but shot himself in the foot which is a pity really for Australia.

Taylorman wrote:

The Lions series was NZs biggest disappointment since 2009 and 2007 before that and from both they took massive learnings and this time its about how to overcome and then exploit the rush defence. Thats the key difference between a side that thinks they should always win, to those who think they can be competitive.

Oh well, we didnt win this time, but we might next time. For the ABs the key is to change the direction of the game and pull those that think they have caught up in another direction. So unless youre doing that as well, youre always going to be chasing moving goalposts.

From the Lions tour discipline should really be NZs key take away albeit it was an obvious issue even before the tour.

Just swap Cheika and Jones over...job done for both countries.

hugehandoff wrote:Just swap Cheika and Jones over...job done for both countries.

Probably would be good for both countries alright.

Collapse2005 wrote:

Taylorman wrote:

The Lions series was NZs biggest disappointment since 2009 and 2007 before that and from both they took massive learnings and this time its about how to overcome and then exploit the rush defence. Thats the key difference between a side that thinks they should always win, to those who think they can be competitive.

Oh well, we didnt win this time, but we might next time. For the ABs the key is to change the direction of the game and pull those that think they have caught up in another direction. So unless youre doing that as well, youre always going to be chasing moving goalposts.

From the Lions tour discipline should really be NZs key take away albeit it was an obvious issue even before the tour.

in terms of strategy discipline plays little part. The rush defence has opened up other avenues and opportunities. ABs are now welcoming it and working within that space. Discipline will take care of itself and is restricted to a few isolated events, the attitude of some individuals. Havent seen too many issues this year so you may be right, they could have addressed that as well.

ebop wrote:Too true Tman. And with the long serving players and coaches that span multiple RWCs, you’d think they’d be able to draw on previous game plans and experiences if the opposition mixes it up. Unless of course the opposition comes up with something revolutionary themselves and take the initiative.

ABs are fortunate enough that theyve built an overal skilset that can play one way one week, another the next, or even change up or down during the match..

Mentioned it elsewhere but before half time ABs scored through using the expansive running game. Immediately after half time they changed completely and went straight up the middle pick and go, and kept on that till they scored. Wallabies would have been so concerned at half time about being able to cover the ABs width that they got ambushed up the middle.

Then with the bigger lead they went back to the wider game. Its that sort of thinking thats keeping them ahead now. Cheikas press conference said itvall. Completely bewildered about what they have to do.

I think that you might be getting a bit carried away Taylorman based on a weak enough Rugby Championship, no?

The real test for the ABs will be in November.