@RoninWC said in RWC: All Blacks v Canada (Pool B):

With all due respect, I think it is the other way around, play the first team against Canada and then Italy, giving plenty of rest balanced with game time.

The 2nd string team plays against Namibia which has a much shorter turnaround.

That way the top combinations have more time for work ons.

In this scenario, Namibia unfortunately ends up being the placeholders but based on the draw and the win against the Boks, there isn't any other way IMHO

There will be pros and cons for each option. Excluding BBBR, the likes of Ioane and Goodhue will need to play sooner rather than later. They last played in Perth on Aug 10, 7 weeks and counting.

Edit: Rieko might have played for Auckland after that - not 100% sure.

Minutes played...

Moody 50/ Tu'ungafasi 30
Coles 40/ Taylor 40
Laulala 50/ Ta'avao 30
Whitelock 80
Barrett 75
Tuipulotu 40
Savea 80
Cane 40
Read 80
Frizell 5
Smith 61 / Perenara 19
Mo'unga 66
G. C. Bridge 80
R. S. Crotty 50 / SBW 30
A. R. Lienert-Brown 80
S. L. Reece 80
B. J. Barrett 80
B Smith 14

Jordie Barrett 0
Ioane 0
Goodhue 0
Weber 0
Todd 0
Retallick 0
Coltman 0
Moli 0

Can make up the team from that if everyone gets a run in the first 2 games

@RoninWC they don't have to roll out a whole team to build combinations. I doubt we'll see the same side as SA named for any other pool matches.

@Bones IMHO, I think they do. Much like what happened in '15, keep the top team together and get them minutes without tiring them out too much.

Isn't that optimal? Surely, combinations just aren't across positions but the whole team?

@RoninWC said in RWC: All Blacks v Canada (Pool B):

@Bones IMHO, I think they do. Much like what happened in '15, keep the top team together and get them minutes without tiring them out too much.

Isn't that optimal? Surely, combinations just aren't across positions but the whole team?

I think there'll be periods where we see a large number of the "top team" together, as well as periods of "number 1" plays. But I can't see them wanting to show their hand too much before the quarters.

I think all of those with zero time will start except BBBR and JB.

@Crucial why not JB?

@Bones

I fall in the camp of the bestish team against Canada and Italy. Dirttrackers against Namibia on the short turnaround. You has a long break after Bok game a long break prior to that , so from here in its pretty much a game a week for the frontline. That said you may see Moli, Goodhue and Fritzelll, starting or in 23 against Canada,

@DMX I'd side with @Crucial here, I think it's one time Shag may actually follow through on what he says - there's no value to saying everyone will get a run and then not seeing it out, unless something drastic happens.

@Bones said in RWC: All Blacks v Canada (Pool B):

@Crucial why not JB?

Because I think Ben Smith will start at 15. He is more important to have time under the belt and confidence. JB will come on from the bench.

@Crucial said in RWC: All Blacks v Canada (Pool B):

@Bones said in RWC: All Blacks v Canada (Pool B):

@Crucial why not JB?

Because I think Ben Smith will start at 15. He is more important to have time under the belt and confidence. JB will come on from the bench.

I can see Barrett starting right wing against Namibia. There is no compelling reason to play Reece or Bridge on short rest.

Whoever is the 3rd 10 will likely get at least a 20 minute stint there at some point - could be Jordie too.

Centre combo is the interesting one. They want to give everyone a run, but they've been doing that for four years, its about time the chosen two settled down and developed a combo for at least 2 of the next 3 games.

@rotated said in RWC: All Blacks v Canada (Pool B):

@Crucial said in RWC: All Blacks v Canada (Pool B):

@Bones said in RWC: All Blacks v Canada (Pool B):

@Crucial why not JB?

Because I think Ben Smith will start at 15. He is more important to have time under the belt and confidence. JB will come on from the bench.

I can see Barrett starting right wing against Namibia. There is no compelling reason to play Reece or Bridge on short rest.

Whoever is the 3rd 10 will likely get at least a 20 minute stint there at some point - could be Jordie too.

Centre combo is the interesting one. They want to give everyone a run, but they've been doing that for four years, its about time the chosen two settled down and developed a combo for at least 2 of the next 3 games.

For this game I think the aim will be to start SBW and Goodhue with the aim of them getting up to speed. Crotty is the obvious reserve but he could also sub the 10 and have someone like JB go into 12.

For backs I’m thinking something like

TJP
Mounga
Rieko
SBW
Goodhue
Reece/JB
Bender

Weber
Crotty
JB/BB

@Crucial said in RWC: All Blacks v Canada (Pool B):

@rotated said in RWC: All Blacks v Canada (Pool B):

@Crucial said in RWC: All Blacks v Canada (Pool B):

@Bones said in RWC: All Blacks v Canada (Pool B):

@Crucial why not JB?

Because I think Ben Smith will start at 15. He is more important to have time under the belt and confidence. JB will come on from the bench.

I can see Barrett starting right wing against Namibia. There is no compelling reason to play Reece or Bridge on short rest.

Whoever is the 3rd 10 will likely get at least a 20 minute stint there at some point - could be Jordie too.

Centre combo is the interesting one. They want to give everyone a run, but they've been doing that for four years, its about time the chosen two settled down and developed a combo for at least 2 of the next 3 games.

For this game I think the aim will be to start SBW and Goodhue with the aim of them getting up to speed. Crotty is the obvious reserve but he could also sub the 10 and have someone like JB go into 12.

For backs I’m thinking something like

TJP
Mounga
Rieko
SBW
Reece/JB
Bender

Weber
Crotty
JB/BB

You are the anti-Cheika.

@rotated said in RWC: All Blacks v Canada (Pool B):

Centre combo is the interesting one. They want to give everyone a run, but they've been doing that for four years, its about time the chosen two settled down and developed a combo for at least 2 of the next 3 games.

According to Fozzie that isn't the philosophy anymore. They want an interchangeable pool of centres and see that as a strength.

@Crucial said in RWC: All Blacks v Canada (Pool B):

According to Fozzie that isn't the philosophy anymore. They want an interchangeable pool of centres and see that as a strength.

He has also said they know who their best centre combo is, even if the rest of us don't from the outside looking in (yet).

@Bones

I don’t know if you are referring to next game or in general, but it seems to me if you play your strongest team against Italy that’s three weeks after the Boks game, you definitely want a hit out before that but you don’t want it on a short week, so it only makes sense for bulk of first team to play this week after having had a good break, with the dirt trackers playing 4 days after that. To me after that tough first game the schedule is perfect. An opportunity to build every week and stay game ready with no short weeks for the 1st team.

Thing is that you've actually only got 8 dirt trackers - i.e. guys who didn't play the first game (and Frizell for Todd, Patty T for Retallick IMO).

So, for me, those eight guys all play both of the next two games - mixed and matched with the starting 23. And then the top 23 (as far as possible) play Italy and the play-off games.

The Canada game looks the ideal opportunity to give Jordie Barrett some match time at First Five Eight and get up to speed playing number 10 at International level.

@sparky said in RWC: All Blacks v Canada (Pool B):

The Canada game looks the ideal opportunity to give Jordie Barrett some match time at First Five Eight and get up to speed playing number 10 at International level.

@DMX said in RWC: All Blacks v Canada (Pool B):

@Bones

I don’t know if you are referring to next game or in general, but it seems to me if you play your strongest team against Italy that’s three weeks after the Boks game, you definitely want a hit out before that but you don’t want it on a short week, so it only makes sense for bulk of first team to play this week after having had a good break, with the dirt trackers playing 4 days after that. To me after that tough first game the schedule is perfect. An opportunity to build every week and stay game ready with no short weeks for the 1st team.

Well sure, if that's the way you think rugby must be done, then it wouldn't make sense. They know what their top side is (if there even is one) and also what plays/plans work when and against who pretty much. What value is there in saying everyone gets played and then not following through? I keep hearing the ABs are getting an easier quarter and also can't play more than 3 decent level games in a row - why does the top team need to play twice before hitting the finals?