@Joans-Town-Jones said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Billy-Tell said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Joans-Town-Jones said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Billy-Tell said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

Don’t think we were winning that without the red card. Nevertheless well done. Fluhler is fantastic. DC was a great 10 but he is a shît goal kicking coach. We need to learn how to defend a maul.

Women can barely kick 30ms. He'd need a doctorate in bionics to improve their kicking.

Sorry to read you didn’t get to watch the final. It was a great game. Distance wasn’t the problem, accuracy was.

Pffff, they can't even get them from the sideline. They drop under the bar ffs.

Go back to the 1950s with your outdated chauvinistic views. We know you don’t like women’s rugby, you’ve already posted such, go piss in another thread. Ideally one where you’ve actually watched the game.

@Bovidae said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Crucial said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Stargazer said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Billy-Tell Yep. The commentators said that Holmes was nailing her kicks at goal from 50m during warm-up. I think she missed so many kicks because of the pressure; not because the kicks were too hard.

Most of the kicks (except one duff one) were close. Minor technical problem that was creating a late hook to the left.
If you were at practice and lining them up one after another you’d fix it quickly but you don’t get that luxury in a game.

I was yelling at the TV to aim for inside the right post as all her close misses went left. There weren't any gimmes in front of the posts.

BTW, England only converted 20 of their 43 tries. NZ were 21/44.

I like these stats. Shows conversions aren’t a given.

@Billy-Tell said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Joans-Town-Jones said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Billy-Tell said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Joans-Town-Jones said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Billy-Tell said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

Don’t think we were winning that without the red card. Nevertheless well done. Fluhler is fantastic. DC was a great 10 but he is a shît goal kicking coach. We need to learn how to defend a maul.

Women can barely kick 30ms. He'd need a doctorate in bionics to improve their kicking.

Sorry to read you didn’t get to watch the final. It was a great game. Distance wasn’t the problem, accuracy was.

Pffff, they can't even get them from the sideline. They drop under the bar ffs.

Go back to the 1950s with your outdated chauvinistic views. We know you don’t like women’s rugby, you’ve already posted such, go piss in another thread. Ideally one where you’ve actually watched the game.

England only converted 20 of their 43 tries. NZ were 21/44. Facts, Beta.

@Joans-Town-Jones said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Billy-Tell said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Joans-Town-Jones said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Billy-Tell said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Joans-Town-Jones said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Billy-Tell said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

Don’t think we were winning that without the red card. Nevertheless well done. Fluhler is fantastic. DC was a great 10 but he is a shît goal kicking coach. We need to learn how to defend a maul.

Women can barely kick 30ms. He'd need a doctorate in bionics to improve their kicking.

Sorry to read you didn’t get to watch the final. It was a great game. Distance wasn’t the problem, accuracy was.

Pffff, they can't even get them from the sideline. They drop under the bar ffs.

Go back to the 1950s with your outdated chauvinistic views. We know you don’t like women’s rugby, you’ve already posted such, go piss in another thread. Ideally one where you’ve actually watched the game.

England only converted 20 of their 43 tries. NZ were 21/44. Facts, Beta.

So what is your point exactly? I'd love to see the stats for stoppage times because the game seemed to flow better than most men's games I've seen for a while. The skills on show were very impressive, capped off by the BFs version of the try from the end of the world. Of course you would know this if you watched the game....

@canefan said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Joans-Town-Jones said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Billy-Tell said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Joans-Town-Jones said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Billy-Tell said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Joans-Town-Jones said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Billy-Tell said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

Don’t think we were winning that without the red card. Nevertheless well done. Fluhler is fantastic. DC was a great 10 but he is a shît goal kicking coach. We need to learn how to defend a maul.

Women can barely kick 30ms. He'd need a doctorate in bionics to improve their kicking.

Sorry to read you didn’t get to watch the final. It was a great game. Distance wasn’t the problem, accuracy was.

Pffff, they can't even get them from the sideline. They drop under the bar ffs.

Go back to the 1950s with your outdated chauvinistic views. We know you don’t like women’s rugby, you’ve already posted such, go piss in another thread. Ideally one where you’ve actually watched the game.

England only converted 20 of their 43 tries. NZ were 21/44. Facts, Beta.

So what is your point exactly? I'd love to see the stats for stoppage times because the game seemed to flow better than most men's games I've seen for a while. The skills on show were very impressive, capped off by the BFs version of the try from the end of the world. Of course you would know this if you watched the game....

I haven't searched for them but there were some ball in play stats being thrown around for both the semis and final and they were well above the average mens test comparison.. Around 6-8% off the top of my head

@canefan said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Joans-Town-Jones said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Billy-Tell said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Joans-Town-Jones said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Billy-Tell said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Joans-Town-Jones said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Billy-Tell said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

Don’t think we were winning that without the red card. Nevertheless well done. Fluhler is fantastic. DC was a great 10 but he is a shît goal kicking coach. We need to learn how to defend a maul.

Women can barely kick 30ms. He'd need a doctorate in bionics to improve their kicking.

Sorry to read you didn’t get to watch the final. It was a great game. Distance wasn’t the problem, accuracy was.

Pffff, they can't even get them from the sideline. They drop under the bar ffs.

Go back to the 1950s with your outdated chauvinistic views. We know you don’t like women’s rugby, you’ve already posted such, go piss in another thread. Ideally one where you’ve actually watched the game.

England only converted 20 of their 43 tries. NZ were 21/44. Facts, Beta.

So what is your point exactly? I'd love to see the stats for stoppage times because the game seemed to flow better than most men's games I've seen for a while. The skills on show were very impressive, capped off by the BFs version of the try from the end of the world. Of course you would know this if you watched the game....

Never said anything about skills other than kicking. In reference to DC being a shit coach. Of course you'd know this if you read what I wrote...

DC wasn't the kicking coach. He came to camp and did a couple of sessions and gave out some tips. If he was kicking coach there would have been full on golf swing analysis, mental coaching (which they had, but specifically to kicking).
He would have pointed out a few obvious things to take stuff up a notch.
Can't blame him for a few misses. He actually improved Holmes' tee kicking quite a bit with those tips. She was a much better kicker at the end of the tournament than when she started.
It is fair to say that not a lot of kick coaching is done at FPC levels. It often comes down to inviduals putting their hand up and doing extras after training. Just like mens teams used to be.

Never said he was a kicking coach either. I was responding to the fact he was labelled as such.

@Crucial as I mentioned a few weeks back, it isnt so much the kicking that is the issue, its the distance from the foot, and suggested they could probably have a slightly smaller/lighter ball (like a 4.5) but @Stargazer said this was looked at a year or 2 back and they decided to leave as is.

When you watch the last 2 games of the BFs it seemed clear that less kicking was a tactic, especially against England where a kick would often not get past the 22, meaning England would then have an attacking lineout with thier maul, so keeping it away from there was paramount.

@taniwharugby said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Crucial as I mentioned a few weeks back, it isnt so much the kicking that is the issue, its the distance from the foot, and suggested they could probably have a slightly smaller/lighter ball (like a 4.5) but @Stargazer said this was looked at a year or 2 back and they decided to leave as is.

When you watch the last 2 games of the BFs it seemed clear that less kicking was a tactic, especially against England where a kick would often not get past the 22, meaning England would then have an attacking lineout with thier maul, so keeping it away from there was paramount.

In general I agree but some technique coaching in that area can improve things. There are some decent out of hand kickers in other teams and it's not like that have massive legs or longer levers. Technique and timing can go a long way just like in cricket.
Proper drop punting where more force is put onto the ball going onto the foot is a technique I'm not seeing much. Old school spiral punts will also get distance.
Key is finding the time and expertise to put effort into this area. Not much different to the mens game in that respect where natural kickers are the start point

@Joans-Town-Jones said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@canefan said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Joans-Town-Jones said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Billy-Tell said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Joans-Town-Jones said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Billy-Tell said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Joans-Town-Jones said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Billy-Tell said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

Don’t think we were winning that without the red card. Nevertheless well done. Fluhler is fantastic. DC was a great 10 but he is a shît goal kicking coach. We need to learn how to defend a maul.

Women can barely kick 30ms. He'd need a doctorate in bionics to improve their kicking.

Sorry to read you didn’t get to watch the final. It was a great game. Distance wasn’t the problem, accuracy was.

Pffff, they can't even get them from the sideline. They drop under the bar ffs.

Go back to the 1950s with your outdated chauvinistic views. We know you don’t like women’s rugby, you’ve already posted such, go piss in another thread. Ideally one where you’ve actually watched the game.

England only converted 20 of their 43 tries. NZ were 21/44. Facts, Beta.

So what is your point exactly? I'd love to see the stats for stoppage times because the game seemed to flow better than most men's games I've seen for a while. The skills on show were very impressive, capped off by the BFs version of the try from the end of the world. Of course you would know this if you watched the game....

Never said anything about skills other than kicking. In reference to DC being a shit coach. Of course you'd know this if you read what I wrote...

This is the Fern mate. It is my prerogative to form an opinion without actually reading everything you said!

@canefan said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Joans-Town-Jones said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@canefan said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Joans-Town-Jones said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Billy-Tell said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Joans-Town-Jones said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Billy-Tell said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Joans-Town-Jones said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Billy-Tell said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

Don’t think we were winning that without the red card. Nevertheless well done. Fluhler is fantastic. DC was a great 10 but he is a shît goal kicking coach. We need to learn how to defend a maul.

Women can barely kick 30ms. He'd need a doctorate in bionics to improve their kicking.

Sorry to read you didn’t get to watch the final. It was a great game. Distance wasn’t the problem, accuracy was.

Pffff, they can't even get them from the sideline. They drop under the bar ffs.

Go back to the 1950s with your outdated chauvinistic views. We know you don’t like women’s rugby, you’ve already posted such, go piss in another thread. Ideally one where you’ve actually watched the game.

England only converted 20 of their 43 tries. NZ were 21/44. Facts, Beta.

So what is your point exactly? I'd love to see the stats for stoppage times because the game seemed to flow better than most men's games I've seen for a while. The skills on show were very impressive, capped off by the BFs version of the try from the end of the world. Of course you would know this if you watched the game....

Never said anything about skills other than kicking. In reference to DC being a shit coach. Of course you'd know this if you read what I wrote...

This is the Fern mate. It is my prerogative to form an opinion without actually reading everything you said!

Look, when you come for my mother, thats what you get.

This is great and well-deserved!!

@Stargazer
Totally rapt for the Black Ferns
lots of people on the social network questioning the disparity with between the Women are getting and what the All Blacks could of got bonus wise ‍️..obviously don’t understand legacy or commercials , I will bet dollars to doughnuts many of them did’nt even watch a Ferns game before this RWC .

@Steven-Harris said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Stargazer
Totally rapt for the Black Ferns
lots of people on the social network questioning the disparity with between the Women are getting and what the All Blacks could of got bonus wise ‍️..obviously don’t understand legacy or commercials , I will bet dollars to doughnuts many of them did’nt even watch a Ferns game any sport before this RWC .

FIFY

@Crucial said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@taniwharugby said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Crucial as I mentioned a few weeks back, it isnt so much the kicking that is the issue, its the distance from the foot, and suggested they could probably have a slightly smaller/lighter ball (like a 4.5) but @Stargazer said this was looked at a year or 2 back and they decided to leave as is.

When you watch the last 2 games of the BFs it seemed clear that less kicking was a tactic, especially against England where a kick would often not get past the 22, meaning England would then have an attacking lineout with thier maul, so keeping it away from there was paramount.

In general I agree but some technique coaching in that area can improve things. There are some decent out of hand kickers in other teams and it's not like that have massive legs or longer levers. Technique and timing can go a long way just like in cricket.
Proper drop punting where more force is put onto the ball going onto the foot is a technique I'm not seeing much. Old school spiral punts will also get distance.
Key is finding the time and expertise to put effort into this area. Not much different to the mens game in that respect where natural kickers are the start point

You may be able to eek out a few more meters but men just have more power through the leg drive and may also have to do with the physiological differences between men and women such as height, body shape, hips etc. There's a good video on YouTube with the differences between a helium filled rugby ball and one filled with air. The distance is crazy. Maybe they could look into a helium/air blend so distances in kicks will be increased but not to the point where it completely changes the way the women play.

@Joans-Town-Jones said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Crucial said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@taniwharugby said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Crucial as I mentioned a few weeks back, it isnt so much the kicking that is the issue, its the distance from the foot, and suggested they could probably have a slightly smaller/lighter ball (like a 4.5) but @Stargazer said this was looked at a year or 2 back and they decided to leave as is.

When you watch the last 2 games of the BFs it seemed clear that less kicking was a tactic, especially against England where a kick would often not get past the 22, meaning England would then have an attacking lineout with thier maul, so keeping it away from there was paramount.

In general I agree but some technique coaching in that area can improve things. There are some decent out of hand kickers in other teams and it's not like that have massive legs or longer levers. Technique and timing can go a long way just like in cricket.
Proper drop punting where more force is put onto the ball going onto the foot is a technique I'm not seeing much. Old school spiral punts will also get distance.
Key is finding the time and expertise to put effort into this area. Not much different to the mens game in that respect where natural kickers are the start point

You may be able to eek out a few more meters but men just have more power through the leg drive and may also have to do with the physiological differences between men and women such as height, body shape, hips etc. There's a good video on YouTube with the differences between a helium filled rugby ball and one filled with air. The distance is crazy. Maybe they could look into a helium/air blend so distances in kicks will be increased but not to the point where it completely changes the way the women play.

Ok idea in theory only. The mix would need to be regulated and certified, the preparation of balls witnessed.......all sorts of logistical issues.

@Crucial said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Joans-Town-Jones said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Crucial said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@taniwharugby said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Crucial as I mentioned a few weeks back, it isnt so much the kicking that is the issue, its the distance from the foot, and suggested they could probably have a slightly smaller/lighter ball (like a 4.5) but @Stargazer said this was looked at a year or 2 back and they decided to leave as is.

When you watch the last 2 games of the BFs it seemed clear that less kicking was a tactic, especially against England where a kick would often not get past the 22, meaning England would then have an attacking lineout with thier maul, so keeping it away from there was paramount.

In general I agree but some technique coaching in that area can improve things. There are some decent out of hand kickers in other teams and it's not like that have massive legs or longer levers. Technique and timing can go a long way just like in cricket.
Proper drop punting where more force is put onto the ball going onto the foot is a technique I'm not seeing much. Old school spiral punts will also get distance.
Key is finding the time and expertise to put effort into this area. Not much different to the mens game in that respect where natural kickers are the start point

You may be able to eek out a few more meters but men just have more power through the leg drive and may also have to do with the physiological differences between men and women such as height, body shape, hips etc. There's a good video on YouTube with the differences between a helium filled rugby ball and one filled with air. The distance is crazy. Maybe they could look into a helium/air blend so distances in kicks will be increased but not to the point where it completely changes the way the women play.

Ok idea in theory only. The mix would need to be regulated and certified, the preparation of balls witnessed.......all sorts of logistical issues.

The other way would be to go full helium. I'm sure the woke movement would be against some sort of advantage though...

@Joans-Town-Jones said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Crucial said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Joans-Town-Jones said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Crucial said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@taniwharugby said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Crucial as I mentioned a few weeks back, it isnt so much the kicking that is the issue, its the distance from the foot, and suggested they could probably have a slightly smaller/lighter ball (like a 4.5) but @Stargazer said this was looked at a year or 2 back and they decided to leave as is.

When you watch the last 2 games of the BFs it seemed clear that less kicking was a tactic, especially against England where a kick would often not get past the 22, meaning England would then have an attacking lineout with thier maul, so keeping it away from there was paramount.

In general I agree but some technique coaching in that area can improve things. There are some decent out of hand kickers in other teams and it's not like that have massive legs or longer levers. Technique and timing can go a long way just like in cricket.
Proper drop punting where more force is put onto the ball going onto the foot is a technique I'm not seeing much. Old school spiral punts will also get distance.
Key is finding the time and expertise to put effort into this area. Not much different to the mens game in that respect where natural kickers are the start point

You may be able to eek out a few more meters but men just have more power through the leg drive and may also have to do with the physiological differences between men and women such as height, body shape, hips etc. There's a good video on YouTube with the differences between a helium filled rugby ball and one filled with air. The distance is crazy. Maybe they could look into a helium/air blend so distances in kicks will be increased but not to the point where it completely changes the way the women play.

Ok idea in theory only. The mix would need to be regulated and certified, the preparation of balls witnessed.......all sorts of logistical issues.

The other way would be to go full helium. I'm sure the woke movement would be against some sort of advantage though...

There’s only one ball in play. What advantage?
But you keep thinking that the womens game is a lesser version of the mens rather than thinking of it as a slight variation.
Kicking is one of the aspects that brings variation. You get more running out of the 22, less penalty shots for goal, more quick taps etc.
once you get used to that you view the game a little differently.

@Crucial said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Joans-Town-Jones said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Crucial said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Joans-Town-Jones said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Crucial said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@taniwharugby said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Crucial as I mentioned a few weeks back, it isnt so much the kicking that is the issue, its the distance from the foot, and suggested they could probably have a slightly smaller/lighter ball (like a 4.5) but @Stargazer said this was looked at a year or 2 back and they decided to leave as is.

When you watch the last 2 games of the BFs it seemed clear that less kicking was a tactic, especially against England where a kick would often not get past the 22, meaning England would then have an attacking lineout with thier maul, so keeping it away from there was paramount.

In general I agree but some technique coaching in that area can improve things. There are some decent out of hand kickers in other teams and it's not like that have massive legs or longer levers. Technique and timing can go a long way just like in cricket.
Proper drop punting where more force is put onto the ball going onto the foot is a technique I'm not seeing much. Old school spiral punts will also get distance.
Key is finding the time and expertise to put effort into this area. Not much different to the mens game in that respect where natural kickers are the start point

You may be able to eek out a few more meters but men just have more power through the leg drive and may also have to do with the physiological differences between men and women such as height, body shape, hips etc. There's a good video on YouTube with the differences between a helium filled rugby ball and one filled with air. The distance is crazy. Maybe they could look into a helium/air blend so distances in kicks will be increased but not to the point where it completely changes the way the women play.

Ok idea in theory only. The mix would need to be regulated and certified, the preparation of balls witnessed.......all sorts of logistical issues.

The other way would be to go full helium. I'm sure the woke movement would be against some sort of advantage though...

There’s only one ball in play. What advantage?
But you keep thinking that the womens game is a lesser version of the mens rather than thinking of it as a slight variation.
Kicking is one of the aspects that brings variation. You get more running out of the 22, less penalty shots for goal, more quick taps etc.
once you get used to that you view the game a little differently.

Oh FFS. If a ball is full of helium, it flies further. That fucking advantage.

Also, the market would suggest the women's game is an inferior product. How many of you "fans" on here supported the women's game before the WRWC?

@Joans-Town-Jones said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Crucial said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Joans-Town-Jones said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Crucial said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Joans-Town-Jones said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Crucial said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@taniwharugby said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Crucial as I mentioned a few weeks back, it isnt so much the kicking that is the issue, its the distance from the foot, and suggested they could probably have a slightly smaller/lighter ball (like a 4.5) but @Stargazer said this was looked at a year or 2 back and they decided to leave as is.

When you watch the last 2 games of the BFs it seemed clear that less kicking was a tactic, especially against England where a kick would often not get past the 22, meaning England would then have an attacking lineout with thier maul, so keeping it away from there was paramount.

In general I agree but some technique coaching in that area can improve things. There are some decent out of hand kickers in other teams and it's not like that have massive legs or longer levers. Technique and timing can go a long way just like in cricket.
Proper drop punting where more force is put onto the ball going onto the foot is a technique I'm not seeing much. Old school spiral punts will also get distance.
Key is finding the time and expertise to put effort into this area. Not much different to the mens game in that respect where natural kickers are the start point

You may be able to eek out a few more meters but men just have more power through the leg drive and may also have to do with the physiological differences between men and women such as height, body shape, hips etc. There's a good video on YouTube with the differences between a helium filled rugby ball and one filled with air. The distance is crazy. Maybe they could look into a helium/air blend so distances in kicks will be increased but not to the point where it completely changes the way the women play.

Ok idea in theory only. The mix would need to be regulated and certified, the preparation of balls witnessed.......all sorts of logistical issues.

The other way would be to go full helium. I'm sure the woke movement would be against some sort of advantage though...

There’s only one ball in play. What advantage?
But you keep thinking that the womens game is a lesser version of the mens rather than thinking of it as a slight variation.
Kicking is one of the aspects that brings variation. You get more running out of the 22, less penalty shots for goal, more quick taps etc.
once you get used to that you view the game a little differently.

Oh FFS. If a ball is full of helium, it flies further. That fucking advantage.

Also, the market would suggest the women's game is an inferior product. How many of you "fans" on here supported the women's game before the WRWC?

Quite a few actually.

Explain who is getting an advantage against who if the ball is filled with helium and travels further. Both teams play with the same ball.

@Crucial said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Joans-Town-Jones said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Crucial said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Joans-Town-Jones said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Crucial said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Joans-Town-Jones said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Crucial said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@taniwharugby said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Crucial as I mentioned a few weeks back, it isnt so much the kicking that is the issue, its the distance from the foot, and suggested they could probably have a slightly smaller/lighter ball (like a 4.5) but @Stargazer said this was looked at a year or 2 back and they decided to leave as is.

When you watch the last 2 games of the BFs it seemed clear that less kicking was a tactic, especially against England where a kick would often not get past the 22, meaning England would then have an attacking lineout with thier maul, so keeping it away from there was paramount.

In general I agree but some technique coaching in that area can improve things. There are some decent out of hand kickers in other teams and it's not like that have massive legs or longer levers. Technique and timing can go a long way just like in cricket.
Proper drop punting where more force is put onto the ball going onto the foot is a technique I'm not seeing much. Old school spiral punts will also get distance.
Key is finding the time and expertise to put effort into this area. Not much different to the mens game in that respect where natural kickers are the start point

You may be able to eek out a few more meters but men just have more power through the leg drive and may also have to do with the physiological differences between men and women such as height, body shape, hips etc. There's a good video on YouTube with the differences between a helium filled rugby ball and one filled with air. The distance is crazy. Maybe they could look into a helium/air blend so distances in kicks will be increased but not to the point where it completely changes the way the women play.

Ok idea in theory only. The mix would need to be regulated and certified, the preparation of balls witnessed.......all sorts of logistical issues.

The other way would be to go full helium. I'm sure the woke movement would be against some sort of advantage though...

There’s only one ball in play. What advantage?
But you keep thinking that the womens game is a lesser version of the mens rather than thinking of it as a slight variation.
Kicking is one of the aspects that brings variation. You get more running out of the 22, less penalty shots for goal, more quick taps etc.
once you get used to that you view the game a little differently.

Oh FFS. If a ball is full of helium, it flies further. That fucking advantage.

Also, the market would suggest the women's game is an inferior product. How many of you "fans" on here supported the women's game before the WRWC?

Quite a few actually.

Explain who is getting an advantage against who if the ball is filled with helium and travels further. Both teams play with the same ball.

It means they can kick the ball from the sideline and get it over the cross bar.

"Quite a few actually." - let me guess, big fans, always have been? Like the fuck all up until the RWC?

@Joans-Town-Jones said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

"Quite a few actually." - let me guess, big fans, always have been? Like the fuck all up until the RWC?

Personally I have very little interest in ladies rugby. However there are people on TSF who are interested and have been for some time

For instance here is all the Black Ferns threads: https://www.forum.thesilverfern.com/tags/blackferns

Or this years female Super Rugby: https://www.forum.thesilverfern.com/tags/aupiki

I'm sure not every thread has been tagged correctly either. Plus there's been discussion of 7's and the NPC for years too

@Duluth said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Joans-Town-Jones said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

"Quite a few actually." - let me guess, big fans, always have been? Like the fuck all up until the RWC?

Personally I have very little interest in ladies rugby. However there are people on TSF who are interested and have been for some time

For instance here is all the Black Ferns threads: https://www.forum.thesilverfern.com/tags/blackferns

Or this years female Super Rugby: https://www.forum.thesilverfern.com/tags/aupiki

I'm sure not every thread has been tagged correctly either. Plus there's been discussion of 7's and the NPC for years too

FPC thread was fairly active.

“Ladies Rugby”?
Is that as opposed to Lords Rugby? Gentlemen’s Rugby?

@Joans-Town-Jones said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Crucial said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Joans-Town-Jones said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Crucial said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Joans-Town-Jones said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Crucial said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Joans-Town-Jones said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Crucial said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@taniwharugby said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Crucial as I mentioned a few weeks back, it isnt so much the kicking that is the issue, its the distance from the foot, and suggested they could probably have a slightly smaller/lighter ball (like a 4.5) but @Stargazer said this was looked at a year or 2 back and they decided to leave as is.

When you watch the last 2 games of the BFs it seemed clear that less kicking was a tactic, especially against England where a kick would often not get past the 22, meaning England would then have an attacking lineout with thier maul, so keeping it away from there was paramount.

In general I agree but some technique coaching in that area can improve things. There are some decent out of hand kickers in other teams and it's not like that have massive legs or longer levers. Technique and timing can go a long way just like in cricket.
Proper drop punting where more force is put onto the ball going onto the foot is a technique I'm not seeing much. Old school spiral punts will also get distance.
Key is finding the time and expertise to put effort into this area. Not much different to the mens game in that respect where natural kickers are the start point

You may be able to eek out a few more meters but men just have more power through the leg drive and may also have to do with the physiological differences between men and women such as height, body shape, hips etc. There's a good video on YouTube with the differences between a helium filled rugby ball and one filled with air. The distance is crazy. Maybe they could look into a helium/air blend so distances in kicks will be increased but not to the point where it completely changes the way the women play.

Ok idea in theory only. The mix would need to be regulated and certified, the preparation of balls witnessed.......all sorts of logistical issues.

The other way would be to go full helium. I'm sure the woke movement would be against some sort of advantage though...

There’s only one ball in play. What advantage?
But you keep thinking that the womens game is a lesser version of the mens rather than thinking of it as a slight variation.
Kicking is one of the aspects that brings variation. You get more running out of the 22, less penalty shots for goal, more quick taps etc.
once you get used to that you view the game a little differently.

Oh FFS. If a ball is full of helium, it flies further. That fucking advantage.

Also, the market would suggest the women's game is an inferior product. How many of you "fans" on here supported the women's game before the WRWC?

Quite a few actually.

Explain who is getting an advantage against who if the ball is filled with helium and travels further. Both teams play with the same ball.

It means they can kick the ball from the sideline and get it over the cross bar.

And where is the advantage over the team they are playing. I’m still not getting your original comment.

@Duluth said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Joans-Town-Jones said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

"Quite a few actually." - let me guess, big fans, always have been? Like the fuck all up until the RWC?

Personally I have very little interest in ladies rugby. However there are people on TSF who are interested and have been for some time

For instance here is all the Black Ferns threads: https://www.forum.thesilverfern.com/tags/blackferns

Or this years female Super Rugby: https://www.forum.thesilverfern.com/tags/aupiki

I'm sure not every thread has been tagged correctly either. Plus there's been discussion of 7's and the NPC for years too

Great, so 20 blokes on a rugby forum is a reflection of the wider populous? It's actually unreal in an effort to stay woke people refuse to admit the ladies game is inferior. Hopefully they get their equal footing but right now no one gives a shit.

It still has feck all to do with the fact women cannot kick the ball as far as men. Which is what my original comment was about.

@Crucial said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Joans-Town-Jones said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Crucial said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Joans-Town-Jones said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Crucial said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Joans-Town-Jones said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Crucial said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Joans-Town-Jones said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Crucial said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@taniwharugby said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Crucial as I mentioned a few weeks back, it isnt so much the kicking that is the issue, its the distance from the foot, and suggested they could probably have a slightly smaller/lighter ball (like a 4.5) but @Stargazer said this was looked at a year or 2 back and they decided to leave as is.

When you watch the last 2 games of the BFs it seemed clear that less kicking was a tactic, especially against England where a kick would often not get past the 22, meaning England would then have an attacking lineout with thier maul, so keeping it away from there was paramount.

In general I agree but some technique coaching in that area can improve things. There are some decent out of hand kickers in other teams and it's not like that have massive legs or longer levers. Technique and timing can go a long way just like in cricket.
Proper drop punting where more force is put onto the ball going onto the foot is a technique I'm not seeing much. Old school spiral punts will also get distance.
Key is finding the time and expertise to put effort into this area. Not much different to the mens game in that respect where natural kickers are the start point

You may be able to eek out a few more meters but men just have more power through the leg drive and may also have to do with the physiological differences between men and women such as height, body shape, hips etc. There's a good video on YouTube with the differences between a helium filled rugby ball and one filled with air. The distance is crazy. Maybe they could look into a helium/air blend so distances in kicks will be increased but not to the point where it completely changes the way the women play.

Ok idea in theory only. The mix would need to be regulated and certified, the preparation of balls witnessed.......all sorts of logistical issues.

The other way would be to go full helium. I'm sure the woke movement would be against some sort of advantage though...

There’s only one ball in play. What advantage?
But you keep thinking that the womens game is a lesser version of the mens rather than thinking of it as a slight variation.
Kicking is one of the aspects that brings variation. You get more running out of the 22, less penalty shots for goal, more quick taps etc.
once you get used to that you view the game a little differently.

Oh FFS. If a ball is full of helium, it flies further. That fucking advantage.

Also, the market would suggest the women's game is an inferior product. How many of you "fans" on here supported the women's game before the WRWC?

Quite a few actually.

Explain who is getting an advantage against who if the ball is filled with helium and travels further. Both teams play with the same ball.

It means they can kick the ball from the sideline and get it over the cross bar.

And where is the advantage over the team they are playing. I’m still not getting your original comment.

It has nothing to do with having an advantage over the other team. It's about being able to kick goals which is what my comment re: DC being a shit kicking coach was about.

@Joans-Town-Jones said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

Great, so 20 blokes on a rugby forum is a reflection of the wider populous? It's actually unreal in an effort to stay woke people refuse to admit the ladies game is inferior. Hopefully they get their equal footing but right now no one gives a shit.

I never said that. I was simply pointing out that you were incorrect. Also, I am not woke

@Duluth said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Joans-Town-Jones said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

Great, so 20 blokes on a rugby forum is a reflection of the wider populous? It's actually unreal in an effort to stay woke people refuse to admit the ladies game is inferior. Hopefully they get their equal footing but right now no one gives a shit.

I never said that. I was simply pointing out that you were incorrect. Also, I am not woke

So the women's game is as popular as men's?

@Joans-Town-Jones

Are you retarded?

@Joans-Town-Jones You could start by not calling us woke people. I like women's rugby not because I'm woke, but because I like all different forms of the code, women's, men's U20s, school's, sevens.

I also don't think it's an inferior product. It's a different product, that you can like or not like, just like bantam weight boxing is a different product from heavy weight boxing, or the different weight classes in other fight sports, or the different car classes in racing, the different distances in swimming or rowing.

And no, some blokes on a rugby forum isn't a reflection of the wider population. In the wider population, women's rugby probably has more support, because that wider population also includes women and, generally, people who enjoy the sport withouth joing a forum. And no, I'm not saying the women's game is as popular as men's, but it's popularity is growing pretty fast.

@Duluth said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Joans-Town-Jones

Are you retarded?

Appears you are. I just refuted DC is a shit kicking coach.

@Stargazer said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Joans-Town-Jones You could start by not calling us woke people. I like women's rugby not because I'm woke, but because I like all different forms of the code, women's, men's U20s, school's, sevens.

I also don't think it's an inferior product. It's a different product, that you can like or not like, just like bantam weight boxing is a different product from heavy weight boxing, or the different weight classes in other fight sports, or the different car classes in racing, the different distances in swimming or rowing.

And no, some blokes on a rugby forum isn't a reflection of the wider population. In the wider population, women's rugby probably has more support, because that wider population also includes women and, generally, people who enjoy the sport withouth joing a forum. And no, I'm not saying the women's game is as popular as men's, but it's popularity is growing pretty fast.

Yeah na, it's not like bantam vs heavy weight at all. It's like men's heavy weight vs women's heavy weight.

@Joans-Town-Jones

I was correcting a specific, and completely incorrect, point you made

You are putting words in my mouth and claiming I have said something I haven't. It's painfully dumb or a troll

@Duluth said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Joans-Town-Jones

I was correcting a specific, and completely incorrect, point you made

You are putting words in my mouth and claiming I have said something I haven't. It's painfully dumb or a troll

I'd say both.

@Stargazer said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Duluth said in WRWC Final - NZ Vs England:

@Joans-Town-Jones

I was correcting a specific, and completely incorrect, point you made

You are putting words in my mouth and claiming I have said something I haven't. It's painfully dumb or a troll

I'd say both.

That's been obvious for months. I've never been sure why people keep engaging.