All Blacks v France II

@sparky said in All Blacks v France II:

@DaGrubster Sportsmanship means different things in different societies, especially in this commercial era, although I've found one universal in great Rugby heartlands is superb hospitality, very much including the south of France.

I'm relaxed about the French making their own decisions about what Rugby values means to them rather than demanding they follow our protocols. Hopefully, next Saturday will be a competitive test match with no hint of it being a dead rubber.
Ask yourself if France were holding aloft the dave gallher trophy after winning the series, and we just sloped off to the sheds, i sm sure we would never hesr the end of it.

@DaGrubster New Zealand Rugby is all about giving your all for 80 minutes, then applauding the opposition if they score more points than you at the end or celebrating the win. Lots of talk of our DNA these days, but that's our true DNA. So yes, I'd be furious if the All Blacks ever sloped off before a trophy ceremony.

And I'm quite prepared to hold our boys to a higher account than I do the French.

But what values the French regard as important is their business.

Back to the props for another aspect of their game : defending mauls. Who are the best at it ?

@Bovidae said in All Blacks v France II:

It's always fun reading match threads days after the fact.

While we are piling on BB, was he actually on the field when Taylor scored his try? I didn't see him from the TV footage.

If so, under what law was he allowed to take the conversion? I was quite looking forward to seeing Roigard have a kick.

I wondered that too Bovidae, BB's time wasn't on field and I half expected the ref to say you can't take kick. Had no idea if he could, but like you I wondered if it allowed.
Apparently it is.

@Bovidae I don't think there's anything in the laws that stipulates who can take a kick. Provided his yellow card ended around the time the try was scored, it would've been fine.

Suspect Jordie Barrett would've just taken the kick in his absence, as he did a few minutes earlier.

@Mr-Fish said in All Blacks v France II:

Suspect Jordie Barrett would've just taken the kick in his absence, as he did a few minutes earlier.

Except he was also off for an HIA/blood bin.

BB got his YC at 18 mins and Taylor scored on 28 mins, so it was close. I reckon BB would have been waiting to get back on, and the next stoppage was the try. A little suss to me.

@Bovidae said in All Blacks v France II:

@Mr-Fish said in All Blacks v France II:

Suspect Jordie Barrett would've just taken the kick in his absence, as he did a few minutes earlier.

Except he was also off for an HIA/blood bin.

BB got his YC at 18 mins and Taylor scored on 28 mins, so it was close. I reckon BB would have been waiting to get back on, and the next stoppage was the try. A little suss to me.

Ah whoops, forgot that.

If the next stoppage was the try then it was entirely legitimate. A stoppage is a stoppage and you can make the change/bring the player back from the bin. Provided you still make your kick within the time allowed, no reason why it couldn't be a player coming back from the bin who's handed the tee.

@Dan54 said in All Blacks v France II:

@brodean How does that compare with all other players? We haven't done well against these teams in the 20s, so imagine there not a lot of good win stats for players. I actually thought RMo started most of the tests at 10 between 2020 and 2023, but perhaps I missed BB starting a few games against Boks?

There's not a lot you can read into because as you say RMo started a lot of the tests at 10.

The main point is he doesn't have a solid archive of games where he guides us to wins against the best teams as a 10. I still believe his best role is as an impact player off the bench.

He's got two more wins than Love against the best teams in the twenties. I would like to see Love start at 10.

No matter who France put out its still an experimental development side. Love is good enough to compete against those guys.

Beauden Barrett getting rissolled from teh 10 shirt by i assume Joe Schmidt was a huge part of why the ABs turned their form around halfway through that tour to South Africa and saved Fosters job. RMo wasn't even great, he was just better than BB, and that's all that was needed (RMo was pretty bloody good by the World Cup play offs though).

And here we are, 3 years later, he's restored to the shirt, playing just as shit as he was then, yet seemingly nailed on to start. It defies belief.

@brodean understand your point etc, but I doubt whether Love is even been considered starting for ABs this week, after about 4-5 games at most starting for Canes. And I a Canes man (and Love fan). I doubt any test coach in world would consider a starting 10 with so little experience.

@mariner4life said in All Blacks v France II:

And here we are, 3 years later, he's restored to the shirt, playing just as shit as he was then, yet seemingly nailed on to start. It defies belief.

He does have good hair though.

@Frank said in All Blacks v France II:

@mariner4life said in All Blacks v France II:

And here we are, 3 years later, he's restored to the shirt, playing just as shit as he was then, yet seemingly nailed on to start. It defies belief.

He does have good hair though.

well, it doesn't take a long bow to think our head coach puts a lot of weight on that factor

@Dan54 said in All Blacks v France II:

@brodean understand your point etc, but I doubt whether Love is even been considered starting for ABs this week, after about 4-5 games at most starting for Canes. And I a Canes man (and Love fan). I doubt any test coach in world would consider a starting 10 with so little experience.

complete aside, but this is the problem with NZ having 5 pro teams.

That's 5 jobs where you get like 16 games a year maybe, and you'll probably get rotated out for a couple of those.
With a couple of long tenured guys, you're left with kids who haven't got the shits and left yet, or journeymen who can't get a better playing gig somewhere else.
The ABs are basically forced in to the same two guys, or someone who has played fuck all.

@Dan54 said in All Blacks v France II:

@brodean understand your point etc, but I doubt whether Love is even been considered starting for ABs this week, after about 4-5 games at most starting for Canes. And I a Canes man (and Love fan). I doubt any test coach in world would consider a starting 10 with so little experience.

You're probably right about consideration from the coaches. Doesn't mean they're right.

The guy is 24 now. He's had 5 years of Super Rugby experience and started 13 games for the Canes at 10. It's an experimental French B/C team. Beauden Barrett had already played 24 tests at 24. We're too conservative now.

@brodean said in All Blacks v France II:

@Dan54 said in All Blacks v France II:

@brodean understand your point etc, but I doubt whether Love is even been considered starting for ABs this week, after about 4-5 games at most starting for Canes. And I a Canes man (and Love fan). I doubt any test coach in world would consider a starting 10 with so little experience.

You're probably right about consideration from the coaches. Doesn't mean they're right.

The guy is 24 now. He's had 5 years of Super Rugby experience and started 13 games for the Canes at 10. It's an experimental French B/C team. Beauden Barrett had already played 24 tests at 24. We're too conservative now.

Problem is that coaches at Canes (rightly or wrongly) haven't thought Love is good enough to steer them around field at 10. Their job is to do what they think is best for Canes, and selectors have to (I think) select on a good body of work, so they have confidence they won't cock up in tests.
I tend to agree I would like to see more of Love, but if at 10 off bench. Her starts and makes a few balls ups, imagine the melt down (and in press etc) about playing him before he ready.

@Dan54 said in All Blacks v France II:

@brodean said in All Blacks v France II:

@Dan54 said in All Blacks v France II:

@brodean understand your point etc, but I doubt whether Love is even been considered starting for ABs this week, after about 4-5 games at most starting for Canes. And I a Canes man (and Love fan). I doubt any test coach in world would consider a starting 10 with so little experience.

You're probably right about consideration from the coaches. Doesn't mean they're right.

The guy is 24 now. He's had 5 years of Super Rugby experience and started 13 games for the Canes at 10. It's an experimental French B/C team. Beauden Barrett had already played 24 tests at 24. We're too conservative now.

Problem is that coaches at Canes (rightly or wrongly) haven't thought Love is good enough to steer them around field at 10. Their job is to do what they think is best for Canes, and selectors have to (I think) select on a good body of work, so they have confidence they won't cock up in tests.
I tend to agree I would like to see more of Love, but if at 10 off bench. Her starts and makes a few balls ups, imagine the melt down (and in press etc) about playing him before he ready.

Laidlaw shat the bed by reinstating Cameron as the starter when he returned from injury. Bad for the Canes, bad for Love and his AB potential

@canefan said in All Blacks v France II:

@Dan54 said in All Blacks v France II:

@brodean said in All Blacks v France II:

@Dan54 said in All Blacks v France II:

@brodean understand your point etc, but I doubt whether Love is even been considered starting for ABs this week, after about 4-5 games at most starting for Canes. And I a Canes man (and Love fan). I doubt any test coach in world would consider a starting 10 with so little experience.

You're probably right about consideration from the coaches. Doesn't mean they're right.

The guy is 24 now. He's had 5 years of Super Rugby experience and started 13 games for the Canes at 10. It's an experimental French B/C team. Beauden Barrett had already played 24 tests at 24. We're too conservative now.

Problem is that coaches at Canes (rightly or wrongly) haven't thought Love is good enough to steer them around field at 10. Their job is to do what they think is best for Canes, and selectors have to (I think) select on a good body of work, so they have confidence they won't cock up in tests.
I tend to agree I would like to see more of Love, but if at 10 off bench. Her starts and makes a few balls ups, imagine the melt down (and in press etc) about playing him before he ready.

Laidlaw shat the bed by reinstating Cameron as the starter when he returned from injury. Bad for the Canes, bad for Love and his AB potential

Speaking of body of work - there was more than enough body of work to show that Brett Cameron wasn't the answer but Laidlaw went that path anyway.