Originally Posted by zimeric
ok explain?
Last edited by WARHORSE; 27-08-10 at 21:27.
The Baby Faced Assasin
The only reasoning I could think of for Faingaa and Barnes is that if the Wallabies are winning at the 70 minute mark Barnes can lock down the game with his kicking. If the Wallabies are losing at that point Faingaa can run straight at a tired defense and hopefully open them up like Nonu did. Not that I think that's a good idea. I lost faith in Deans' selection policies a long time ago.
Smoke me a kipper, I'll be back for breakfast.
True, you'd need to have a freakin' awesome distributor at 10, because mistakes in such a system would hurt a lot, with the defence having the time to get to the outside in numbers, but Quade's sure go the tools to make something weird like that work, and if Genia runs a lot of runarounds off the 12, who runs an inside angle, the defence will be held up anyway.
Might be shit from my addled mind, but It'd be interesting
C'mon the
England used to use this occasionally with Carling at 12 and Guscott at 13 (usually the other way round) although it'd be rough to say Carling was just a straight runner. It works with some opponents, and can strengthen the defence if the fly-half's a bit flakey (ie, Rob Andrew!)
I used to be a big supporter of robbie deans...........not anymore.
I know where you are coming from Haji however, for me, he has said it is about the RWC (rightly or wrongly) so I am resisting jumping ship just yet but will crucify him for anything less than a final, having sacrificed all the lead up fixtures in that pursuit.
"Bloody oath we did!"
Nathan Sharpe, Legend.
If deans wants to be like the kiwis he needs to have faith with the guys on the bench and actually use them. Slipper did well and so did mcalman. Couldnt see simmons figuring prominantly in the lineout but was solid around the park. Why Moore didnt replace faingaa and others in the backline has me gobsmacked.
Henry brought on weepu, vito, dagg, and whitelock who all made an impact for them to get over the line against the boks. The AB's are clearly a fitter team then the wallabies so i dont know why deans thinks most of his players can play a full 80 minutes in the high veldt.....use the bloody bench players deans!! Its really hard for me to admit this but the AB's play with a lot more intelligence as well.
Saia faingaa should have been yanked with 30 minutes to go. Dunno if he was tired but evrything he did seemed to turrn to shit.
The last 20-30 minutes would have been the perfect environment to bring on luke burgess he may have a shonky pass but his running game would have given us oppurtunities with the amount of broken play not to mentiion his solid defense. genia was clearly sucking wind with 20 to go and you could see burgess just itching to get on and have a crack..
A faingaa and barnes would have been good to at least harden up the midfield defense and faingaas direct running would have been helpful.
Mumm was exposed as pretty average without sharpey out there to hold his hand. Pretty embarrassing when sharpey is trying to make lineout calls from the bench.
Theres something really mentally wrong with this player group. It not only seems we cant play a full 80 minutes but from wek to week we seem to fail at some fundamental aspect of the game that the opposition capitalizes on. Next week theyll work on the lineout which will probably come good but then their scrum will probably fall apart or something else. its pretty frustrating.
Agreed.
It was a classic case for what I call the unit bench.
You have a Scrummy, Flyhalf and Inside sitting there that should have been practicing together for the last three weeks as a unit.
Drop them in and either drag the 9-10-12 or put them in the outside backs and drag the 11, 13, 14 or 15.
Under the circumstances, I probably would have gone for at 60:
9 Burgess
10 Barnes
11 Mitchell
12 Faingaa
13 Giteau
14 Ashley Cooper
15 Beale
Dramas if there is any late injuries, but the match was already slipping away with 20 to go so it was well worth rolling the dice.
"Bloody oath we did!"
Nathan Sharpe, Legend.
S.Faingaa and Ma'afu should go back to club rugby - where they belong. Ma'afu is not a big prop - they have muscle. He is just big. And doesn't have the fitness for the full 80 minutes. He struggled to walk off the pitch last night at the 60 minute mark. S.Faingaa gifted 3 or 4 penalties from stupid stupid play - diving in to just sit on the ball, with no intent or purpose. He also could not throw a line out right to save his life. I've not been terribly impressed about any of his games, but last night really proved that he's not ready for international rugby, and I don't understand why they persisted with him for so long.
Nathan Sharpe can't go off the pitch for the rest of the Trinations. It's too much to bear.
A kick in this game is like a rather nasty alcoholic shooter, only as good as it's chaser...
Courtesy of quality South African commentry
Agree with most of the comments above, and though I agree Moore should start, I didn't feel S Faingaa was that bad - his throws were straight but just pilfered by the Boks. We should have gone to the front more often.
Quade Cooper was crap! He should go to league where he belongs. He was drifting in and out of the play, showing up only when we were on the front foot. Otherwise he was invisible, especially in defence, where he dropped off his customary attempts at tackles. In league he would be forced to complete one on one tackles, and his shoulder charges would be tolerated.
Giteau, Barnes and A Faingaa should have played as 10, 12, 13 in the last 20.
Slipper was impressive and probably should start over Ma'afu. McCalman, I'm afraid to say, outshone Browny at No8. Its a shame Higginbotham got injured in the warm-up.
well the bench selection baffled me before the match, and it was reaffirmed in the 80th minute of the match..
I didnt mind the forwards, it was the selection of Barnes and Faingaa which had me bewildered, they werent even utilised FFS, AAC should have been subbed IMO, however there was no sub for him.
i felt there was more to my critique of Faingaa then just his throwing. It seemed he was always giving away a free kicks or penalty and the basic things he was doing well to be in the squad in the first place didnt present itself this game ie tackling, workrate at the breakdown etc etc personally i think he's just not very fit and the highveldt amplified this. if you didnt know any better you'd think he was lazy. and the final play when the wallabies attempted to counterattack and he got done for obstruction summed it up really for me........he just kept getting in the way and just need to be pulled off the field.
In his defense, that penalty at the end for obstruction was hardly his fault, he was running a angle and the person behingpd him received the ball and ran I to his back....
As for the lineouts, well it's a tough one, most times the throws looked decent, matfield was just reading the play to well, whoever was calling the line outs was should have been kiting it up a bit more..
Posted via Mobile Device
What was Faingaa doing running at such an weird angle?! I don't mean to suggest it was just him, but you can't honestly say he's not to blame at all!
I was most unimpressed with him at every single ruck jumping with about zero intention and just lying down. He was picked up three times for it, but it could have been a thousand more. He was a giant pile of poo this week.
On the plus side, I did catch him rucking a South African out of his way, which scored some brownie points. But on the whole, he does not look like someone ready for international rugby.
A kick in this game is like a rather nasty alcoholic shooter, only as good as it's chaser...
running forward is a weird angle?
I cant remember whether it was slipper or pocock who received the pass, i only briefly saw the '7' on there jersey, but they looked as though they were going to run back inside Genia but then changed there mind and ran into the back of Faingaa.
It was the indecision by the person receiving ball which cause the penalty..
Its funny that one week Faingaa is getting praised for his workrate at the breakdown, and the following week he is getting criticised for it, he did nothing different to what he usually does, the Refs interpretation of the rules was just a different this week.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote