Success built on back of forwards
November 04, 2008
A protracted 2008 Bledisloe Cup series is over. A final verdict can now be given on exactly where our rivalry lies with Rob's Mob.
Statistics rarely lie. A three-to-one score line to the men in black is sufficient proof that right here, right now, the All Blacks are the better team. More specifically, both opposing backlines pretty much cancel themselves out but the eight in our engine room have proved more talented and more durable.
Our front row ultimately tilts the clash of the fatties to our advantage and our locks have seemingly provided a tad more shove. They have also finally gained parity at the very least in the lineout against the Wallabies.
And then there's the marked superiority of our loose trio, spearheaded by McCaw the Magnificent.
As I've intimated, there's scarcely a cigarette paper between the form of both backlines. Burgess is as least as effective as any of our halfbacks. Carter has had a slim advantage over Giteau in the same way Mortlock has in the midfield. Both sets of wings have had their ups and downs as have the fullbacks.
So there you have it. Luck of course is inevitably a factor but just as predictably, it finds a way to even itself out.
Graham Henry must, and deserves, to feel the warm flush of redemption even though I'm certain he'd swap a million Bledisloe Cup wins for a World Cup triumph. Only then would his regrets evaporate.
To Robbie Deans' credit, his undeniable coaching prowess was clearly evident in Hong Kong. His Wallabies outfit showed accuracy and fitness in abundance which are the perennial trademarks of any performance that he's associated with.
But when you don't have quite the same talent to work with as does the opposition, frustration often leads to a marginal decrease in discipline.
I end my appraisal with this plea, one which I'm certain enjoys total support from every New Zealand rugby fan, given I have not heard a sliver of a peep of approval for that moronic move to put Stephen Donald ahead of Carter at first five. Not even from the most avid supporters of the current coaching regime.
Was this yet another experiment from Wayne's Weird Laboratory? Who knows. What I do know is that simply playing the best players in their best positions in test after test seems about as attractive a proposition to our three wise men as it is for politicians to make truth the priority.
We live in hope. Your thoughts please.
UNFAIR?
Rugby League is a game I've come to love more and more in recent years, given I was brought up on a massive diet of rugby and cricket.
So may I ask the life-long aficionados amongst you if you think this World Cup format is doing the game a big favour?
As a genuine request, please explain to me the sense of putting Adrian Lam's Papua New Guinea team in the same group as Australia, England and New Zealand who will all make it into the semi-finals as long they all beat the unfortunate Kumuls.
How fair and credible is that for Papua New Guinea to be drawn with the three strongest teams. Please could somebody enlighten me?
Statistics rarely lie. A three-to-one score line to the men in black is sufficient proof that right here, right now, the All Blacks are the better team. More specifically, both opposing backlines pretty much cancel themselves out but the eight in our engine room have proved more talented and more durable.
Our front row ultimately tilts the clash of the fatties to our advantage and our locks have seemingly provided a tad more shove. They have also finally gained parity at the very least in the lineout against the Wallabies.
And then there's the marked superiority of our loose trio, spearheaded by McCaw the Magnificent.
As I've intimated, there's scarcely a cigarette paper between the form of both backlines. Burgess is as least as effective as any of our halfbacks. Carter has had a slim advantage over Giteau in the same way Mortlock has in the midfield. Both sets of wings have had their ups and downs as have the fullbacks.
So there you have it. Luck of course is inevitably a factor but just as predictably, it finds a way to even itself out.
Graham Henry must, and deserves, to feel the warm flush of redemption even though I'm certain he'd swap a million Bledisloe Cup wins for a World Cup triumph. Only then would his regrets evaporate.
To Robbie Deans' credit, his undeniable coaching prowess was clearly evident in Hong Kong. His Wallabies outfit showed accuracy and fitness in abundance which are the perennial trademarks of any performance that he's associated with.
But when you don't have quite the same talent to work with as does the opposition, frustration often leads to a marginal decrease in discipline.
I end my appraisal with this plea, one which I'm certain enjoys total support from every New Zealand rugby fan, given I have not heard a sliver of a peep of approval for that moronic move to put Stephen Donald ahead of Carter at first five. Not even from the most avid supporters of the current coaching regime.
Was this yet another experiment from Wayne's Weird Laboratory? Who knows. What I do know is that simply playing the best players in their best positions in test after test seems about as attractive a proposition to our three wise men as it is for politicians to make truth the priority.
We live in hope. Your thoughts please.
UNFAIR?
Rugby League is a game I've come to love more and more in recent years, given I was brought up on a massive diet of rugby and cricket.
So may I ask the life-long aficionados amongst you if you think this World Cup format is doing the game a big favour?
As a genuine request, please explain to me the sense of putting Adrian Lam's Papua New Guinea team in the same group as Australia, England and New Zealand who will all make it into the semi-finals as long they all beat the unfortunate Kumuls.
How fair and credible is that for Papua New Guinea to be drawn with the three strongest teams. Please could somebody enlighten me?
Post a comment
To post a new comment, you must Sign in first.