France vs New Zealand. What did we learn?

Firstly, congratulations to France. PSA rang the changes and probably the French put in their most convincing display. The scoreline flattered NZ. France came here as wooden spooners in the 6N and with club commitments the odds were against them. Apart from the second test, where they were outplayed tactically, France was competitive throughout.

It seems unbelievable that France's selection problems at 9 and 10 stem from goalkicking. PSA either goes for a reliable goalkicker but sacrifices a lot in general play or goes for somebody who has a solid all-round game but can't kick goals to save themselves.

To further compound their misery, PSA seems to be unwilling to encourage his players to keep the ball in hand and run with the ball. They looked threatening when they didn't kick away possession. Their defence was excellent throughout the series but occasionally they stood off and the chasing allowed NZ to return the ball with interest either kicking or running. Close to their line, they also stood off and gave NZ too much time and space like with Dagg today that led to Smith's try. If France could be more aggressive in their attack at times, I think they'd make life infinitely easier for themselves in terms of ticking over the scoreboard.

The set piece looked much more solid today with the French lineout functioning well. The French backrow had ascendancy at the breakdown for much of this series. Unfortunately turnover ball seemed to be kicked away too often. It seemed though that the pack didn't have much confidence in their outside backs to finish off their phase movements. 

For NZ, Ben Smith was the standout player for me. He brought such enthusiasm and effort and shows the importance of rewarding form. Dagg was out of sorts in his attacking game but at least did the basics right. He had a lot of high balls to field and although today that was sloppy from NZ, Dagg's positional play and punting game hurt France. I think he looked suspect at times on defence and France should've attacked him more with ball in hand than through the boot.

NZ was overshadowed at the breakdown. Cane and Messam or Vito just look a big step down in terms of physical presence. They do not convince me and NZ look relatively weak in this area. More encouraging is the lock area. Romano was NZ's most constant ball carrier in the middle of the field and for a big man he has lovely hands and a great passing game. The front row had a shaky start today but came back stronger. Crockett seems to be a penalty magnet and LH seems to be a problem in terms of depth much like inside centre and blindside flank.

NZ didn't adjust well to the French line speed. Nonu's kicking was hit and miss and mainly miss. Carter had a very up and down performance today but Barrett seems a useful sub to bring on and his versatility at fullback and flyhalf along with Ben Smith gives us flexibility. Ranger just didn't get enough ball in space today and we were too deep and lateral attacking the line for much of the game. 

3-0 is a very satisfying achievement much like last year against Ireland. But NZ will have to improve dramatically in order to be competitive. The return of Richie McCaw will go a long way to shoring up the pack but how match fit will he be? Lots of players blooded which is pleasing but I think there are more we can blood. KB looked much sharper than Weepu today but Aaron Smith deserves a start for his performances. Cruden and Carter can interchange depending on the opposition but the backrow needs attention and injuries might test us in certain positions. Hansen will be happy enough but there needs to be further improvement because Australia and SA will be much more threatening this year.

Dont think we're starting much behind the Boks Kia but take a look at their Samoan match tonight. I just put it down to the French being French and hansen hinted at individuals not preparing well- so somethings going to come out of that I think. Weepu was terrible, so was Vito- still looks like he overthinks everything. Ranger did what he could to get into it but wasnt helped by Nonu chipping many times it came his way.

I don't like the direction our game is going kicking wise. We don't do tactical field positioning well and its too 50 50 to assert any dominance with. Look at Daggs kick- 60 meters dead?

Kicking isnt the AB way and I can see more close matches than we need if we pursue that line.

It was accurate in the second test but tonight it was a mixed display. We haven't looked sharp in attack in general throughout this series and credit must be given to France for that.

More worrying for me was the breakdown. Dusatoir and Picamoles were immense. Read had an ordinary game tonight full of errors and Cane and Vito looked anonymous.

Wouldnt be surprised if McCaw comes back as a 6. The 7 role is developing into one that requires more speed than even McCaw will be able to muster hese days and we are short in the position still with Vito not displaying the required depth in the pos. Enforcer McCaw is not but has everything else for the 6 role and with Read and Cane (and I believe ultimately Luke Braid) could form a formidable back 3.

Nah - McCaw still offers a lot more than Cane so until Braid steps up then he needs to stay at 7.  The problem with Vito is that he is an 8 - how about Read back to 6 and Vito at 8? Nah. In which case Luatua has to step up and make the position his until Kaino gets back.

I think we learning to adjust to changes in both the emphasis of refereeing in the NH and SH in the last 12 months. We are in some regards back in 2009. The warnings of the RU and the response of the IRB are probably still valid. Given that the NH refereeing has moved away from the the IRB directives of 2009 and 2011 as well as the IRB presidents 2009 comments and the review of the 2011 world cup (all re the tackle and ruck), I think we have done well.