The Rugby Championship

First topic message reminder :

It starts again tomorrow. As ever the interest will wane quickly if the ABs resume their usual dismantling of all opposition. They look extremely strong with Retallick and Whitelock back in harness. Their strength in depth at 10 is frightening. The Aussies do have Pocock back, but hard to look beyond another comfortable AB win.

Argentina away in SA will be interesting I think. SA look like they are improving and Argentina play some good rugby - one to watch I think.

Hoping that somebody pushes the ABs and an Aussie win tomorrow would be the perfect tonic for the tournament, however unlikely that is.

That's a pretty close gap between the top two, did NZ drop points?

yappysnap wrote:That's a pretty close gap between the top two, did NZ drop points?

New Zealand will drop the maximum points (2), but as they were over 4 points clear are still comfortable at the top.

Was at the game. Standing ovation for the Boks at the end by the locals should put all the nay sayers as ease. It was a good game to watch. Obviously, whilst I would have loved the AB's to win, you couldn't knock the Boks today.

Not grey and not a ghost wrote:Was at the game. Standing ovation for the Boks at the end by the locals should put all the nay sayers as ease. It was a good game to watch. Obviously, whilst I would have loved the AB's to win, you couldn't knock the Boks today.

Gotta agree, best Ive seen the boks play since 2014. With the same team from last week managed to lift themselves to a height ive never seen in one week.

And not just because it was the ABs, theyd have beaten anyone with that effort. 200 plus tackles! When does that happen? Ive not seen comparable stats but they knocked over anything and everything. ABs had dozens of situations they might have scored from but the Boks just kept knocking them over. It was like Dublin reversed.

Rapt for Bok rugby. And with Argie timing their run well I think the SH teams are going to spoil the NH party again next year, the one saving grace being that at world cup time they get players like Cordero, Bismarck etc back if the6 need to, so for the tournament, their squads can get stronger than at any time between world cups, which is fantastic.

LondonTiger wrote:

yappysnap wrote:That's a pretty close gap between the top two, did NZ drop points?

New Zealand will drop the maximum points (2), but as they were over 4 points clear are still comfortable at the top.

Its one of those anomalies. SA won from seventh ranking because they played like they were at one or two. Shows theyre still capable of producing world brst efforts when they need to.

This will change them. Havent see that take no prisoners attitude from them for a while. Huge implications if they can reproduce that aggression.

Erasmus job was on the line no match is a given ,perhaps a rerun 2008 home loss followed by away win.
There will be no complancency for next time and maybe some injured players will be available too.
Argentina have improved vastly but can`t see them taking the AB`s even at home.

The Boks simply went back to what they are best at, physicality. Its what iRELAND DID IN Chicago though they got sat down the next week. Rest of the world take note, its probably only 1 of a couple of chinks the ABs have - that and their place kicking without Carter.

Taylorman wrote:

Not grey and not a ghost wrote:Was at the game. Standing ovation for the Boks at the end by the locals should put all the nay sayers as ease. It was a good game to watch. Obviously, whilst I would have loved the AB's to win, you couldn't knock the Boks today.

Gotta agree, best Ive seen the boks play since 2014. With the same team from last week managed to lift themselves to a height ive never seen in one week.

And not just because it was the ABs, theyd have beaten anyone with that effort. 200 plus tackles! When does that happen? Ive not seen comparable stats but they knocked over anything and everything. ABs had dozens of situations they might have scored from but the Boks just kept knocking them over. It was like Dublin reversed.

Rapt for Bok rugby. And with Argie timing their run well I think the SH teams are going to spoil the NH party again next year, the one saving grace being that at world cup time they get players like Cordero, Bismarck etc back if the6 need to, so for the tournament, their squads can get stronger than at any time between world cups, which is fantastic.

Personally I wouldn't as an Ireland fan like to face Argentina in the RWC but I reckon no top ten team except maybe NZ will want to face them as they are just so unpredictable and good in attack.

Id rather face SA or Australia. However, if SA play like that in the group stages there is a chance Ireland could play NZ in the quarters.

Pie wrote:The Boks simply went back to what they are best at, physicality. Its what iRELAND DID IN Chicago though they got sat down the next week. Rest of the world take note, its probably only 1 of a couple of chinks the ABs have - that and their place kicking without Carter.

I think they attacked a lot better than they normally do as well. Also they kept the really daft errors to a minimum. Faf de Klerk had a great game and if he can sort his box kicking out would a better all round player than Aaron Smith and up there with Murray. His aggression at rucks is impressive for a little fellow.

Collapse2005 wrote:

Pie wrote:The Boks simply went back to what they are best at, physicality. Its what iRELAND DID IN Chicago though they got sat down the next week. Rest of the world take note, its probably only 1 of a couple of chinks the ABs have - that and their place kicking without Carter.

I think they attacked a lot better than they normally do as well. Also they kept the really daft errors to a minimum. Faf de Klerk had a great game and if he can sort his box kicking out would a better all round player than Aaron Smith and up there with Murray. His aggression at rucks is impressive for a little fellow.

Geez Murrays overated up there, doesnt have the pass or running game of Smith. Typical solid, defensive, good close to the line, box kicking northern 9 but has a very limited repetroire on attack. The games moving on from the Murray, Sexton types to a more expansive , attacking game. 10s like Barrett and Sanchez are where the gains are. Sure the Boks put everything into tying Barrett down and theyll work that one out as they usually do. I see Murrays being replaced by another All Black while he sorts out his mystery ailment. Whats going on there? Not the best world cup warm up Id say.

Fafs been playing rubbish all year after looking promising and played a little better this time so obviously youve not seen him lately.

Collapse2005 wrote:

Taylorman wrote:

Not grey and not a ghost wrote:Was at the game. Standing ovation for the Boks at the end by the locals should put all the nay sayers as ease. It was a good game to watch. Obviously, whilst I would have loved the AB's to win, you couldn't knock the Boks today.

Gotta agree, best Ive seen the boks play since 2014. With the same team from last week managed to lift themselves to a height ive never seen in one week.

And not just because it was the ABs, theyd have beaten anyone with that effort. 200 plus tackles! When does that happen? Ive not seen comparable stats but they knocked over anything and everything. ABs had dozens of situations they might have scored from but the Boks just kept knocking them over. It was like Dublin reversed.

Rapt for Bok rugby. And with Argie timing their run well I think the SH teams are going to spoil the NH party again next year, the one saving grace being that at world cup time they get players like Cordero, Bismarck etc back if the6 need to, so for the tournament, their squads can get stronger than at any time between world cups, which is fantastic.

Personally I wouldn't as an Ireland fan like to face Argentina in the RWC but I reckon no top ten team except maybe NZ will want to face them as they are just so unpredictable and good in attack.

Id rather face SA or Australia. However, if SA play like that in the group stages there is a chance Ireland could play NZ in the quarters.

Cant take too much from one game. Chances are SA will go on to lose shortly. Everyone does after beating the ABs. Their results dont seem to meet their expectations because everyones even more wary of them. SA won that through hard work and it helped having that marvellous little winger. Repeating it again and again is a huge ask. But I think theyll be fine for next year. Ireland will have it tough whichever of Oz, SA, or Argie they play. The margins are too small for any to be dominant but I would definitely back SA to beat Ireland in a World cup knockout. world cups a different beast and Ireland know that only too well and SA and Argie have won matches they werent favoured too, Ireland never have. Thats a mental barrier they have to get over. One thing being good enough, another knowing what it takes in a knockout.

He was excellent against England in the summer and all last year with sale. If you don't rate Murray well, you can't watch him much.

No 7&1/2 wrote:He was excellent against England in the summer and all last year with sale. If you don't rate Murray well, you can't watch him much.

I dont rate him above Smith, certainly from an attacking perspective. In a tight, slow drawn out match hes strong, but when the game opens up, and it will world cup time on the fast Japan strips, Murray will be wanting. Box kicking wont be enough. Ireland play an average open game and typically want their enemy in close, wont happen world cup time. Percentage plays wont cut it.

Oz SA and Argie will also be much stronger with the NH players back as well.

Yeah. You guys need to watch more nh rugby.

Ellis park the AB`s grave yard high on the veldt,expect Perenara starting with A.Smith on the bench.
May see Scott Barrett as an alternative goal kicker.Nothing changes kick the goals win the matches

Taylorman wrote: I see Murrays being replaced by another All Black while he sorts out his mystery ailment. Whats going on there? Not the best world cup warm up Id say.

Yep...it's called being given a bit of a pre- 2019 sabbatical without declaring it publically

Taylorman wrote: I would definitely back SA to beat Ireland in a World cup knockout. world cups a different beast and Ireland know that only too well and SA and Argie have won matches they werent favoured too, Ireland never have. Thats a mental barrier they have to get over. One thing being good enough, another knowing what it takes in a knockout.

Yeah, in other pre-WC periods of the past I'd have whole heartedly agreed with you, Taylor.  A number of times Ireland have arrived close to the WC in fine shape, looking sharp and fully loaded for action, only to disappoint everyone in the execution of the pools.  
The Weight... the mental weight, added to some shoddy coaching at times, just always was there in the back of all Irish minds.  I've been a long time watching Rugby and despite every period when Ireland looked to be purring (in NH terms at least) going to a WC, I personally always had my strong doubts about it lasting.  Always.    

The last 6N was the very first time, in my decades of watching, that I looked at Ireland's squad list for the competition and couldn't deny myself the declaration here, in public - in the open - that if that squad didn't win the whole thing, take the Slam, then there were no excuses left because the squad as a whole, as individuals, were that good.  I just saw them as the best group of players in the 6N competition.  I had never felt that before - ever.  And never would I ever have declared in public such a firm conviction that they'd win a competition.  I debated with myself whether or not I'd say it or not (would my hunch and prediction come back to haunt me?) but in the end I defied my own natural reserve and told myself that I'd say what I truly believed - the Irish squad should win the Slam.

There is quality everywhere in the current batch of Irish Internationals.  It's never been this way before - never.  They find ways to get results they want and they do it together.  If one star player is having a not so good day, there are three, four or five players that are there to take the game on, with the quality to do so.  I've never been so impressed with an Irish squad and never felt so confident in their combined ability to get a job done.

Of course lots of sides in the top 7 or 8 can beat them.  They may be back down to third, fourth, fifth or seventh by the time next year's World Cup comes around.  I'm not a dreamer, I know how quickly confidence can go and results can whither.  But this collection of Irish players now just act and sound and play and speak differently.  It's a new generation.  I don't think they have it in them to implode as a complete squad over the next year.  If main stars fall away in fitness or confidence, I think there are alternatives there only too willing to push that doubter to the side, put their hand up and demand a replacement place with no sense of nervousness at the prospect of the boots they have to fill.  Maybe it's a generational arrogance - the good kind that makes players ultra competitive and hungry.  I just think Ireland now have a collection of real-deal players.  They can get beaten, they will be beaten but they'll study the losses meticulously and get back in the saddle again.  They know they're good enough and know that losing is tactics gone bad.  I don't think lack of self-belief is part of the make-up anymore.  It's application and methods and work ethic that is blamed when they lose not talent.

I saw TJ Perenara defend the decision-making at the end, saying they were thinking of going for the drop, when the overlap appeared, and that looked like a better, safer option.

Having now seen the game, I can't understand what he's talking about. The All Blacks were camped down in front of the posts for ages. An obvious try-scoring chance might have appeared right at the end, but that wasn't true in the run-up.

TJ Perenara talks about the sequence as if it was straight either/or spur of the moment decision, where putting it through the hands was less risky than passing for a drop. Instead, the drop goal option was expressly rejected for well over a minute, in favour of boshing the ball up, and recycling. There's no way a drop goal is a riskier option than trying to recycle possession for that long.

Taylorman wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:

Pie wrote:The Boks simply went back to what they are best at, physicality. Its what iRELAND DID IN Chicago though they got sat down the next week. Rest of the world take note, its probably only 1 of a couple of chinks the ABs have - that and their place kicking without Carter.

I think they attacked a lot better than they normally do as well. Also they kept the really daft errors to a minimum. Faf de Klerk had a great game and if he can sort his box kicking out would a better all round player than Aaron Smith and up there with Murray. His aggression at rucks is impressive for a little fellow.

Geez Murrays overated up there, doesnt have the pass or running game of Smith. Typical solid, defensive, good close to the line, box kicking northern 9 but has a very limited repetroire on attack. The games moving on from the Murray, Sexton types to a more expansive , attacking game. 10s like Barrett and Sanchez are where the gains are. Sure the Boks put everything into tying Barrett down and theyll work that one out as they usually do. I see Murrays being replaced by another All Black while he sorts out his mystery ailment. Whats going on there? Not the best world cup warm up Id say.

Fafs been playing rubbish all year after looking promising and played a little better this time so obviously youve not seen him lately.

Murray has scored 5 tries against NZ. I think that's more than any other current player but sure he has no running game nor attack. Lol.

Irish players just like key NZ players are managed in terms of game time. Nothing at all to see there.

I'm basing Faf on his rugby championship performances. I have seen him many times before and thought he was poor.

Taylorman wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:He was excellent against England in the summer and all last year with sale. If you don't rate Murray well, you can't watch him much.

I dont rate him above Smith, certainly from an attacking perspective. In a tight, slow drawn out match hes strong, but when the game opens up, and it will world cup time on the fast Japan strips, Murray will be wanting. Box kicking wont be enough. Ireland play an average open game and typically want their enemy in close, wont happen world cup time. Percentage plays wont cut it.

Oz SA and Argie will also be much stronger with the NH players back as well.

In an attacking perspective?? I think Smith has scored 1 try v Ireland vs Murrays 4 or 5 v NZ. Lol.

Rugby Fan wrote:I saw TJ Perenara defend the decision-making at the end, saying they were thinking of going for the drop, when the overlap appeared, and that looked like a better, safer option.

Having now seen the game, I can't understand what he's talking about. The All Blacks were camped down in front of the posts for ages. An obvious try-scoring chance might have appeared right at the end, but that wasn't true in the run-up.

TJ Perenara talks about the sequence as if it was straight either/or spur of the moment decision, where putting it through the hands was less risky than passing for a drop. Instead, the drop goal option was expressly rejected for well over a minute, in favour of boshing the ball up, and recycling. There's no way a drop goal is a riskier option than trying to recycle possession for that long.

It may have been a riskier option given the yips that Barrett had. I was gonna write a post just on his poor kicking but was afraid he would hit it.

I personally think Smith is a little overrated myself. Murray is a different type of scrum half but overall better imo. Webb is perhaps more in the Smith mould and again, just a bit better. I'd certainly have those as my top 3 though, quality options.

It's a great win, but we played better against them in Newlands last year. Barrett kicks better, we lose by 6-8 points. We also were uncharacteristically efficient, especially in the first half. Three trips to the 22, for 21 points. If this is how we plan on playing the ABs moving forward, we are gonna get smashed some more

Truth is that Aron Smith is better with quick ball,Perenara better in a dog fight.AB`s defence let them
down usually they are neigh on perfect there.Selection and may be complanency was to blame too the
aim is to have a squad of about 50 for RWC.You can bet they will learn their lessons before next year
for the first time they may lose a pool game for first time ever.Bring it on.

Looking at the stats, it's a bit of a freak result. The stats went as expected except for the scoreline. Normal service to resume next week.

Collapse2005 wrote:

Taylorman wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:

Pie wrote:The Boks simply went back to what they are best at, physicality. Its what iRELAND DID IN Chicago though they got sat down the next week. Rest of the world take note, its probably only 1 of a couple of chinks the ABs have - that and their place kicking without Carter.

I think they attacked a lot better than they normally do as well. Also they kept the really daft errors to a minimum. Faf de Klerk had a great game and if he can sort his box kicking out would a better all round player than Aaron Smith and up there with Murray. His aggression at rucks is impressive for a little fellow.

Geez Murrays overated up there, doesnt have the pass or running game of Smith. Typical solid, defensive, good close to the line, box kicking northern 9 but has a very limited repetroire on attack. The games moving on from the Murray, Sexton types to a more expansive , attacking game. 10s like Barrett and Sanchez are where the gains are. Sure the Boks put everything into tying Barrett down and theyll work that one out as they usually do. I see Murrays being replaced by another All Black while he sorts out his mystery ailment. Whats going on there? Not the best world cup warm up Id say.

Fafs been playing rubbish all year after looking promising and played a little better this time so obviously youve not seen him lately.

Murray has scored 5 tries against NZ. I think that's more than any other current player but sure he has no running game nor attack. Lol.  

Irish players just like key NZ players are managed in terms of game time. Nothing at all to see there.

I'm basing Faf on his rugby championship performances. I have seen him many times before and thought he was poor.

Im not sure but how many Murray tries were not scratch over from a break from either a scrum or breakdown near the line? I havent checked but I doubt many, if any. I dont call that attacking rugby. Thats the get in close with the enemy stuff and fall over the line stuff that Im talking about. Look at Aaron Smiths try last week. Gets the ball away on the blind and after a scintillating ben Smith burst is on hand up the middle to take the inside pass and score.

You never see Murray running those sort of yards- well someone might go and you tube some, but for me hes not got the legs for an all out attacking game. Typical north hem. stuff that made England successful.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:I personally think Smith is a little overrated myself. Murray is a different type of scrum half but overall better imo. Webb is perhaps more in the Smith mould and again, just a bit better. I'd certainly have those as my top 3 though, quality options.

I'll agree he's different. But he's still typically NH. Thats what makes the difference. Who's Webb?

Murray’s tries are generally dive overs from an opportunity at a ruck. He’s strong for a scrum half and similar to Mike Phillips. Not a great passer. He suits Ireland’s style of attritional rugby. No frills, percentage rugby.

Taylorman, Webb is Welsh. Very different to Murray. Fast paced and more SH in style.

A lot of commentators are saying the All Blacks will learn from that defeat. To be honest, there isn't much for them to learn, because they still played very well. It's always been true that New Zealand can come undone when they get a couple of things wrong, while the opposition plays a blinder. That's pretty much the story of any match they lose.

Even if other sides match South Africa's intensity, they willl still have to score alot of points, because the All Blacks managed six themselves.

Rugby Fan wrote:A lot of commentators are saying the All Blacks will learn from that defeat. To be honest, there isn't much for them to learn, because they still played very well. It's always been true that New Zealand can come undone when they get a couple of things wrong, while the opposition plays a blinder. That's pretty much the story of any match they lose.

Even if other sides match South Africa's intensity, they willl still have to score alot of points, because the All Blacks managed six themselves.

Thats true that they havent got much to learn from the aspect of play, However that game was lost through only one thing and that was lack of meaningful leadership. In short I was very disappointed with the lack of initiatve from Read.

A McCaw, a Fitzpatrick an Umaga would have got to that point after throwing a couple of 7 pointer intercepts away and absolutely reneged on defensive obligations, where everyone would have been pulled into a huddle told to either settle down, do some work, get some territory, get some points and get the lead OR just F%$#of and dont come back. That team looked like they thought they were trying to win by 50 points, yet overlooking the fact that they were behind on the scoreboard.

I wa not impressed.

Cyril wrote:Murray’s tries are generally dive overs from an opportunity at a ruck. He’s strong for a scrum half and similar to Mike Phillips. Not a great passer. He suits Ireland’s style of attritional rugby. No frills, percentage rugby.

Yeah, power rugby. Beautiful to watch when at full tilt.

Check out these beautiful Murry tries v the ABs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7kLLZvTi6y0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bCmcDNikbd0

The ABs don't seem to have figured him out yet as he keeps scoring against them.

Taylorman wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:

Taylorman wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:

Pie wrote:The Boks simply went back to what they are best at, physicality. Its what iRELAND DID IN Chicago though they got sat down the next week. Rest of the world take note, its probably only 1 of a couple of chinks the ABs have - that and their place kicking without Carter.

I think they attacked a lot better than they normally do as well. Also they kept the really daft errors to a minimum. Faf de Klerk had a great game and if he can sort his box kicking out would a better all round player than Aaron Smith and up there with Murray. His aggression at rucks is impressive for a little fellow.

Geez Murrays overated up there, doesnt have the pass or running game of Smith. Typical solid, defensive, good close to the line, box kicking northern 9 but has a very limited repetroire on attack. The games moving on from the Murray, Sexton types to a more expansive , attacking game. 10s like Barrett and Sanchez are where the gains are. Sure the Boks put everything into tying Barrett down and theyll work that one out as they usually do. I see Murrays being replaced by another All Black while he sorts out his mystery ailment. Whats going on there? Not the best world cup warm up Id say.

Fafs been playing rubbish all year after looking promising and played a little better this time so obviously youve not seen him lately.

Murray has scored 5 tries against NZ. I think that's more than any other current player but sure he has no running game nor attack. Lol.  

Irish players just like key NZ players are managed in terms of game time. Nothing at all to see there.

I'm basing Faf on his rugby championship performances. I have seen him many times before and thought he was poor.

Im not sure but how many Murray tries were not scratch over from a break from either a scrum or breakdown near the line? I havent checked but I doubt many, if any. I dont call that attacking rugby. Thats the get in close with the enemy stuff and fall over the line stuff that Im talking about. Look at Aaron Smiths try last week. Gets the ball away on the blind and after a scintillating ben Smith burst is on hand up the middle to take the inside pass and score.

You never see Murray running those sort of yards- well someone might go and you tube some, but for me hes not got the legs for an all out attacking game. Typical north hem. stuff that made England successful.

You don't remember these tries?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7kLLZvTi6y0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bCmcDNikbd0

Even if his other tries were scored from the base of a ruck close to the ABs line they clearly haven't figured out yet how to stop him.

Collapse2005 wrote:

Taylorman wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:

Taylorman wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:

Pie wrote:The Boks simply went back to what they are best at, physicality. Its what iRELAND DID IN Chicago though they got sat down the next week. Rest of the world take note, its probably only 1 of a couple of chinks the ABs have - that and their place kicking without Carter.

I think they attacked a lot better than they normally do as well. Also they kept the really daft errors to a minimum. Faf de Klerk had a great game and if he can sort his box kicking out would a better all round player than Aaron Smith and up there with Murray. His aggression at rucks is impressive for a little fellow.

Geez Murrays overated up there, doesnt have the pass or running game of Smith. Typical solid, defensive, good close to the line, box kicking northern 9 but has a very limited repetroire on attack. The games moving on from the Murray, Sexton types to a more expansive , attacking game. 10s like Barrett and Sanchez are where the gains are. Sure the Boks put everything into tying Barrett down and theyll work that one out as they usually do. I see Murrays being replaced by another All Black while he sorts out his mystery ailment. Whats going on there? Not the best world cup warm up Id say.

Fafs been playing rubbish all year after looking promising and played a little better this time so obviously youve not seen him lately.

Murray has scored 5 tries against NZ. I think that's more than any other current player but sure he has no running game nor attack. Lol.  

Irish players just like key NZ players are managed in terms of game time. Nothing at all to see there.

I'm basing Faf on his rugby championship performances. I have seen him many times before and thought he was poor.

Im not sure but how many Murray tries were not scratch over from a break from either a scrum or breakdown near the line? I havent checked but I doubt many, if any. I dont call that attacking rugby. Thats the get in close with the enemy stuff and fall over the line stuff that Im talking about. Look at Aaron Smiths try last week. Gets the ball away on the blind and after a scintillating ben Smith burst is on hand up the middle to take the inside pass and score.

You never see Murray running those sort of yards- well someone might go and you tube some, but for me hes not got the legs for an all out attacking game. Typical north hem. stuff that made England successful.

You don't remember these tries?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7kLLZvTi6y0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bCmcDNikbd0

Even if his other tries were scored from the base of a ruck close to the ABs line they clearly haven't figured out yet how to stop him.

Just confirms my point. Typical NH halfback. Tough it over when nothing else is on.
In open play Murrays nothing special. He has a oh well ill do it myself game. Smith passed across five welsh defenders to get a try in. Murray ever do that?

Taylorman wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:

Taylorman wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:

Taylorman wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:

Pie wrote:The Boks simply went back to what they are best at, physicality. Its what iRELAND DID IN Chicago though they got sat down the next week. Rest of the world take note, its probably only 1 of a couple of chinks the ABs have - that and their place kicking without Carter.

I think they attacked a lot better than they normally do as well. Also they kept the really daft errors to a minimum. Faf de Klerk had a great game and if he can sort his box kicking out would a better all round player than Aaron Smith and up there with Murray. His aggression at rucks is impressive for a little fellow.

Geez Murrays overated up there, doesnt have the pass or running game of Smith. Typical solid, defensive, good close to the line, box kicking northern 9 but has a very limited repetroire on attack. The games moving on from the Murray, Sexton types to a more expansive , attacking game. 10s like Barrett and Sanchez are where the gains are. Sure the Boks put everything into tying Barrett down and theyll work that one out as they usually do. I see Murrays being replaced by another All Black while he sorts out his mystery ailment. Whats going on there? Not the best world cup warm up Id say.

Fafs been playing rubbish all year after looking promising and played a little better this time so obviously youve not seen him lately.

Murray has scored 5 tries against NZ. I think that's more than any other current player but sure he has no running game nor attack. Lol.  

Irish players just like key NZ players are managed in terms of game time. Nothing at all to see there.

I'm basing Faf on his rugby championship performances. I have seen him many times before and thought he was poor.

Im not sure but how many Murray tries were not scratch over from a break from either a scrum or breakdown near the line? I havent checked but I doubt many, if any. I dont call that attacking rugby. Thats the get in close with the enemy stuff and fall over the line stuff that Im talking about. Look at Aaron Smiths try last week. Gets the ball away on the blind and after a scintillating ben Smith burst is on hand up the middle to take the inside pass and score.

You never see Murray running those sort of yards- well someone might go and you tube some, but for me hes not got the legs for an all out attacking game. Typical north hem. stuff that made England successful.

You don't remember these tries?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7kLLZvTi6y0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bCmcDNikbd0

Even if his other tries were scored from the base of a ruck close to the ABs line they clearly haven't figured out yet how to stop him.

Just confirms my point. Typical NH halfback. Tough it over when nothing else is on.
In open play Murrays nothing special. He has a oh well ill do it myself game. Smith passed across five welsh defenders to get a try in. Murray ever do that?

Guns probably can’t stomach to watch but you only have to see how Aaron Smith worked the ABs up the field in 2013. Ran to the breakdown and flung a pass. Didn’t have to stop and scratch his head like a typical NH halfback.

Taylorman wrote: Smith passed across five welsh defenders to get a try in. Murray ever do that?

Murray don't like copying folks, mostly.

Why copy the ABs? It seems every team that is goaded into that game gets mostly shafted by them.

Play it different, play it smart, don't be dragged into the "you can't play it like we can" bear trap.... get tries where your coaches have worked out where you can get 'em.

How can anyone draw a distinction between Northern and Southern Hemisphere scrum half play, when there are a variety of styles in both hemispheres?

Justin Marshall's slow and inconsistent passing is a topic which still gets debated today. Joost van der Westhuizen was an all-time great, who stood 6ft 2in, and had power to go with his other skills. Neither of them play anything like the current All Black and Springbok scrum halves.

Even in the North, there's a wide variety of players. Mike Phillips is taller than Van der Westhuizen, while Rhys Webb is 5ft 10in, and a totally different type of player. For a long time, the best passing scrum half in the north was Peter Stringer, and he plays nothing like Conor Murray, who is much more in the Van der Westhuizen mould.

Rugby Fan wrote:How can anyone draw a distinction between Northern and Southern Hemisphere scrum half play, when there are a variety of styles in both hemispheres?

Justin Marshall's slow and inconsistent passing is a topic which still gets debated today. Joost van der Westhuizen was an all-time great, who stood 6ft 2in, and had power to go with his other skills. Neither of them play anything like the current All Black and Springbok scrum halves.

Even in the North, there's a wide variety of players. Mike Phillips is taller than Van der Westhuizen, while Rhys Webb is 5ft 10in, and a totally different type of player. For a long time, the best passing scrum half in the north was Peter Stringer, and he plays nothing like Conor Murray, who is much more in the Van der Westhuizen mould.

Geez youre comparing marshalls pass as a SH norm?
Aaron Smith has been an absolute revelation where passing is concerned.
We now have the best passer of the ball in test rugby ...bar none. No one has passed better than Smith. EverAnd i challenge you to name one better passer. Cos he doesnt exist.

Taylorman wrote:... No one has passed better than Smith...

You are making the point there that Smith is not the norm.

Taylorman wrote:

Just confirms my point. Typical NH halfback. Tough it over when nothing else is on.
In open play Murrays nothing special. He has a oh well ill do it myself game. Smith passed across five welsh defenders to get a try in. Murray ever do that?

There is no "typical NH" style. You must not watch NH rugby much because you have an outdated opinion what it's like and think every NH team plays like that.


There's a huge variety of styles in Europe but skill levels have improved dramatically in the last decade or two. NZ coaches have played a big part so thanks for that.


It was only one or two years ago when posters (probably yourself) laughed at the notion that the NH was catching up to the SH. It was too unimaginable for some and so they denied the clear evidence in front of them.

Taylorman wrote:

Rugby Fan wrote:How can anyone draw a distinction between Northern and Southern Hemisphere scrum half play, when there are a variety of styles in both hemispheres?

Justin Marshall's slow and inconsistent passing is a topic which still gets debated today. Joost van der Westhuizen was an all-time great, who stood 6ft 2in, and had power to go with his other skills. Neither of them play anything like the current All Black and Springbok scrum halves.

Even in the North, there's a wide variety of players. Mike Phillips is taller than Van der Westhuizen, while Rhys Webb is 5ft 10in, and a totally different type of player. For a long time, the best passing scrum half in the north was Peter Stringer, and he plays nothing like Conor Murray, who is much more in the Van der Westhuizen mould.

Geez youre comparing marshalls pass as a SH norm?
Aaron Smith has been an absolute revelation where passing is concerned.
We now have the best passer of the ball in test rugby ...bar none. No one has passed better than Smith. EverAnd i challenge you to name one better passer. Cos he doesnt exist.

Peter Stringer had just a good a pass as Smith, maybe even better. Very fast, very accurate. You would swear Smith invented the fast pass.

Stringer wasn't an AB so didn't know how to play rugby. Basically all great things are done in NZ and everyone copies them.

Taylorman wrote:We now have the best passer of the ball in test rugby ...bar none. No one has passed better than Smith. EverAnd i challenge you to name one better passer. Cos he doesnt exist.

Good God man. Get a grip!

Smith is a very good player. All time great? Give me a break!

Exiledinborders wrote:

Taylorman wrote:We now have the best passer of the ball in test rugby ...bar none. No one has passed better than Smith. EverAnd i challenge you to name one better passer. Cos he doesnt exist.

Good God man. Get a grip!

Smith is a very good player. All time great? Give me a break!

Well youll have to define greatness as Ive not seen a better record. Joist was a great apparently. Did more than Smith? In what way?

Taylorman wrote:

Exiledinborders wrote:

Taylorman wrote:We now have the best passer of the ball in test rugby ...bar none. No one has passed better than Smith. EverAnd i challenge you to name one better passer. Cos he doesnt exist.

Good God man. Get a grip!

Smith is a very good player. All time great? Give me a break!

Well youll have to define greatness as Ive not seen a better record. Joist was a great apparently. Did more than Smith? In what way?

He held up the roof!

Rugby Fan wrote:How can anyone draw a distinction between Northern and Southern Hemisphere scrum half play, when there are a variety of styles in both hemispheres?

Justin Marshall's slow and inconsistent passing is a topic which still gets debated today. Joost van der Westhuizen was an all-time great, who stood 6ft 2in, and had power to go with his other skills. Neither of them play anything like the current All Black and Springbok scrum halves.

Even in the North, there's a wide variety of players. Mike Phillips is taller than Van der Westhuizen, while Rhys Webb is 5ft 10in, and a totally different type of player. For a long time, the best passing scrum half in the north was Peter Stringer, and he plays nothing like Conor Murray, who is much more in the Van der Westhuizen mould.

Add in French scrum halves who often dictate their sides play a lot more then others, and kick at goal frequently. They're more like a 9.5 then a traditional no9.

There's a lot more to rugby then that final try scoring pass.

Taylorman wrote:

Exiledinborders wrote:

Taylorman wrote:We now have the best passer of the ball in test rugby ...bar none. No one has passed better than Smith. EverAnd i challenge you to name one better passer. Cos he doesnt exist.

Good God man. Get a grip!

Smith is a very good player. All time great? Give me a break!

Well youll have to define greatness as Ive not seen a better record. Joist was a great apparently. Did more than Smith? In what way?

For me Joost was light years ahead of Smith. Tougher, stronger, faster, better in attack and a real winner. Smith has a lovely pass and runs well. Wont be remembered as a great.

Scrumhalves usually come in two species,the 9th forward or runners ,but sometimes a third.Onwelyln]
Brace,Des Connor,Ken Catchpole,Dave Loveridge[perhaps the nearest to Smith]Stephen Bacop etc.
Some of the greatest 10`s did`nt kick Cliff Morgan for one and so on Carlos Spencer was one of
best ever but a 50% kicker.
After a match lost people look to lay the blame,BARRETT had a bad day BUT had 2 posters out
of 4.DON CLARKE in the first few minutes hit both posts and a cross bar from his own half
versus Wales 1963 pulling a musscle do`int it.THAT was considered GREAT goalkicking.
The cliches come out "take the points" a "Gimme" but theres no such thing in Rugby.
Sam Whitelock maybe a better choice of Captain,squad for Argentina looks short on
experirence but the walking wounded are rested to continue re hab,Read expected for
Sa match

How many points do you get for a post and out?