Argentina to Win the Rugby Championship?

First topic message reminder :

Something seems to be brewing in Argentina. The Jaguares are currently top of their conference in Super Rugby with 8 wins from 13 games including some good wins away in SA, NZ and Aus. They are 2nd in the overall standings with a real chance of hosting a quarter final in Argentina for the first time ever. Their form is definitely peaking given that most of their five losses came at the start of the season and they have won 6 of their last 7 games, a narrow loss away to the highlanders being their one recent loss.

Given that New Zealand have a recent habit of not winning the Rugby Championship held in a world cup year (Australia won the last two) is it Argentina's chance to shine being the form super rugby side? The form guide would probably suggest that this years championship is more than likely going to be one of the more hotly contested championships in recent memory so why not Argentina? I suspect their super rugby form will give them renewed belief that they can challenge the other SANZAAR sides and away wins might help them achieve some consistency on the road.

You also know you are good when people like Phil Kearns start to complain about the Jaguares basically being an international side. Kearns also fears that this gives them a huge advantage at the RWC, does it? Probably.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/super-rugby/113139439/jaguares-coach-gonzalo-quesada-hits-back-at-phil-kearns-comments-on-super-rugby-inclusion

SA who claimed a good away win in NZ and who are probably moving in the right direction despite a desperate win loss ratio for 2018 will probably be contenders too albeit more than likely without captain Kolisi who has picked up a fairly serious injury. New Zealand of course are almost always favorites have picked up a few losses in recent years and have some selection quandaries. Who to pick in the back row, is Aaron Smith still their number one guy at 9 and who is Barrett's back up? This particular debate may have gained another dimension as the talented but still relatively inexperienced Mo'unga is subject to some controversy following a recent tour to SA. As usual Australia appear to be a sinking ship which probably means they will be contenders for everything.

Anyway long story short, I knows its still a couple of months out but I would like to call on our resident Kiwis to provide their expert opinions and anyone else why enjoys the rugby championship to chime in and declare who do you think will come 1st to last in this years championship and why? Will it be Los Pumas time to shine?

Go raibh mile maith agaibh.
Is mise le meas,
Collapse.

On the actual subject... ‘saders are missing two key players (both ABs) for the final. Jaguares might not have a better chance than now.

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

Taylorman wrote:

asoreleftshoulder wrote:Yeah he's so good he wouldn't be able to play with Ireland, do you  have any understanding of the contradiction there.

Yes I do, and explained that contradiction fully. Perenara would go better with Ireland because he suits the game better. Murray would be a rank failure with the ABs cos he can’t pass to save himself and we don’t run our game from 9 and pander only to our forwards as you do, or at least Ireland does.

Smith is a certain type of player that suits a fast running wide game, because he provides the best possible platform for a fast and wide game.

Murray, and Perenara, and why he appeals more to NHers, like physicality in a 9, like the huddle and bustle of contact, running with the ball. Smiths about slick long passing to get the backs away, all day if he has to.

He’s actually more in the Murray mode of box kicking than Perenara when he needs to be as well, Perenara doesn’t kick as much.

You might have explained it but your reasoning is just terrible. You obviously don't watch the game here at all as basically every utterance you make about the Irish players is miles off reality.

Yet you offer no information on the actual players or abilities to validate your point. Ok then.

We have toiled away with nuggety physical halves like Murray for decades and got average results. They simply don’t suit our insistence on using maximum width. Murray is that kind of half and oddly enough, their gameplan isn’t based on width as a priority.
Which part of the reasoning is wrong?

mikey_dragon wrote:On the actual subject... ‘saders are missing two key players (both ABs) for the final. Jaguares might not have a better chance than now.

Yes they are, Crotty is the midfield director and that’s where the jags are so good at exposing. Huge loss.
Barrett’s high work rate will be missed as well.
Jags get in tomorrow so will have a few days to prepare. They’ve travelled well so far this year so a lot going for them. Although I’d like another NZ win, saders not being the main side I support, an Argie based team winning would do wonders, especially in raising the profile in South America. We are told rugbys growing faster in Argie than anywhere and if the jags and under 20’s are due to a spike in interest all the better.

I just love watching them play.

Taylorman wrote:

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

Taylorman wrote:

asoreleftshoulder wrote:Yeah he's so good he wouldn't be able to play with Ireland, do you  have any understanding of the contradiction there.

Yes I do, and explained that contradiction fully. Perenara would go better with Ireland because he suits the game better. Murray would be a rank failure with the ABs cos he can’t pass to save himself and we don’t run our game from 9 and pander only to our forwards as you do, or at least Ireland does.

Smith is a certain type of player that suits a fast running wide game, because he provides the best possible platform for a fast and wide game.

Murray, and Perenara, and why he appeals more to NHers, like physicality in a 9, like the huddle and bustle of contact, running with the ball. Smiths about slick long passing to get the backs away, all day if he has to.

He’s actually more in the Murray mode of box kicking than Perenara when he needs to be as well, Perenara doesn’t kick as much.

You might have explained it but your reasoning is just terrible. You obviously don't watch the game here at all as basically every utterance you make about the Irish players is miles off reality.

Yet you offer no information on the actual players or abilities to validate your point. Ok then.

We have toiled away with nuggety physical halves like Murray for decades and got average results. They simply don’t suit our insistence on using maximum width. Murray is that kind of half and oddly enough, their gameplan isn’t based on width as a priority.
Which part of the reasoning is wrong?

Your appraisal of Murrays pass is just so off the mark it renders anything else you have to say as obsolete. His consistency of pass has dropped a bit this year as he recovers from injury but his passing was world class before that and is still easily international class. He can be a bit slow at getting the ball away from the ruck but to dismiss one of the top 2 or 3 scrumhalves in the world as being a poor passer is simply showing your ignorance.

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

Taylorman wrote:

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

Taylorman wrote:

asoreleftshoulder wrote:Yeah he's so good he wouldn't be able to play with Ireland, do you  have any understanding of the contradiction there.

Yes I do, and explained that contradiction fully. Perenara would go better with Ireland because he suits the game better. Murray would be a rank failure with the ABs cos he can’t pass to save himself and we don’t run our game from 9 and pander only to our forwards as you do, or at least Ireland does.

Smith is a certain type of player that suits a fast running wide game, because he provides the best possible platform for a fast and wide game.

Murray, and Perenara, and why he appeals more to NHers, like physicality in a 9, like the huddle and bustle of contact, running with the ball. Smiths about slick long passing to get the backs away, all day if he has to.

He’s actually more in the Murray mode of box kicking than Perenara when he needs to be as well, Perenara doesn’t kick as much.

You might have explained it but your reasoning is just terrible. You obviously don't watch the game here at all as basically every utterance you make about the Irish players is miles off reality.

Yet you offer no information on the actual players or abilities to validate your point. Ok then.

We have toiled away with nuggety physical halves like Murray for decades and got average results. They simply don’t suit our insistence on using maximum width. Murray is that kind of half and oddly enough, their gameplan isn’t based on width as a priority.
Which part of the reasoning is wrong?

Your appraisal of Murrays pass is just so off the mark it renders anything else you have to say as obsolete. His consistency of pass has dropped a bit this year as he recovers from injury but his passing was world class before that and is still easily international class. He can be a bit slow at getting the ball away from the ruck but to dismiss one of the top 2 or 3 scrumhalves in the world as being a poor passer is simply showing your ignorance.

Well thats your opinion but hes not at 2 or 3 because of his pass. Nor does his side require it.

Hes better than Smith in contact and around the rucks and thats not what makes a Smith a great player either. A murray ‘package’ will always be his short range runs and tries, box kicking and support play, a Smith package will often contain passes that take out 3+ defenders, in itself not a great athletic feat, but in terms of providing space for others, gold. Few halves cam take out the defence with a single pass, Smiths certainly one of the finest.

And thats why Murray wouldnt fit in an AB side that wants quick, wide ball, often.

Its not just about his passing, its his suitability within the gameplan.

That's your opinion but the idea that a player who makes over 100 passes every game and plays at a world class level can't pass to save himself is ridiculous and invalidates every conclusion you draw from that initial fatally flawed premise.

Look we have to be honest here.  Ireland play a Lot of phaseplay rugby.  Holding possession by recycling and short passing, recycling and short passing.  That's a lot of passing but not necessarily - one might even say logically not at all - designed to be cutting edge, creative or space forming.  It's a game plan to retain possession for long periods and to cut down the risk of being overturned whilst isolated.

We play our game.  Some of us like it, some of us accept that it's been effective but might not like it.  That's irrelevant.  The fact is quite a number of Irish players get high passing stats by the nature of the game we play.  Murray gets high pass numbers because it's our system.  It can't be used as a stat to prove any exceptional passing ability.

Some Irish fans like the role Murray plays, like our game plan...who knows perhaps that's a majority view amongst us.  Fair enough.  I'd personally love to see a sharper, faster, more erratic and instinctive 9 operating with Ireland - that's just more my kind of 9 - but I accept that the entire team must be playing a different brand of rugby for that kind of 9 to excel.  So I continue to hope that we finally do shift back to a gameplan that requires a livewire creative 9 rather than a trustworthy tall and physical one.

Yeah you're right looking at the stats doesn't prove any exceptional passing ability, looking at the games does that instead. Taylorman said Murray can't pass to save himself, does that ring even remotely true?

asoreleftshoulder wrote:Yeah you're right looking at the stats doesn't prove any exceptional passing ability, looking at the games does that instead. Taylorman said Murray can't pass to save himself, does that ring even remotely true?

I guess Taylorman is talking of the passing that gets lauded in New Zealand, sore. Different likes, different appreciations ..... and different ways of bantering. I assume Taylor is speaking of the kind of Ooh, Ahh passing that, we have to admit, Ireland isn't structured to play a whole lot of.

Doesn't matter, if he can't make a clear point then everything he says is invalid. Murray can pass to a world class standard, he could probably get his passes away quicker but long passing off lineout and scrum id brilliant and the powerplays we use off these platforms wouldn't work with a SH who can't pass. He can take 2 or 3 defenders out with a pass no problem. It's just a ridiculous platform to start any debate from.

asoreleftshoulder wrote:Yeah you're right looking at the stats doesn't prove any exceptional passing ability, looking at the games does that instead. Taylorman said Murray can't pass to save himself, does that ring even remotely true?

He did well on the lions tour.

asoreleftshoulder wrote:Yeah you're right looking at the stats doesn't prove any exceptional passing ability, looking at the games does that instead. Taylorman said Murray can't pass to save himself, does that ring even remotely true?

At the start of his career and possibly this year Murrays pass has been a bit ponderous. When he is on song its as good as anyones. I expect his warped arm problem to be gone by the RWC and hell be back to being the best in the business again.

Taylorman wrote:You have to be kidding. NZ fans have always been critical of Marshalls passing game and it was a huge relief when Smith came along and was able to get the backs away.

I don't think I disagree with anything you say in this post, or the one you followed with. It's because Marshall was not a good passer of the ball, but is regarded as an all-time great All Black scrum half, that you can't say Murray would never suit New Zealand. As you point out, they are similar players. If you are actually saying you don't want a player like Murray in the team you have now, then fair enough. That's more about preferring a style of play - which Secret also mentions - than evaluating Murray's ability to add value to an All Black team in other ways.

Rugby Fan wrote:

Taylorman wrote:You have to be kidding. NZ fans have always been critical of Marshalls passing game and it was a huge relief when Smith came along and was able to get the backs away.

I don't think I disagree with anything you say in this post, or the one you followed with. It's because Marshall was not a good passer of the ball, but is regarded as an all-time great All Black scrum half, that you can't say Murray would never suit New Zealand. As you point out, they are similar players. If you are actually saying you don't want a player like Murray in the team you have now, then fair enough. That's more about preferring a style of play - which Secret also mentions - than evaluating Murray's ability to add value to an All Black team in other ways.

Murray would suit NZ, he just wouldn’t displace Smith. So if there were he, Perenara, who I think is every bit murrays equal, Marshall etc there would be a scrap. For me they pass similarly, though Marshall was a step back from both. My couldn’t pass to save himself has set asbo off but in context Murray’s similar to most top halfbacks, the difference being that no one else builds so much of their gameplan around the passing of the 9 as they do Smith.

I’m starting to think though that even Smith is starting to tail off from what he used to be, the wider game not as prevalent as a couple of years or more ago. Tactics are changing, rush defences, greater use of pods are seeing more tries created from set pieces these days, before the rucks and close markings can start.

Even with his withered arm?

Well injuries are no excuse. If you're in a test, you're judged by your performance in that test. If you can't meet the standard, then don't play. Simple. Some can still play well enough to make the field.
McCaw played all three knockouts in 2011 on a foot that was so busted he couldnt train at all in the run up to the final. Even freaked Henry out when he saw it.
But he managed to get through it. If he's still the best with an injury then you go with it. Doesnt mean you're absolved from critiquing how you play.
Murray's obviously a fighter and hopefully all thats gone at the world cup. Sexton can be a bit brittle too (as carter was) so a lots riding on the two.

Sexton has gotten a lot of attention over his years.  Maybe he has become brittle but I don't think I'd blame him given teams don't give him a pass in the rough stuff - and he takes it and gives it, so all good in the battle.

Murray is not brittle.  He was just unlucky enough to get an injury that obviously proved stubborn and the effects on the arm affected was quite noticeable with loss of muscle mass.  You don't do excuses on real injuries and real recuperation periods.

Indeed, players want to play and put their hands up, especially leading in to the World Cup.  So you might blame Joe for picking both Sexton and Murray during the 6N.  Arguably Ireland might have done better had two other players played the bulk of that contest.  But then, maybe it'll have proved a very good bit of player management if those two players kick on now into the latter half of the year.

True, are they back to fitness yet or is Murray's the sort that will be with him forever?

Funny thing injuries. carter was injured sitting in the stands when we lost in 07, in 2011 he didnt even make the tournament, training injury just before it, then, he spends three years up to 2015 mostly out with injury, sneaks into the squad then plays three blinders in the knockouts at the wrong side of 30.

So theres a luck element for sure, Sexton and Murray sound like they could both sit out the friendlys and give the seconds experience and just fitness train. Theyve nothing to prove and can get match fitness in pool play.

So anyways Crotty and Barrett are out for the final which doesn't help the Crusaders chances.

I personally wouldn't be surprised if the Jaguares pulled off an upset here and then Argentina went on to beat NZ in the rugby championship. The Crusaders aren't unbeatable but Jaguares will have to play very well. Argentina have NZ first up at home. Will they ever have a better chance of a win v NZ? I don't think so really.

I noticed that Sam Whitelock pulled off a fairly cynical play to deny TJ Perenara the ball at the bottom of the ruck in the dying minutes of the Crusaders v Hurricanes game. Shame the ref didn't spot it as the Hurricanes deserved one final pop at the title.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/super-rugby/113927302/streetsmart-sam-whitelock-used-clever-ploy-to-get-crusaders-into-super-rugby-final

Collapse2005 wrote:...I personally wouldn't be surprised if the Jaguares pulled off an upset here...

I'd be surprised, because teams don't beat the Crusaders at home at the best of times, let alone after a long distance schlep across the world.

If it does happen, it will likely be
a) a red card, or a series of yellow cards
b) the Crusaders just faling apart, perhaps because of pressure exerted by
c) a Jaguares team pulling together as one, getting enough right in the match to win

Yep cagey Sam got away with that from most accounts. It should have gone upstairs.
Big call on Argie to beat NZ. Gotta remember jags are one side where NZ had four in the finals, two which had to go out to other NZ sides, the chiefs bowing out to the jags. So a much wider quality to select from.
Where I think the jags are way up on the Saders is in the backs experience, especially out wide. Between Reece, Ennor, Bridge, Havili, Goodhue, Mou’unga and half bryn hall theyve about twenty test caps all up, four of those with none. Jags have about 80 plus depending on whos selected. Crottys by far the most experienced and is out. All talented players but raw at test level for a saders side.

For argie to have any hope of winning the RC...I dont think theyll get close...will be to beat NZ, first time ever, in three weeks, in Argie. Oddly, they usually go closer against NZ when they come here.

But in the last 13 RC matches- ie all of them- the lowest margin vs NZ has been 15 points, way back in 2013, in Hamilton, so although they could win, its very unlikely.

Dontbknow how much theyll borrow off NH resources...I believe Sanchez is returning, and he has stiff competition now.

Rugby Fan wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:...I personally wouldn't be surprised if the Jaguares pulled off an upset here...

I'd be surprised, because teams don't beat the Crusaders at home at the best of times, let alone after a long distance schlep across the world.

If it does happen, it will likely be
a) a red card, or a series of yellow cards
b) the Crusaders just faling apart, perhaps because of pressure exerted by
c) a Jaguares team pulling together as one, getting enough right in the match to win

No you are right about that but a couple of injuries and coming up against a side on a tear at the moment could turn out to be the perfect storm for the Jaguares. I also suspect the Crusaders arent quite as dominant as they have been.

Taylorman wrote:Yep cagey Sam got away with that from most accounts. It should have gone upstairs.
Big call on Argie to beat NZ. Gotta remember jags are one side where NZ had four in the finals, two which had to go out to other NZ sides, the chiefs bowing out to the jags. So a much wider quality to select from.
Where I think the jags are way up on the Saders is in the backs experience, especially out wide. Between Reece, Ennor, Bridge, Havili, Goodhue, Mou’unga and half bryn hall theyve about twenty test caps all up, four of those with none. Jags have about 80 plus depending on whos selected. Crottys by far the most experienced and is out. All talented players but raw at test level for a saders side.

For argie to have any hope of winning the RC...I dont think theyll get close...will be to beat NZ, first time ever, in three weeks, in Argie. Oddly, they usually go closer against NZ when they come here.

But in the last 13 RC matches- ie all of them- the lowest margin vs NZ has been 15 points, way back in 2013, in Hamilton, so although they could win, its very unlikely.

Dontbknow how much theyll borrow off NH resources...I believe Sanchez is returning, and he has stiff competition now.

They dont have many players any more in the NH. Who outside of Sanchez would make it? Imhoff maybe, Isa, maybe Herrera. Not sure who else.

Thats a credit to the saders then.
They only lost two from 17, one in searing heat in suva to a resurgent chiefs, topped the table by a clear five points, beat the second highest on points the Canes three from three this year. Jags lost 5, in a conference where they only played nz sides four times (saders played 8).
If thats not as dominant then theyve done well.

Collapse2005 wrote:

Taylorman wrote:Yep cagey Sam got away with that from most accounts. It should have gone upstairs.
Big call on Argie to beat NZ. Gotta remember jags are one side where NZ had four in the finals, two which had to go out to other NZ sides, the chiefs bowing out to the jags. So a much wider quality to select from.
Where I think the jags are way up on the Saders is in the backs experience, especially out wide. Between Reece, Ennor, Bridge, Havili, Goodhue, Mou’unga and half bryn hall theyve about twenty test caps all up, four of those with none. Jags have about 80 plus depending on whos selected. Crottys by far the most experienced and is out. All talented players but raw at test level for a saders side.

For argie to have any hope of winning the RC...I dont think theyll get close...will be to beat NZ, first time ever, in three weeks, in Argie. Oddly, they usually go closer against NZ when they come here.

But in the last 13 RC matches- ie all of them- the lowest margin vs NZ has been 15 points, way back in 2013, in Hamilton, so although they could win, its very unlikely.

Dontbknow how much theyll borrow off NH resources...I believe Sanchez is returning, and he has stiff competition now.

They dont have many players any more in the NH. Who outside of Sanchez would make it? Imhoff maybe, Isa, maybe Herrera. Not sure who else.

Yep, those are the names I was thinking.

Taylorman wrote:Thats a credit to the saders then.
They only lost two from 17,  one in searing heat in suva to a resurgent chiefs, topped the table by a clear five points, beat the second highest on points the Canes three from three this year. Jags lost 5, in a conference where they only played nz sides four times (saders played 8).
If thats not as dominant then theyve done well.

No you are right they are still a huge challenge and will be favourites but I like the look of this Jags side. Looking forward to the game.

Collapse2005 wrote:

Taylorman wrote:Thats a credit to the saders then.
They only lost two from 17,  one in searing heat in suva to a resurgent chiefs, topped the table by a clear five points, beat the second highest on points the Canes three from three this year. Jags lost 5, in a conference where they only played nz sides four times (saders played 8).
If thats not as dominant then theyve done well.

No you are right they are still a huge challenge and will be favourites but I like the look of this Jags side. Looking forward to the game.

It’s the backs that concern me. Only a handful of players with test experience, Goodhue the only starter. And that’s where Jags are so strong.

Taylor

Hypothetically how much would the Crusaders losing dent the hopes of All Blacks fans going into the RWC?

maestegmafia wrote:Taylor

Hypothetically how much would the Crusaders losing dent the hopes of All Blacks fans going into the RWC?

None. Theres no correlation between the two other than those in the Saders will want some form of redemption from losing, the others might chuckle a bit. Though their sides all lost as well.

In 2011 saders lost to the reds in the S rugby final and Oz won the 3N. ABs won the wcup.
In 2015 Highlanders beat the canes in SRugby and oz won the 3N, both SA and Oz beating NZ.
ABs still won the Wcup.

And its one match. One match never really defines a side though world cup finals might argue with that.

Crusaders are Crusaders and ABs are ABs. Once theyre in camp SRugby is a thing of the past.

Taylorman wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:Taylor

Hypothetically how much would the Crusaders losing dent the hopes of All Blacks fans going into the RWC?

None. Theres no correlation between the two other than those in the Saders will want some form of redemption from losing, the others might chuckle a bit.    Though their sides all lost as well.

In 2011 saders lost to the reds in the S rugby final and Oz won the 3N. ABs won the wcup.
In 2015 Highlanders beat the canes in SRugby and oz won the 3N, both SA and Oz beating NZ.
ABs still won the Wcup.

And its one match. One match never really defines a side though world cup finals might argue with that.

Crusaders are Crusaders and ABs are ABs. Once theyre in camp SRugby is a thing of the past.

So if any team beats the ABs in the RC this season we shouldn’t get too excited about your chances of winning the RWC diminishing then...!

Taylorman wrote:One match never really defines a side though

I dunno I think we all still define the All Blacks based on that semi final vs France

maestegmafia wrote:

Taylorman wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:Taylor

Hypothetically how much would the Crusaders losing dent the hopes of All Blacks fans going into the RWC?

None. Theres no correlation between the two other than those in the Saders will want some form of redemption from losing, the others might chuckle a bit.    Though their sides all lost as well.

In 2011 saders lost to the reds in the S rugby final and Oz won the 3N. ABs won the wcup.
In 2015 Highlanders beat the canes in SRugby and oz won the 3N, both SA and Oz beating NZ.
ABs still won the Wcup.

And its one match. One match never really defines a side though world cup finals might argue with that.

Crusaders are Crusaders and ABs are ABs. Once theyre in camp SRugby is a thing of the past.

So if any team beats the ABs in the RC this season we shouldn’t get too excited about your chances of winning the RWC diminishing then...!

No not this year. Other years, when its a full home and away schedule, for sure.

In all honesty we all pay it too little respect. Theres talk of the WCup side just playing the home games for example, so they can guage how the main side will go. Those that need more games, plus the second strings, may play away. So we could lose to Argie if they get carried away, but I dont think they will.

But reality these days is the itinerary is so full its reasonable to send your best side out every single test. You target the ones you must win- the three knockouts have been that for a year or two, losing one of those would for the ABs be failure, so unnacceptable.

Then work towards that. Any other single test, bar the easy pool ones, become lose-able, but not a complete failure. More than two RC losses would also be considered a failure, but thats not going to happen easily.

Taylorman wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:

Taylorman wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:Taylor

Hypothetically how much would the Crusaders losing dent the hopes of All Blacks fans going into the RWC?

None. Theres no correlation between the two other than those in the Saders will want some form of redemption from losing, the others might chuckle a bit.    Though their sides all lost as well.

In 2011 saders lost to the reds in the S rugby final and Oz won the 3N. ABs won the wcup.
In 2015 Highlanders beat the canes in SRugby and oz won the 3N, both SA and Oz beating NZ.
ABs still won the Wcup.

And its one match. One match never really defines a side though world cup finals might argue with that.

Crusaders are Crusaders and ABs are ABs. Once theyre in camp SRugby is a thing of the past.

So if any team beats the ABs in the RC this season we shouldn’t get too excited about your chances of winning the RWC diminishing then...!

No not this year. Other years, when its a full home and away schedule, for sure.

In all honesty we all pay it too little respect. Theres talk of the WCup side just playing the home games for example, so they can guage how the main side will go. Those that need more games, plus the second strings, may play away. So we could lose to Argie if they get carried away, but I dont think they will.

But reality these days is the itinerary is so full its reasonable to send your best side out every single test. You target the ones you must win- the three knockouts have been that for a year or two, losing one of those would for the ABs be failure, so unnacceptable.

Then work towards that. Any other single test, bar the easy pool ones, become lose-able, but not a complete failure. More than two RC losses would also be considered a failure, but thats not going to happen easily.

Building a cohesive squad is imperative these days. Injuries can take there toll as you guys know from 2011

Yes already Hansens said most of the Crusaders wont be going to Argentina for the first RC match as they play this weekend and have had a very long season already. Read definitely aint going so we’ll need a new skip for that.
That presents a risk though Argie could be stuffed as well as most of their side will be the same jags that play this weekend. So thats where your all eggs in the one basket can hurt you.
Even though we wont be taking our best players, we will be taking fresher players from the other four Super sides the wont be playing this weekend, making Argies bid for the RC a tough one. They have to use the same squad for club and country.
So if they win the RC it would be pretty much a miracle.

Hard fought win for the Crusaders, only one try in the match, 19-3. Pity the surface had that icy layer to it which caused a lot of handling mistakes on both sides. Razor three from three, with probably more to come.

Good to see the Crusaders win

Ffs. Who ever takes any notice of Taylorman. He still thinks the ABs were worth their wc win and that Joubert had nothing to do with a third rate French team losing even though they clearly didn’t. He was also v quiet about Chicago ( we was looking at the sights) or other times. I am old enough to remember the nz supporters over in 89 for buck shelfords tour. Having gone to two games I can tell you they were as exciting or excitable as a Dutch reform church member.

It reminds me of the story of some newspaper journalist sent to nz at the beginning of the 20th century. Arriving after a three week journey he sends a telegram back to head office “send help. Two million people trapped alive in the South Pacific”

Geen sport voor watjes wrote:Ffs. Who ever takes any notice of Taylorman. He still thinks the ABs were worth their wc win and that Joubert had nothing to do with a third rate French team losing even though they clearly didn’t. He was also v quiet about Chicago ( we was looking at the sights) or other times. I am old enough to remember the nz supporters over in 89 for buck shelfords tour. Having gone to two games I can tell you they were as exciting or excitable as a Dutch reform church member.

It reminds me of the story of some newspaper journalist sent to nz at the beginning of the 20th century. Arriving after a three week journey he sends a telegram back to head office “send help. Two million people trapped alive in the South Pacific”

For one, I was not quiet abou chicago, were you asleep or is that just made up?
Secondly, the ABs were worth their world cup win, only the envious trash talkers believe they werent.

The rest I’ll just put down to silliness or the drink or something.
But tell me, where we’re the other 1.2 million? NZs population beg. 20the century was 800k. Or are ayour reporters as poor as well? I mean, You’re telling the story. Fancy getting every point wrong.

Anyway,
Great work ROG, nice to have some coaching payback for a change. NZ, and especially the Crusaders, loves ya!  

https://i.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/super-rugby/114054003/super-rugby-how-crusaders-pivot-richie-mounga-turned-around-his-goalkicking

Argentina have named their squad for the rugby championship:

Argentina’s 46-man squad

Prop: Nahuel Tetaz Chaparro, Mayco Vivas, Juan Pablo Zeiss, Javier Díaz, Santiago García Botta, Juan Figallo, Ramiro Herrera, Santiago Medrano, Enrique Pieretto, Lucio Sordoni

Hooker: Agustín Creevy, Julián Montoya, Santiago Socino

Second-row: Guido Petti, Tomás Lavanini, Matías Alemanno, Lucas Paulos 77

Back-row: Pablo Matera, Tomás Lezana, Facundo Isa, Javier Ortega Desio, Marcos Kremer, Rodrigo Bruni, Juan Manuel Leguizamón

Scrumhalf: Tomás Cubelli, Gonzalo Bertranou, Martín Landajo, Felipe Ezcurra

Flyhalf: Nicolás Sánchez, Benjamín Urdapilleta, Joaquín Díaz Bonilla, Domingo Miotti

Centre: Santiago González Iglesias, Jerónimo De La Fuente, Matías Orlando, Matías Moroni, Lucas Mensa, Juan Cruz Mallía, Bautista Ezcurra

Back three: Ramiro Moyano, Bautista Delguy, Sebastián Cancelliere, Emiliano Boffelli, Joaquín Tuculet, Manuel Montero, Santiago Carreras

From Europe:
Juan Figallo (Saracens), Ramiro Herrera (Stade Francais), Facundo Isa (Toulon), Nicolas Sanchez (Stade Francais) and Benjamin Urdapilleta (Castres).

Its been well covered that 3 and 10 were brutally exposed in the Super XV final so out goes Bonilla and in comes Sanchez as Bonillas lack of experience showed, and is on the wrong side of 30 to start taking over that role now.

Medrano got done like a dinner by Moody at scrum time so theyll be looking north to get a more experienced tighthead. Cant go into a World cup with a 20 odd year old anchoring your scrum.

Other than that, things looking pretty good for Argie.

Theyll need to start targetting the matches they want to win immediately with the ABs coming next week, and get the required balance of the squad in terms of rest vs match fitness.

It was one game, Bonilla had a good season apart from that. 3 is probably the bigger deal.

Yeah but he got targeted big time and as the match went on withdrew back into his shell standing deeper and deeper and out of the action. When ‘only one game’ is the final its definitely down to pressure, the occasion.

Sanchez would have revelled in the same scenario, without any shadow of a doubt. Bonilla needs to be put under more pressure but id say too late to start tests this year in any big ones.

Did you see Moody shive Medrano up and out of the scrum?

Moodys going to be a handful for tightheads Im sure.

Yes I did

8 Crusaders to miss the trip to Argentina.

Yep, Argentina will never have a better chance to get the win.

Argie will win one one day, the mere increasing frequency they play, the increasing familiarity of the Jaguares and Puma's with NZ rugby and number of matches means players have just gotta rest. NZ as expected is hoping a less than full AB side will do the job, but its not the end of the world, and this close to a World cup, losses tend to give you more about your teams abilities than wins.
AB's should win as expected though, and even for Argie, the bigger matches are in a few weeks.

The side would be pretty good without those 8 as far as I know. Who are the 8 referred to? Does it include uncapped Crusaders?

Collapse2005 wrote:Yes I did

They got pumped didn’t they Guns?

Nah I don't think the Crusaders made the most of their scrum advantage but they didn't really need to. They gave away a penalty themselves in the scrum vs two or three from the Jags.

The scrum definitely wasn't the difference between the sides at all. There were much more prominent factors. Crusaders controlled the game better, kicked better and achieved marginal dominance in the collisions and the breakdown. The wet weather suited the Crusaders much more too. Those were the main differences for me along with a bad day at the office for Bonilla and some bad luck in good scoring positions. They did create enough chances, at least as many as the Crusaders in any case.

In his defense he is used to playing an expansive game and the conditions didn't help and he wasn't able to change his style mainly because he isn't used to controlling territory as the Jaguares don't play that sort of game.

Saders clearly targeted both bonilla, who got worse and worse as the game progressed, and the jags scrum, which got owned big time. With that, no team can function, forwards and backs are neutralised, the argie attacks blunted and tried hard but were always far to far from the gain line to have any impact. Thats why sanchez must come in. Dont know what Bonillas past is, but hes too old to go up to the next level at this stage of his career. He’ll be one of those who is strictly Super level, and will sub, or play the weaker pool matches.
Sanchez has it all over him in most areas.