Planet Rugby Forum

Yes, I know know he said half fit, so I extend my apology to Mr Very Popular immediately

I was eating a magnificent leg of Kiwi lamb at the time and misread.

Apologies.

Bobcock wrote:

Mr. Very Popular wrote:

Bobcock wrote:

harry 22 wrote:i've a feeling he'll go with itoje at 6 and that POM was given the captaincy yesterday to soften the blow of being dropped next week

I reckon that is why he got the captaincy, he won't be replaced by Itoje though.

Itoje will play second row with Kruis. AWJ will be on the bench.

That was my first thought as well, just a sop to him before being dropped for a half fit welsh lad.

Half wit? Well that's a pretty dumb thing to say...... I think you have made yourself the obvious half wit around here.

Try Growing up and discussing like men before you bother with me again.....

no bother boss.

Hawk97 wrote:

Jeff the Bear wrote:
Like I said, it's more about physicality in my opinion. If the defensive tactics are working well, it doesn't rely on being good tackler in midfield to make it work, you just need to be a unit. If all is going to plan, then the ball is slowed at the ruck, which means the opposition are getting flat foot ball. The defensive line then rushes up to eat up the space, which means the attacking team have one option only, and that's to take contact.

The only way you subsequently lose in that situation is if the person rushing up in defence gets physically dominated. The best way to make sure that doesn't happen is to make sure you have the biggest players in your midfield. Gatland has only ever picked units in his centre, and although most people think it's for the attacking bosh, I'm convinced it has a lot more to do with being able to execute a Edwards/Farrell style rush defence to the fullest.

Or likely they'll stand deeper, spin it wide, and then we have ponderous players trying to defend the likes of Ben Smith in space?

Distinct possibility. The rush/umbrella defence is not without it's flaws. Most notably it is susceptible to the ball out the back door and wide, or the cross field kick. You'd have to imagine that that is exactly what the All Blacks will be looking to instigate at every opportunity.

The defence coaches always talk about adapting to the situation, and that will be doubly the case here. When the rush defence gets beaten, it's invariably because the rush defence was never the right one to adopt in that circumstance. To get it to work properly, the ball must first be slowed down at the preceding ruck. Once flat footed, a ball out the back door just invites you to be tackled even further behind the gainline, and a cross field kick is the last refuge of a 10 who's got nowhere else to go.

And to whoever said I was talking about Rugby League, you're right, that is exactly what is being deployed...a Rugby League style defence, by an ex-Rugby League player who is now a defence coach.

Jeff the Bear wrote:

Hawk97 wrote:

Jeff the Bear wrote:
Like I said, it's more about physicality in my opinion. If the defensive tactics are working well, it doesn't rely on being good tackler in midfield to make it work, you just need to be a unit. If all is going to plan, then the ball is slowed at the ruck, which means the opposition are getting flat foot ball. The defensive line then rushes up to eat up the space, which means the attacking team have one option only, and that's to take contact.

The only way you subsequently lose in that situation is if the person rushing up in defence gets physically dominated. The best way to make sure that doesn't happen is to make sure you have the biggest players in your midfield. Gatland has only ever picked units in his centre, and although most people think it's for the attacking bosh, I'm convinced it has a lot more to do with being able to execute a Edwards/Farrell style rush defence to the fullest.

Or likely they'll stand deeper, spin it wide, and then we have ponderous players trying to defend the likes of Ben Smith in space?

Distinct possibility. The rush/umbrella defence is not without it's flaws. Most notably it is susceptible to the ball out the back door and wide, or the cross field kick. You'd have to imagine that that is exactly what the All Blacks will be looking to instigate at every opportunity.

The defence coaches always talk about adapting to the situation, and that will be doubly the case here. When the rush defence gets beaten, it's invariably because the rush defence was never the right one to adopt in that circumstance. To get it to work properly, the ball must first be slowed down at the preceding ruck. Once flat footed, a ball out the back door just invites you to be tackled even further behind the gainline, and a cross field kick is the last refuge of a 10 who's got nowhere else to go.

And to whoever said I was talking about Rugby League, you're right, that is exactly what is being deployed...a Rugby League style defence, by an ex-Rugby League player who is now a defence coach.

That was me btw readers

Bobcock wrote:Yes, I know know he said half fit, so I extend my apology to Mr Very Popular immediately

I was eating a magnificent leg of Kiwi lamb at the time and misread.

Apologies.

Accepted, how was the lamb?

Conspicuous wrote:Given team selection for Chiefs match on Tuesday and performances against the Maori , I think Gatland will go for . I don't think Warburton is ready and there seems to be growing speculation that he'll be left out but I'll believe it when I see it

Halfpenny
Watson
Davies
Teo
North
Sexton
Murray
Faletau
SOB
Warburton
Kruis
Itoje
Furlong
George
Vunipola


McGrath
Owens
Sinckler
AWJ
POM
Webb
Biggar
Joeseph

Team looks right but with AWJ at lock

In the round, I'd actually prefer a passer at 12, but I think it's a fallacy to think that we've got a good defence at the moment, that we can change a key component to that, and expect it to be just as good. It may be, but it's certainly not a given.

So why does everyone think Farrell is out now?

cubby boi wrote:So why does everyone think Farrell is out now?

Grade 1 quad tear or strain, might not make the match.

I don't see how Sexton/Farrell with Teo (or some other bruiser - without disrespecting Teo, who I'm a fan of) at 12 would be any better in defence than a Sexton - Farrell combination. They are both excellent at reading the game and they're not exactly small either.

I think it's insane not to play both of them. Aside from being good players themselves, they're both ultra competitive and are good organisers of other players.

Gatland said he took Farrell as a 10. I believe Gatland changes his mind about as quickly as continental drift.

I cannot see it happening a second time, but, a hell of a lot of people were left with egg on their faces after the Australian Lions selections. So (even though I agree with a lot of posts on here) I`m keeping my powder dry until we see the outcome.

I don't see Gatland selecting Farrell at 12. For one thing he doesn't offer a significant crash-ball threat

Jeff the Bear wrote:

Hawk97 wrote:

Jeff the Bear wrote:
Like I said, it's more about physicality in my opinion. If the defensive tactics are working well, it doesn't rely on being good tackler in midfield to make it work, you just need to be a unit. If all is going to plan, then the ball is slowed at the ruck, which means the opposition are getting flat foot ball. The defensive line then rushes up to eat up the space, which means the attacking team have one option only, and that's to take contact.

The only way you subsequently lose in that situation is if the person rushing up in defence gets physically dominated. The best way to make sure that doesn't happen is to make sure you have the biggest players in your midfield. Gatland has only ever picked units in his centre, and although most people think it's for the attacking bosh, I'm convinced it has a lot more to do with being able to execute a Edwards/Farrell style rush defence to the fullest.

Or likely they'll stand deeper, spin it wide, and then we have ponderous players trying to defend the likes of Ben Smith in space?

Distinct possibility. The rush/umbrella defence is not without it's flaws. Most notably it is susceptible to the ball out the back door and wide, or the cross field kick. You'd have to imagine that that is exactly what the All Blacks will be looking to instigate at every opportunity.

The defence coaches always talk about adapting to the situation, and that will be doubly the case here. When the rush defence gets beaten, it's invariably because the rush defence was never the right one to adopt in that circumstance. To get it to work properly, the ball must first be slowed down at the preceding ruck. Once flat footed, a ball out the back door just invites you to be tackled even further behind the gainline, and a cross field kick is the last refuge of a 10 who's got nowhere else to go.

And to whoever said I was talking about Rugby League, you're right, that is exactly what is being deployed...a Rugby League style defence, by an ex-Rugby League player who is now a defence coach.

Just about every team in rugby rushes. What's so fundamentally different about a Gatland team?

Mr. Very Popular wrote:

Bobcock wrote:Yes, I know know he said half fit, so I extend my apology to Mr Very Popular immediately

I was eating a magnificent leg of Kiwi lamb at the time and misread.

Apologies.

Accepted, how was the lamb?

It was fantastic, truly, my wife is a genius in the kitchen considering she had no idea about lamb until recently.

Hopefully it'll be the last think I consider something superior about NZ for a while.....

Tim. wrote:

Jeff the Bear wrote:

Hawk97 wrote:

Jeff the Bear wrote:
Like I said, it's more about physicality in my opinion. If the defensive tactics are working well, it doesn't rely on being good tackler in midfield to make it work, you just need to be a unit. If all is going to plan, then the ball is slowed at the ruck, which means the opposition are getting flat foot ball. The defensive line then rushes up to eat up the space, which means the attacking team have one option only, and that's to take contact.

The only way you subsequently lose in that situation is if the person rushing up in defence gets physically dominated. The best way to make sure that doesn't happen is to make sure you have the biggest players in your midfield. Gatland has only ever picked units in his centre, and although most people think it's for the attacking bosh, I'm convinced it has a lot more to do with being able to execute a Edwards/Farrell style rush defence to the fullest.

Or likely they'll stand deeper, spin it wide, and then we have ponderous players trying to defend the likes of Ben Smith in space?

Distinct possibility. The rush/umbrella defence is not without it's flaws. Most notably it is susceptible to the ball out the back door and wide, or the cross field kick. You'd have to imagine that that is exactly what the All Blacks will be looking to instigate at every opportunity.

The defence coaches always talk about adapting to the situation, and that will be doubly the case here. When the rush defence gets beaten, it's invariably because the rush defence was never the right one to adopt in that circumstance. To get it to work properly, the ball must first be slowed down at the preceding ruck. Once flat footed, a ball out the back door just invites you to be tackled even further behind the gainline, and a cross field kick is the last refuge of a 10 who's got nowhere else to go.

And to whoever said I was talking about Rugby League, you're right, that is exactly what is being deployed...a Rugby League style defence, by an ex-Rugby League player who is now a defence coach.

Just about every team in rugby rushes. What's so fundamentally different about a Gatland team?

For most teams it's a means to an end. For Gatland it is the end. Or to put it another way, that 'offensive defence' is a key component of the attacking play of the team...which is why I think he picks his centres based on their defensive prowess, rather than any attacking capability.

Why would Gatland pick a passer at 12?

Who would he pass it to? Halfpenny?
The wings look like our weakest position.
Even if Farrell and Sexton were picked I'd say it would be to have two kickers stretching 10 man rugby to 11, playing pressure and territorial test rugby.

That said, he will pick a bosher at 12 and will probably only do Sexton/Farrell for 20mins either to change it up if we are behind or close it out with kicks if we are ahead.

Jeff the Bear wrote:For most teams it's a means to an end. For Gatland it is the end. Or to put it another way, that 'offensive defence' is a key component of the attacking play of the team...which is why I think he picks his centres based on their defensive prowess, rather than any attacking capability.

So you're in broad agreement with everyone who thinks we're playing Gatlandball, or...?

Do you think Lawes or Henderson are slightly tempted to go down with a game ending injury in the 5th minute that magically clears up overnight?

Mahoney wrote:Do you think Lawes or Henderson are slightly tempted to go down with a game ending injury in the 5th minute that magically clears up overnight?

Why not both, we have two locks on the bench......

Mr. Very Popular wrote:

cubby boi wrote:So why does everyone think Farrell is out now?

Grade 1 quad tear or strain, might not make the match.

Has any more been said since he first did it though? Though they were talking positively about his chances originally?

cubby boi wrote:

Mr. Very Popular wrote:

cubby boi wrote:So why does everyone think Farrell is out now?

Grade 1 quad tear or strain, might not make the match.

Has any more been said since he first did it though? Though they were talking positively about his chances originally?

Try the BBC website, there is a headline that details Gatlands comments on the Farrell situation from today.

So Sky have Pom as captain. He is a superb player, I still suspect we are in for a hiding

sewa wrote:So Sky have Pom as captain. He is a superb player, I still suspect we are in for a hiding

This would be the best news all tour.

Itoje and Kruis, plus Lawes for the bench.

I'd have Itoje Kruis with Lawes on the bench myself.

I suspect it will be Jones on the bench though.

Hawk97 wrote:

Jeff the Bear wrote:
Like I said, it's more about physicality in my opinion. If the defensive tactics are working well, it doesn't rely on being good tackler in midfield to make it work, you just need to be a unit. If all is going to plan, then the ball is slowed at the ruck, which means the opposition are getting flat foot ball. The defensive line then rushes up to eat up the space, which means the attacking team have one option only, and that's to take contact.

The only way you subsequently lose in that situation is if the person rushing up in defence gets physically dominated. The best way to make sure that doesn't happen is to make sure you have the biggest players in your midfield. Gatland has only ever picked units in his centre, and although most people think it's for the attacking bosh, I'm convinced it has a lot more to do with being able to execute a Edwards/Farrell style rush defence to the fullest.

Or likely they'll stand deeper, spin it wide, and then we have ponderous players trying to defend the likes of Ben Smith in space?

I reckon could be right about Gatland's plan. It almost worked against the ABs in their first test of the previous Wales tour to NZ. Wales created so many turnovers by tackling pressure. It was compounded by the fact NZ push the risky offloads/passes. The only reason Wales lost was because they didnt have the firepower to capitalise. So why pick Davies when Henshaw can do a better job?

JM2K6 wrote:

Jeff the Bear wrote:For most teams it's a means to an end. For Gatland it is the end. Or to put it another way, that 'offensive defence' is a key component of the attacking play of the team...which is why I think he picks his centres based on their defensive prowess, rather than any attacking capability.

So you're in broad agreement with everyone who thinks we're playing Gatlandball, or...?

Closer to Schmidt-ball (which tbf, is a similar gameplan based on similar principles). A lot more kicking from 9 for starters with a view to regaining it. Gatlandball adopts downtown kicks with the belief that the defence will contain any run backs.

Jeff the Bear wrote:

JM2K6 wrote:

Jeff the Bear wrote:For most teams it's a means to an end. For Gatland it is the end. Or to put it another way, that 'offensive defence' is a key component of the attacking play of the team...which is why I think he picks his centres based on their defensive prowess, rather than any attacking capability.

So you're in broad agreement with everyone who thinks we're playing Gatlandball, or...?

Closer to Schmidt-ball (which tbf, is a similar gameplan based on similar principles). A lot more kicking from 9 for starters with a view to regaining it. Gatlandball adopts downtown kicks with the belief that the defence will contain any run backs.

And that always goes well against the All Blacks!!

Box kicking to Ben Smith and Dagg could be...interesting.

J Man wrote:Box kicking to Ben Smith and Dagg could be...interesting.

Savea too ..... It will be very interesting if the Lions wingers arrive at the same time as the ball .... and that's what the plan will be

For all the talk about farrell, it's Murrays fitness which will decide if the lions are to have any chance

rfurlong wrote:

J Man wrote:Box kicking to Ben Smith and Dagg could be...interesting.

Savea too ..... It will be very interesting if the Lions wingers arrive at the same time as the ball .... and that's what the plan will be

For all the talk about farrell, it's Murrays fitness which will decide if the lions are to have any chance

the Front 5 and Murray will dictate if we can win. If we dominate up front and Murray plays well we can win.

Mr. Very Popular wrote:

Bobcock wrote:

Mr. Very Popular wrote:

Bobcock wrote:

harry 22 wrote:i've a feeling he'll go with itoje at 6 and that POM was given the captaincy yesterday to soften the blow of being dropped next week

I reckon that is why he got the captaincy, he won't be replaced by Itoje though.

Itoje will play second row with Kruis. AWJ will be on the bench.

That was my first thought as well, just a sop to him before being dropped for a half fit welsh lad.

Half wit? Well that's a pretty dumb thing to say...... I think you have made yourself the obvious half wit around here.

Try Growing up and discussing like men before you bother with me again.....

no bother boss.

rfurlong wrote:

J Man wrote:Box kicking to Ben Smith and Dagg could be...interesting.

Savea too ..... It will be very interesting if the Lions wingers arrive at the same time as the ball .... and that's what the plan will be

For all the talk about farrell, it's Murrays fitness which will decide if the lions are to have any chance

Goes without saying , if Murray gets injured it's game over

CrazyIslander wrote:

Hawk97 wrote:

Jeff the Bear wrote:
Like I said, it's more about physicality in my opinion. If the defensive tactics are working well, it doesn't rely on being good tackler in midfield to make it work, you just need to be a unit. If all is going to plan, then the ball is slowed at the ruck, which means the opposition are getting flat foot ball. The defensive line then rushes up to eat up the space, which means the attacking team have one option only, and that's to take contact.

The only way you subsequently lose in that situation is if the person rushing up in defence gets physically dominated. The best way to make sure that doesn't happen is to make sure you have the biggest players in your midfield. Gatland has only ever picked units in his centre, and although most people think it's for the attacking bosh, I'm convinced it has a lot more to do with being able to execute a Edwards/Farrell style rush defence to the fullest.

Or likely they'll stand deeper, spin it wide, and then we have ponderous players trying to defend the likes of Ben Smith in space?

I reckon could be right about Gatland's plan. It almost worked against the ABs in their first test of the previous Wales tour to NZ. Wales created so many turnovers by tackling pressure. It was compounded by the fact NZ push the risky offloads/passes. The only reason Wales lost was because they didnt have the firepower to capitalise. So why pick Davies when Henshaw can do a better job?

It is a good stifling tactic. I just think a team like NZ will eventually unlock it, either by sheer brilliance and agility, or luck. All it takes is a little dink over the top that comes off, or a moment of individualism that beats an over-eager rush defender, and the swarm of bees that are the AB backs are behind us, and we don't have the speed to catch them

Then comes the issue that we don't have a team or the strategy to come from behind, because we can't finish chances....

Sorry about the doom.

Bobcock wrote:

Mahoney wrote:Do you think Lawes or Henderson are slightly tempted to go down with a game ending injury in the 5th minute that magically clears up overnight?

Why not both, we have two locks on the bench......

"Accidental" clash of heads?

Looks like Farrell is fit so he will start somewhere no question.

theo wrote:Looks like Farrell is fit so he will start somewhere no question.

I've got a sneaking suspicion he's going to be on the bench. With a nod to all the talk of Gatland-ball above, and his love of the bosh, he has clearly yearned for a ball playing inside midfield player to truly make the while thing work. Priestland, and to a lesser extent Henson, were given a lot more chances than their form probably deserved.

I reckon Sexton is the kind of 10 Gatland has always dreamed of. He's given him a lot of time to regain form, and he appears to have found it. Wouldn't be surprised if Sexton started, especially when you consider it'll form a settled partnership with Murray.

He puts the form 10 in Europe on the bench.

The guys a joker.

Hawk97 wrote:

CrazyIslander wrote:

Hawk97 wrote:

Jeff the Bear wrote:
Like I said, it's more about physicality in my opinion. If the defensive tactics are working well, it doesn't rely on being good tackler in midfield to make it work, you just need to be a unit. If all is going to plan, then the ball is slowed at the ruck, which means the opposition are getting flat foot ball. The defensive line then rushes up to eat up the space, which means the attacking team have one option only, and that's to take contact.

The only way you subsequently lose in that situation is if the person rushing up in defence gets physically dominated. The best way to make sure that doesn't happen is to make sure you have the biggest players in your midfield. Gatland has only ever picked units in his centre, and although most people think it's for the attacking bosh, I'm convinced it has a lot more to do with being able to execute a Edwards/Farrell style rush defence to the fullest.

Or likely they'll stand deeper, spin it wide, and then we have ponderous players trying to defend the likes of Ben Smith in space?

I reckon could be right about Gatland's plan. It almost worked against the ABs in their first test of the previous Wales tour to NZ. Wales created so many turnovers by tackling pressure. It was compounded by the fact NZ push the risky offloads/passes. The only reason Wales lost was because they didnt have the firepower to capitalise. So why pick Davies when Henshaw can do a better job?

It is a good stifling tactic. I just think a team like NZ will eventually unlock it, either by sheer brilliance and agility, or luck. All it takes is a little dink over the top that comes off, or a moment of individualism that beats an over-eager rush defender, and the swarm of bees that are the AB backs are behind us, and we don't have the speed to catch them

Then comes the issue that we don't have a team or the strategy to come from behind, because we can't finish chances....

Sorry about the doom.

To be more positive, our scramble defence has been good too though. So all is not completely lost if they do get a linebreak or 7

So Ford & JJ on the bench? At least that would mean there's an option to change plan if when it all goes tits up.

I thought Daly might have had a prayer as the bench option for covering so many positions & having top level speed, but starting tomorrow I guess rules that out.