za vs nz

za vs nz

Post by Carel vd Wat » Thu, 13 Jun 1996 04:00:00


In the S12 it was proven over & over again that home ground advantage is
becoming (and ever was) a decider, not even a factor anymore. The
granite-like Auckland defence in the final lacked exactly that a few
weeks previously against Transvaal, who didn't even feature in the S12.

Test rugby is a whole different ball game, proven by the Springboks in
the WC95 final, where they won against a better team (IMHO).

Only one of the 5 tests between za & nz is played in nz. That will
definitely favour za, and frankly, they will need it! :-)

Point is, (which I'm very loath to say) if the All blacks can put up a
show the likes of Auckland in the S12 final, there must be a very
dedicated team indeed on the other side to stop the tide. Period.

How can any team overlook a player like Tonu'u, his pass must rank as one
of the strongest ever in the game.

Cheers
Carel
--
+----------------------------------+
| Carel van der Wath               |
| Potchefstroom University         |

| http://pukrs3.puk.ac.za/~9418156 |
+----------------------------------+

 
 
 

za vs nz

Post by Peter Willia » Thu, 13 Jun 1996 04:00:00


Quote:

>Subject: za vs nz
>Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 00:39:24 -0700
>In the S12 it was proven over & over again that home ground advantage is
>becoming (and ever was) a decider, not even a factor anymore. The
>granite-like Auckland defence in the final lacked exactly that a few
>weeks previously against Transvaal, who didn't even feature in the S12.
>Test rugby is a whole different ball game, proven by the Springboks in
>the WC95 final, where they won against a better team (IMHO).
>Only one of the 5 tests between za & nz is played in nz. That will
>definitely favour za, and frankly, they will need it! :-)

I'm picking SA to win at altitude but NZ to win at sea level leaving a total
match score of 3-2 to NZ. It will show that on a given day ANYTHING is
possible on the day and that there is nothing to seperate the two best teams
in the world.

Quote:
>How can any team overlook a player like Tonu'u, his pass must rank as one
>of the strongest ever in the game.

But his options are craap and he is ill disciplined. Marshall combines bettr
with Merhtens and that is why he makes the AB';s ahead of Tonu'u

Quote:
>Cheers
>Carel

Later

 
 
 

za vs nz

Post by Andre Marit » Thu, 13 Jun 1996 04:00:00


Quote:
>In the S12 it was proven over & over again that home ground advantage is
>becoming (and ever was) a decider, not even a factor anymore. The
>granite-like Auckland defence in the final lacked exactly that a few
>weeks previously against Transvaal, who didn't even feature in the S12.

>Test rugby is a whole different ball game, proven by the Springboks in
>the WC95 final, where they won against a better team (IMHO).

>Only one of the 5 tests between za & nz is played in nz. That will
>definitely favour za, and frankly, they will need it! :-)

>Point is, (which I'm very loath to say) if the All blacks can put up a
>show the likes of Auckland in the S12 final, there must be a very
>dedicated team indeed on the other side to stop the tide. Period.

>How can any team overlook a player like Tonu'u, his pass must rank as one
>of the strongest ever in the game.

Jeeezzzz Carel, and I thought Potchedstroom University people know their
rugby!

If you look at the WC95 final stats you will see that SA was by far the
better team on the day.  It was pure bad luck (refereeing?) that caused a
close game.  Think a bit, how many times did SA cross their goalline and
how many times did the AB's cross ours?  I will be the last person ever
to call the Boks a better team than the AB's.  We have 100 years of
history proving that these two team are very evenly matched indeed, but
SA beat them solidly in the World Cup.

Yes, if the AB's can put up a match like Auckland did in the S12 final,
they will be extremely difficult to beat, but:

  1.  Even the NZ comentators were in awe during that match, constantly
      pointing out that that is the best that they have seen Auckland
      play in years.

  2.  We all know Natal was nowhere near there best.

My point is that the chances of the AB's playing like Auckland on a
constant base is not very likely and SA have the players to beat them
even if they do.  I have to agree though that it will be a mighty big
task.

I sincerely hope that the SA players are not as negative about the AB's
as you and many SA supporters seem to be.  If the SA players, coaches and
team management think in terms of stopping the AB's instead of thinking
in terms of beating them, then we have already lost.  

I believe that SA can beat the All Blacks and the Wallabies on a given
day, but that they can beat the Boks too.  This is what makes the
e***ment when TITANS clash.

Cheers

 
 
 

za vs nz

Post by Reub » Fri, 14 Jun 1996 04:00:00


Quote:
>How can any team overlook a player like Tonu'u, his pass must rank as one
>of the strongest ever in the game.

Because 'anything he can do, Marshall can do better'.

And i think you may be mistaken about his passing. It's not slick by
any means, takes far *far* *FAR* too long from set pieces, or rucks
where the ball is under control, and is only accurate 2 times in 3
(and I think I'm being generous here).

By accurate, I mean finding the person he is passing to and then
passing to them well enough for them to catch the ball without having
to bend over, reach back, jump up or run three metres back to where
the ball actually landed.

Cheers,
Reuben

 
 
 

za vs nz

Post by Mike Tann » Fri, 14 Jun 1996 04:00:00


says...

Quote:


>>How can any team overlook a player like Tonu'u, his pass must rank as one
>>of the strongest ever in the game.

John Hart selected his AB team with a clear and obvious game plan: get the
ball out to the wings as quick as possible. So your main aim is to pick the
hb who can deliver the ball there fastest. Your secondary aims are individ.
attacking and defensive ability.

Marshall played the trial game and the Samoan game behind the AB pack, and
did exactly what he was supposed to do. He may have started a bit rustily in
each game, but he got better and better as games went on.

So even tho Tonu'u had better S12 form, thus far you have to say that it
looks like Marshall was the correct selection.

MJT  

 
 
 

za vs nz

Post by Tracey Nels » Fri, 14 Jun 1996 04:00:00



Quote:

>>How can any team overlook a player like Tonu'u, his pass must rank as one
>>of the strongest ever in the game.

>Because 'anything he can do, Marshall can do better'.

>And i think you may be mistaken about his passing. It's not slick by
>any means, takes far *far* *FAR* too long from set pieces, or rucks
>where the ball is under control, and is only accurate 2 times in 3
>(and I think I'm being generous here).

>By accurate, I mean finding the person he is passing to and then
>passing to them well enough for them to catch the ball without having
>to bend over, reach back, jump up or run three metres back to where
>the ball actually landed.

And here I was thinking I was the only person who didn't like Tonu'u!!  You're
a man after my own heart, Reuben!  Still, it probably wouldn't have mattered
too much who the halfback was now that Mehrts is back - he can pick up a ball
up off his toes if needs be!  Here's hoping that Carisbrook isn't too wet
under foot on Sunday, so we can see some more of Mehrtens, Wilson and Cullen!

Tracey.