Why Umaga won't be in the AB's

Why Umaga won't be in the AB's

Post by Mr Sceb » Sun, 11 May 2003 05:22:33


Once again he shows all the distribution skills of an NZ Post mail centre.
While softcock's would have him at 2nd five, there's no ***ing way, and he
will be lucky to make the team (there could be an opening on the wing if
Jonah isn't available).

Before you make a***out of yourself, watch the replay from last night, and
look at the key difference between the sides. When the B'lose got the ball
into the centres it was shovelled wide to the man in space. When the
Blowhards got the ball, Umaga tried to play hero, and carry the ball
himself, even though there was a man unmarked (often Nonu) outside him.

And in case you think it's coincidence, watch any match that Umaga's played
other than on the wing - and you will see the same thing time and again.

--
Mr Scebe
"He doesn't win many of the close one's, does he"
~Grant Fox talking about Taine Randell

 
 
 

Why Umaga won't be in the AB's

Post by ti m » Sun, 11 May 2003 06:17:30

I'm waiting for you to say that Lord Percy will make the AB's as a centre and
not a wing.

Watch the game again and you will see that Umaga didn't have the space to run
and pass when compared to the Blues backs.  Put that down to a poor Canes
forward pack and a having Noddy at #10.

Tim

Quote:

> Once again he shows all the distribution skills of an NZ Post mail centre.
> While softcock's would have him at 2nd five, there's no ***ing way, and he
> will be lucky to make the team (there could be an opening on the wing if
> Jonah isn't available).

> Before you make a***out of yourself, watch the replay from last night, and
> look at the key difference between the sides. When the B'lose got the ball
> into the centres it was shovelled wide to the man in space. When the
> Blowhards got the ball, Umaga tried to play hero, and carry the ball
> himself, even though there was a man unmarked (often Nonu) outside him.

> And in case you think it's coincidence, watch any match that Umaga's played
> other than on the wing - and you will see the same thing time and again.

> --
> Mr Scebe
> "He doesn't win many of the close one's, does he"
> ~Grant Fox talking about Taine Randell


 
 
 

Why Umaga won't be in the AB's

Post by Lo » Sat, 10 May 2003 20:15:17

Quote:
> I'm waiting for you to say that Lord Percy will make the AB's as a centre
and
> not a wing.

> Watch the game again and you will see that Umaga didn't have the space to
run
> and pass when compared to the Blues backs.  Put that down to a poor Canes
> forward pack and a having Noddy at #10.

> Tim

I'm half expecting Scebes to come out with some bullshit about how the AB
backline should look like

9. Meg Ryan
10. Mighty Mehrts
12. Dan Carter
13. Caleb Ralph
14. Joe Maddock
15. Scott Hamilton

Lo.

 
 
 

Why Umaga won't be in the AB's

Post by Kip » Sun, 11 May 2003 08:30:14

Quote:

>I'm half expecting Scebes to come out with some bullshit about how the AB
>backline should look like

>9. Meg Ryan
>10. Mighty Mehrts
>12. Dan Carter
>13. Caleb Ralph
>14. Joe Maddock
>15. Scott Hamilton

Close would look more like this;

9. Marshall
10. Mehrtens
11. Flemming / Rocko / Ralph
12. Dan Carter / Aaron Mauger
13. Umaga
14. Howlett
15. Cullen

But expect the first lineup v the poms to look thus;

9. Lee
10. Spenser
11. Flemming / Rocko / Ralph
12. Dan Carter / Aaron Mauger
13. Umaga
14. Howlett
15. Macdonald

 
 
 

Why Umaga won't be in the AB's

Post by Matt Neilso » Sun, 11 May 2003 08:48:01


Quote:


> >I'm half expecting Scebes to come out with some bullshit
about how the AB
> >backline should look like

> >9. Meg Ryan
> >10. Mighty Mehrts
> >12. Dan Carter
> >13. Caleb Ralph
> >14. Joe Maddock
> >15. Scott Hamilton

> Close would look more like this;

> 9. Marshall
> 10. Mehrtens
> 11. Flemming / Rocko / Ralph
> 12. Dan Carter / Aaron Mauger
> 13. Umaga
> 14. Howlett
> 15. Cullen

> But expect the first lineup v the poms to look thus;

> 9. Lee
> 10. Spenser
> 11. Flemming / Rocko / Ralph
> 12. Dan Carter / Aaron Mauger
> 13. Umaga
> 14. Howlett
> 15. Macdonald

Bring back the real Kip - he was much more fun!!

Cheers, aMtt

 
 
 

Why Umaga won't be in the AB's

Post by ti m » Sun, 11 May 2003 09:41:00

Quote:


> >I'm half expecting Scebes to come out with some bullshit about how the AB
> >backline should look like

> >9. Meg Ryan
> >10. Mighty Mehrts
> >12. Dan Carter
> >13. Caleb Ralph
> >14. Joe Maddock
> >15. Scott Hamilton

> Close would look more like this;

> 9. Marshall
> 10. Mehrtens
> 11. Flemming / Rocko / Ralph
> 12. Dan Carter / Aaron Mauger
> 13. Umaga
> 14. Howlett
> 15. Cullen

> But expect the first lineup v the poms to look thus;

> 9. Lee
> 10. Spenser
> 11. Flemming / Rocko / Ralph
> 12. Dan Carter / Aaron Mauger
> 13. Umaga
> 14. Howlett
> 15. Macdonald

Have to say I'm starting to like Devine, but Ben Hurst will be the future,
reminds me alot of Bachop.  Add Tuitupou to the #12 mix and I think thats
going to be the mix of the backs working towards the RWC.

Tim

 
 
 

Why Umaga won't be in the AB's

Post by Kip » Sun, 11 May 2003 10:22:58

Quote:

>Have to say I'm starting to like Devine, but Ben Hurst will be the future,
>reminds me alot of Bachop.  Add Tuitupou to the #12 mix and I think thats
>going to be the mix of the backs working towards the RWC.

Get your TV set fixed, your comments are an embarrassment.
 
 
 

Why Umaga won't be in the AB's

Post by Bobs » Sun, 11 May 2003 11:15:23

Quote:


>>Have to say I'm starting to like Devine, but Ben Hurst will be the future,
>>reminds me alot of Bachop.  Add Tuitupou to the #12 mix and I think thats
>>going to be the mix of the backs working towards the RWC.

> Get your TV set fixed, your comments are an embarrassment.

If Spencer gets in the squad, you can bet Scabs *** stained keyboard
that Devine will too. Devine has really picked up his game in the last
year. He's got a snappy pass, good defence, and his best skill is
harrassing the other halfbacks. Spice was destroyed by him last night,
due to Devine being in his face all night.

Devine will be in the squad. Mark my words, Kip. It's a lock. I've never
been so sure of anything in my life.

--
Q. Did you hear that Hollywood is going to remake the exorcist?

A. Its about a mother who hires the Devil to get a priest out of her son.

 
 
 

Why Umaga won't be in the AB's

Post by Mr Sceb » Sun, 11 May 2003 13:14:50


Quote:
> I'm half expecting Scebes to come out with some bullshit about how the AB
> backline should look like

> 9. Meg Ryan
> 10. Mighty Mehrts
> 12. Dan Carter
> 13. Caleb Ralph
> 14. Joe Maddock
> 15. Scott Hamilton

Ah poor loser. Maybe you should pay more attention.

At the moment i would go for

9 Devine - though it pisses me off that Meg always comes right just before
selection
10 Mauger
11 Umaga
12 Carter
13 Ralph/Muliana
14 Howlett
15 MacDonald/Cullen

--
Mr Scebe
"Personally i think you're a ***ing idiot"
~Sean Connery in "The Rock"

 
 
 

Why Umaga won't be in the AB's

Post by Will Sutto » Sun, 11 May 2003 16:14:06

i hope you get to pick the abs
Quote:

> Once again he shows all the distribution skills of an NZ Post mail centre.
> While softcock's would have him at 2nd five, there's no ***ing way, and he
> will be lucky to make the team (there could be an opening on the wing if
> Jonah isn't available).

> Before you make a***out of yourself, watch the replay from last night, and
> look at the key difference between the sides. When the B'lose got the ball
> into the centres it was shovelled wide to the man in space. When the
> Blowhards got the ball, Umaga tried to play hero, and carry the ball
> himself, even though there was a man unmarked (often Nonu) outside him.

> And in case you think it's coincidence, watch any match that Umaga's played
> other than on the wing - and you will see the same thing time and again.

> --
> Mr Scebe
> "He doesn't win many of the close one's, does he"
> ~Grant Fox talking about Taine Randell

 
 
 

Why Umaga won't be in the AB's

Post by Kip » Mon, 12 May 2003 18:19:01

Quote:

>Devine will be in the squad. Mark my words, Kip. It's a lock. I've never
>been so sure of anything in my life.

Bobs, you are so BAD at calling this sort of shit the man is now
GUARANTEED never to be an All Black again. He's a ***ing
embarrassment anyway, the ***ing convict couldn't even fill out his
AB eligibility form without lying like the *** son of a bread
stealer we all know he is. Between that and him being Just Another
***ing journeyman Aucklander - there's no ***ing way he's getting
near another AB squad. Even if there are fifty players selected.
 
 
 

Why Umaga won't be in the AB's

Post by ward » Mon, 12 May 2003 21:44:40

Quote:

> 9 Devine - though it pisses me off that Meg always comes right just before
> selection
> 10 Mauger
> 11 Umaga

That's just ***ing stupid. Umaga will never play wing again. You saw
how underutilised Nonu was on the wing, it'd be the same with Umaga
 
 
 

Why Umaga won't be in the AB's

Post by Jake » Tue, 13 May 2003 09:23:18

Fare enough.
But if taking combinations into consideration and the fact that it would be
good to see who actually can cut it against a test side pre world cup.
Why not go the hole hog and stick  Umaga at second five,  Nonu at centre and
Cullen at full back.
Those that don't step up we no longer have to worry about.
After seeing Flemming play on Saturday I consider him a bit soft.

Jake

9. Lee

Quote:
> 10. Spenser
> 11. Flemming / Rocko / Ralph
> 12. Dan Carter / Aaron Mauger
> 13. Umaga
> 14. Howlett
> 15. Macdonald



Quote:

> >I'm half expecting Scebes to come out with some bullshit about how the AB
> >backline should look like

> >9. Meg Ryan
> >10. Mighty Mehrts
> >12. Dan Carter
> >13. Caleb Ralph
> >14. Joe Maddock
> >15. Scott Hamilton

> Close would look more like this;

> 9. Marshall
> 10. Mehrtens
> 11. Flemming / Rocko / Ralph
> 12. Dan Carter / Aaron Mauger
> 13. Umaga
> 14. Howlett
> 15. Cullen

> But expect the first lineup v the poms to look thus;

> 9. Lee
> 10. Spenser
> 11. Flemming / Rocko / Ralph
> 12. Dan Carter / Aaron Mauger
> 13. Umaga
> 14. Howlett
> 15. Macdonald