Aus deserving winners of Bledisloe Cup

Aus deserving winners of Bledisloe Cup

Post by Johan van Zyl - JVZ Systems » Tue, 04 Aug 1998 04:00:00


OK now I know



Quote:

>>Because we are going to introduce a system into world rugby which says that
>>no matter how good SA are, they will only ever be able to obtain a maximum
>>ranking of #2. There will be no logical excuse for this except maybe because
>>they are different.

>Of course there is a logical reason for this.

>It will really***the South Africans off :) What other reason would
>you need.

>...Tom

>====================

>"Better at" doesn't equal "Better than"

>======================

Johan van Zyl
Somerset West
South Africa

CW Standard 2002, FM2
 
 
 

Aus deserving winners of Bledisloe Cup

Post by Jonathan Chapma » Tue, 04 Aug 1998 04:00:00

Quote:

>:>PS I wonder if now is the time to investigate Australian citizenship.
>:
>:
>:Piece of***Rick. They gave one to me 'cos I've got a Kiwi wife. They
>:said. 'Course I know its because they need to widen the gene pool a bit.
>:
>In need of the recessive variety were we? :)

Aparently, yes - they need to cross-pollinate it with your sporting
"modesty" gene!

JC

 
 
 

Aus deserving winners of Bledisloe Cup

Post by muzw.. » Tue, 04 Aug 1998 04:00:00


Quote:

> Australia won the Beldisloe Cup and the Lancaster Park test match against New
> Zealand with a quality team performance, 27-23.

> New Zealand were considerably flattered by the close scoreline when their play
> was nowhere close to the Australians.

> Both teams improved on their last meeting but a gap still remains in the
> Australians' favour, and it is a telling one in that they have a working team
> pattern while the All Blacks remain 15 disconnected individuals. The way
> the points were scored reflected this.

> New Zealand started as they meant to continue, lacing in confidence, team
> combination and game plan. The plan seemed to be to kick as much possession
> to Australia as possible and ignore at all costs the team strength of
> talented three quarters. This plan worked a treat in allowing Australia to
> dominate most of the game, if they needed any help, playing as they were with
> a settled, confident, well worked team pattern.

> Bowman scored after 7 minutes after a suspect knock on, but then Welsh idiot
> referee Bevan missed knock ons all day, along with numerous other basic stuff,
> although he wasn't as pedantic as usual.

> Wilson and Cullen combined for a brilliant breakout in the 14th minute, but
> this was the tale of the NZ attack. Individuals showing their considerable
> talents in patches, but wthout support, lacking finish and nothing to do with
> the game plan.

> The All Black backline greatly reduced their error rate, but still looked
> slow, pedestrian and predictable. While Australia knew what they were doing
> and had the personnel to do it. Their finishing was superb. Neither team made
> many mistakes, both sets of forwards were well matched and did their jobs
> well. Any *** that New Zealand might have enjoyed in the loose in gone,
> Australia's loosies are their equal now. The difference was in the backs
> where Australia were clearly superior.

What were you saying about possession statistics last week Rick?
Something about how relevent they are to "forward ***"
was it?

Murray

-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://SportToday.org/; Create Your Own Free Member Forum

 
 
 

Aus deserving winners of Bledisloe Cup

Post by b.. » Tue, 04 Aug 1998 04:00:00


Quote:

> What were you saying about possession statistics last week Rick?
> Something about how relevent they are to "forward ***"
> was it?

No, I'm sorry Muzza. You'll have to be slightly less obtuse than this. What
are you talking about?

-- Rick Boyd

-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://SportToday.org/; Create Your Own Free Member Forum

 
 
 

Aus deserving winners of Bledisloe Cup

Post by Ferd » Tue, 04 Aug 1998 04:00:00

On Sun, 2 Aug 1998 23:55:58 +1000, "Ian Daley"
<<>I will always rate you guys as a pack of arseholes.>>

Not to be taken seriously, then.

 
 
 

Aus deserving winners of Bledisloe Cup

Post by Steve Turne » Tue, 04 Aug 1998 04:00:00

:
:>
:>:>PS I wonder if now is the time to investigate Australian citizenship.
:>:
:>:
:>:Piece of***Rick. They gave one to me 'cos I've got a Kiwi wife. They
:>:said. 'Course I know its because they need to widen the gene pool a bit.
:>:
:>In need of the recessive variety were we? :)
:
:Aparently, yes - they need to cross-pollinate it with your sporting
:"modesty" gene!
:
:JC

I know that a lot of Poms have sex with the lights out and with socks
on.......but now your telling me it's standard practice to re-produce by
fertilising spores? Explains many things :)

BTW I'm really enjoying Boyd and the 'neu gestapenfuhrer' Baron Von Zyl
going head to head, it probably deserves another 'accent attack' ;)
:
:
:

 
 
 

Aus deserving winners of Bledisloe Cup

Post by Grant Cairncros » Wed, 05 Aug 1998 04:00:00

Grant cairncross wrote;

 It's time New Zealand had a

Quote:
> complete overhaul of its rugby. It should start with its so-called
> supporters. Boring !
> --
> Nigel Evans

Yeah right Nigel.   Of course there's absolutlety no irony whatsoever in
this gratuitous advice coming from a Welshman is there?

Overhauling NZ's rugby you say?   Right they'll do it don't worry.
Meanwhile you do something about that *systemic mess* that is otherwise
laughingly known as Welsh rugby.

How many clubs have gone down the dunny in Wales in the last 2 months?
What's happened to WRU support of schoolboy rugby?
When did a Welsh team last beat a SH nation?
When did Wales last beat NZ?  Was it 1952 or 1953?  Certainly way before
I was born anyway.
What was the last France v Wales score?   50 something to *** all?
Will the new National stadium in Cardiff really be ready for the RWC
'99?  Or will the final be held in Edinburgh or Paris because the WRU
could'nt organise a***up in a brewery much less the RWC?

NZ may be down, true.  They'll bounce back and if they meet Wales next
year will probably deal to them yet again.   Meanwhile, Wales are just a
preposterous laughing stock.

The only thing I agree with you on is that the French are the team to
watch in the RWC '99.

Don't worry NZ rugby will look itself in the eye and bounce back.  

Looking after your own 'mouse-factory' in the meantime might not be a
bad idea before spraying advice around to other far more sucessful rugby
nations than the pathetic WRU.

Grant.

 
 
 

Aus deserving winners of Bledisloe Cup

Post by muzw.. » Wed, 05 Aug 1998 04:00:00


Quote:



> > What were you saying about possession statistics last week Rick?
> > Something about how relevent they are to "forward ***"
> > was it?

> No, I'm sorry Muzza. You'll have to be slightly less obtuse than this. What
> are you talking about?

Oh alright then --  without actually going back and looking at your previous
post -- IIRC you were again putting the loss down to poor form of your backs.

In the previous game against SA you latched on to the possession statistic
as an indication of how overwhelmingly *** the ABs pack was.

Yet, in th Christchurch test where the possession statistic was something
like 60-40 to Aus and the ABs conceded something like x2 the turnovers
you still cannot accept that it was the Aussie forwards who won us
the game. For whatever reason -- you've been quite magnanimous about
the Aussie backs -- but you refuse to concede that the Aussie forwards
are in fact very good as well.

I don't know why you do this. Oh well.

Murray

-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://SportToday.org/; Create Your Own Free Member Forum

 
 
 

Aus deserving winners of Bledisloe Cup

Post by Jonathan Chapma » Wed, 05 Aug 1998 04:00:00

Quote:


>:

>:>
>:>:>PS I wonder if now is the time to investigate Australian citizenship.
>:>:
>:>:
>:>:Piece of***Rick. They gave one to me 'cos I've got a Kiwi wife. They
>:>:said. 'Course I know its because they need to widen the gene pool a bit.
>:>:
>:>In need of the recessive variety were we? :)
>:
>:Aparently, yes - they need to cross-pollinate it with your sporting
>:"modesty" gene!
>:
>:JC

>I know that a lot of Poms have sex with the lights out and with socks
>on.......

Lights out, socks off, vest on, every third Sunday in the month whether I
need to or not....

No hang on, that's the bath....

Quote:
>but now your telling me it's standard practice to re-produce by
>fertilising spores? Explains many things :)

>BTW I'm really enjoying Boyd and the 'neu gestapenfuhrer' Baron Von Zyl
>going head to head, it probably deserves another 'accent attack' ;)

It certainly does, but Herr VZ confuses me. He sounds like a Seth Efrican,
but his sig. says that he lives in Zummerrrzzett.

Which is it to be??

JC

 
 
 

Aus deserving winners of Bledisloe Cup

Post by Sculle » Wed, 05 Aug 1998 04:00:00


Quote:




> > > Australia won the Beldisloe Cup and the Lancaster Park test match
> against New
> > > Zealand with a quality team performance, 27-23.

> > Gee, Rick, _you_ may be joking, but I scoured the fair city of Bunbury's
> > numerous hotels last night for Kiwis, and the two that I managed to
track down
> > BOTH played the "I'm an Aussie now!" card. One of them, a former
timber worker
> > from Tokoroa, even claimed that he had rung his Dad at home to gloat
over the
> > Wallaby victory. Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear...

> > Sculler

> John so you scoured the numerous hotels in Bunbury last night? dosn't
> sound like the Sculler I grew up with!!!

> Tomo

You're right Brian; these days I need to create a reason to go to the pub,
& 'Kiwi-bashing' (metaphorically speaking, of course) will do nicely. I
wonder if Rick is coming to Bunbury in the near future?

Sculler

 
 
 

Aus deserving winners of Bledisloe Cup

Post by Nigel Evan » Wed, 05 Aug 1998 04:00:00



Quote:

>Overhauling NZ's rugby you say?   Right they'll do it don't worry.
>Meanwhile you do something about that *systemic mess* that is otherwise
>laughingly known as Welsh rugby.

                       Nothing I can do !

Quote:

>How many clubs have gone down the dunny in Wales in the last 2 months?
>What's happened to WRU support of schoolboy rugby?
>When did a Welsh team last beat a SH nation?
>When did Wales last beat NZ?  Was it 1952 or 1953?  Certainly way before
>I was born anyway.
>What was the last France v Wales score?   50 something to *** all?
>Will the new National stadium in Cardiff really be ready for the RWC
>'99?  Or will the final be held in Edinburgh or Paris because the WRU
>could'nt organise a***up in a brewery much less the RWC?

               Don't you know any of the answers to these questions ?
Why haven't you asked me " why does a dog have black lips ? "

Quote:
>NZ may be down, true.  They'll bounce back and if they meet Wales next
>year will probably deal to them yet again.   Meanwhile, Wales are just a
>preposterous laughing stock.

                   Wales is not the topic of the discussion. There's no
point in you complaining about how bad we are. Stick to New Zealand,
please. That they are "down" is beyond doubt. That they will "bounce
back" is incredibly unlikely.

Quote:
>The only thing I agree with you on is that the French are the team to
>watch in the RWC '99

                     I'm glad you can be sensible at times.

Quote:

>Don't worry NZ rugby will look itself in the eye and bounce back.  

                     It will not ! You are going down the same path as
Wales only about eight years later.

Quote:

>Looking after your own 'mouse-factory' in the meantime might not be a
>bad idea before spraying advice around to other far more sucessful rugby
>nations than the pathetic WRU.

                      It is not my "mouse factory". If I had anything to
do with it, it would be organised better than it is at present.

--
Nigel Evans

 
 
 

Aus deserving winners of Bledisloe Cup

Post by Scott & Karen Web » Thu, 06 Aug 1998 04:00:00



Quote:
>I have found someone I can use this new word, that I learnt today, on.
>OZZYMORON.
>Very descriptive. well at least in this case.
>He is the one who ranks Oz No 1?

...SNIP...

Quote:
>My rankings:
>SA
>NZ
>France
>Aus
>England

>Johan van Zyl

Rankings or ***ings, Johan?  Haven't heard any obese women trilling lately.
Wouldn't enumerate your infant poultry just yet.  Roll on the rest of the
tri-series and the World Cup.  (Hope we can work out how to kick a ***y
field goal in the meantime!!)

Cheers!

Scott (Waddaya wanna be?  A Walla-wallaby!  P-U-U-U-SH!!!) Webb

 
 
 

Aus deserving winners of Bledisloe Cup

Post by b.. » Thu, 06 Aug 1998 04:00:00


Quote:

> Oh alright then --  without actually going back and looking at your previous
> post -- IIRC you were again putting the loss down to poor form of your backs.

That was one of the main reasons, yes.

Quote:

> In the previous game against SA you latched on to the possession statistic
> as an indication of how overwhelmingly *** the ABs pack was.

To some extent. I don't think I was saying that the AB pack was overwhelmingly
***, just that they had produced plenty of possession, certainly enough
for the backs to win the game with, if they had been capable (which they
weren't).

As I discussed subsequenlty with Ferdi, and I don't know whether you saw this
or not, these statistics can be misleading. Winning 20 rucks in a row doesn't
really mean much -- all it means is that the backs have failed to penetrate,
they've been stopped, and the forwards have to pile in and retreive the ball
-- AGAIN. And this should be quite easy to do unless the back in question has
stuffed up the positioning of the ball. Teams should have no trouble cleaning
out the ruck and maintaining their own possession unless they make a basic
mistake. So, it is turnovers in rucks and mauls, lineout wins against the
throw and tightheads in scrums that are the informative statistics, not
simple reatining your own possession.

The statistics I was really interested in were possession and territory. NZ
had enough of both, but failed to use either to their advantage.

Against Australia, also, NZ had plenty of both, enough to create actual
scoring chances. The difference was not in how the Australian forwards shut
possession off from New Zealand, which I would not agree that they did, but
in how the respective backs used their possession. Australia by using
McQueen's ACTesque set moves to score three well worked tries, and one good
support (if lucky bounce of the ball) try to Bowman. And New Zealand by
falling back on individual, opportunistic talent in Wilson and Cullen to
effect desperate, break-out attacks, which failed until the very end when
Cullen (from another individual effort) and Lomu (from a tap penalty) finally
and uncovincingly scored.

There's not too much wrong with the Australian forwards. They have improved.
But it is the Australian backs who are doing the damage. Their improvement at
half and midfield has been dramatic, to the point where I would say they are
the best in the world in the midfield, full stop, and the best on current
form in the halves.

-- Rick Boyd

-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://SportToday.org/; Create Your Own Free Member Forum

 
 
 

Aus deserving winners of Bledisloe Cup

Post by mur.. » Thu, 06 Aug 1998 04:00:00


[...]

Quote:
> As I discussed subsequenlty with Ferdi, and I don't know whether you saw this
> or not, these statistics can be misleading.

Agree

Quote:
> Winning 20 rucks in a row doesn't
> really mean much -- all it means is that the backs have failed to penetrate,
> they've been stopped, and the forwards have to pile in and retreive the ball
> -- AGAIN. And this should be quite easy to do unless the back in question has
> stuffed up the positioning of the ball. Teams should have no trouble cleaning
> out the ruck and maintaining their own possession unless they make a basic
> mistake. So, it is turnovers in rucks and mauls, lineout wins against the
> throw and tightheads in scrums that are the informative statistics, not
> simple reatining your own possession.

> The statistics I was really interested in were possession and territory. NZ
> had enough of both, but failed to use either to their advantage.

But they still overwhelmingly favoured Aus did they not? I don't have
the statistics at hand -- but I think  both possession and territory
favoured Aus by between 65/60 to 35/40. Correct me if I'm wrong.

[snip rest of Ricks argument about why the AB backs lost the game
for NZ]

OK -- you've explained yourself well. I now understand where you are
coming from. And now that I do -- I can say that I think we have a
fairly fundamental disagreement. That's OK -- that's what usenet it for
I suppose.

Let me try to tell you what I think the difference between aus and nz
are so far this year. Whlilst it's true that you need backs who can
take their opportunities -- you need the forwards who can give them
those opportunities.

Obvious and so far I think we agree. Where we disagree is in what
the forwards have to do to constitute creating those opportunites.
And this is where the ABs are failing at the moment. Just getting
possession is not enough -- they need to create space for the
backs as well.

How do they do this? -- by making sure that they are achieving
forward momentum and getting over the gainline -- quick release
of ball whilst the oppo backs are retreating and realigning hopefully
creates those all important couple of yards of space that your
backs can hopefully then exploit.

Ian Jones et al standing out in mid-field -- whilst the AB pack
fails to get any forward momentum with the ball -- does nothing
but further clutter the midfield and make it less likely that space
will be created. That's just one instance of where the AB pack
is going wrong.

Whilst you are probably correct to dismiss that figure of "20 phases"
of continuos play as being relatively meaningless -- the difference
between Burke's try and the AB's abundance of possession against
the Bokke -- was that the Aussie forwards _did_ -- for the most part
-- manage to get over the gainline every time they took the ball up.
The ABs defence held up very well -- but eventually -- all that
backtracking and realigning the defence lead to a mistake which
Larkham and Burke exploited beautifully,

In contrast -- the ABs committing only a couple of forwards at a
time to rucks and mauls -- recycling the ball -- but in doing so only
managing to crab accross the field -- is perfectly useless for your
talented backs. A flat and organised Australian defence was going
to eat up your backs all day in such circumstances -- Merhtens
was left with but one option -- to kick. It's no good continually
blaming the midfield -- they were dealt an ugly hand by your forwards.

The AB pack needs to get stuck back in where it counts and
create more space and momentum for your backs. S12 style
mini rucks and mauls are just not working at this level of rugby.

So there you have it. That's my assessment.

Cheers,

Murray

-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp   Create Your Own Free Member Forum

 
 
 

Aus deserving winners of Bledisloe Cup

Post by b.. » Thu, 06 Aug 1998 04:00:00



Quote:
> You're right Brian; these days I need to create a reason to go to the pub,
> & 'Kiwi-bashing' (metaphorically speaking, of course) will do nicely. I
> wonder if Rick is coming to Bunbury in the near future?

> Sculler

I'll let you know after the third and completely irrelevent Bledisloe Cup
match.

-- Rick Boyd

-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp   Create Your Own Free Member Forum