NZ North vs South Game Thread

[ScarfaceClaw]

Not sure how the south won that. Thought the Norf were the better team.

[Dan54]

No try for Barrett surely. Was never back for that line out.

I agree he wasn't back if lineout was formed, but there were also 2-3 South players inside the 10m (Whitelock was one) so not sure why he just didn't make them throw it again or something.

[Wignu]

Not sure how the south won that. Thought the Norf were the better team.

The North certainly didn't help themselves with Clarke pushing the ball back in for the South and that lineout at the end ....... . The South took both chances given to them so fair fucks for that.

[Carter's Choice]

No try for Barrett surely. Was never back for that line out.

I agree he wasn't back if lineout was formed, but there were also 2-3 South players inside the 10m (Whitelock was one) so not sure why he just didn't make them throw it again or something.

The lineout was 5 metres out from the SI tryline, so their entire team was inside the 10m. Did you actually watch the game?

[Carter's Choice]

Not sure how the south won that. Thought the Norf were the better team.

We watched a different game. The SI had a fair try disallowed, and then a non-try given against them and still won the match. The NI had a massive advantage when it came to players to select from, but lost because they play dumb rugby and lack the heart and courage of their Southern opponents.

[Wild Beef]

Are we arguing over an ABs trial?

[Carter's Choice]

Are we arguing over an ABs trial?

Nothing wrong with arguing about a game of Rugby. In fact, I can't think of anything more noble to argue about.

[Wild Beef]

Well I can’t argue with that.

[stunt_cunt]

Thought that was a great game and a great finish. Had some quality moments spread through it fir a couple scratch teams.

[Not_Couch]

Not sure how the south won that. Thought the Norf were the better team.

We watched a different game. The SI had a fair try disallowed, and then a non-try given against them and still won the match. The NI had a massive advantage when it came to players to select from, but lost because they play dumb rugby and lack the heart and courage of their Southern opponents.

The North and ref took it easy on the south, the fact they didn't start Aaron Smith is evidence of this, clearly it was a training drill for these players

[Carter's Choice]

Not sure how the south won that. Thought the Norf were the better team.

We watched a different game. The SI had a fair try disallowed, and then a non-try given against them and still won the match. The NI had a massive advantage when it came to players to select from, but lost because they play dumb rugby and lack the heart and courage of their Southern opponents.

The North and ref took it easy on the south, the fact they didn't start Aaron Smith is evidence of this, clearly it was a training drill for these players

Sounds like Loser talk mate. We won you lost, and that makes me so happy. Despite the NI having 80% of pro level players in NZ to choose from.

[Slarty FizzyO]

I'd like to see the following:

9. Smith
10. Mo'unga
11. Bridge
12. ALB
13. Goodhue
14. Jordan
15. BB

21. TJP
22. Ioane
23. Jordie

The problem with that backline is its filled with midgets and apart from ALB and Goodhue poor defenders.

[Not_Couch]

We watched a different game. The SI had a fair try disallowed, and then a non-try given against them and still won the match. The NI had a massive advantage when it came to players to select from, but lost because they play dumb rugby and lack the heart and courage of their Southern opponents.

The North and ref took it easy on the south, the fact they didn't start Aaron Smith is evidence of this, clearly it was a training drill for these players

Sounds like Loser talk mate. We won you lost, and that makes me so happy. Despite the NI having 80% of pro level players in NZ to choose from.

80% of new Zealand could care less who won that game. Clearly you're in the minority

[Certain Navigator]

Not sure how the south won that. Thought the Norf were the better team.

Did you only watch one team?

The South dominated territory, possession (to a lesser extent) and penalties, had a legitimate try disallowed, and squandered several other chances. By contrast, the North capitalised on most of the few chances they got.

[Certain Navigator]

The North and ref took it easy on the south, the fact they didn't start Aaron Smith is evidence of this, clearly it was a training drill for these players

Sounds like Loser talk mate. We won you lost, and that makes me so happy. Despite the NI having 80% of pro level players in NZ to choose from.

80% of new Zealand could care less who won that game. Clearly you're in the minority

So why are you making such a fuss then?

[Enzedder]

I thought the South were the better side - forwards definitely ahead and the backs more structured (their combinations showed). North had more flair but razzle dazzle is easily beat with structure if the sides are similar.

[Jb1981]

I'd like to see the following:

9. Smith
10. Mo'unga
11. Bridge
12. ALB
13. Goodhue
14. Jordan
15. BB

21. TJP
22. Ioane
23. Jordie

The problem with that backline is its filled with midgets and apart from ALB and Goodhue poor defenders.

I like the balance of that backline and bench. It gives plenty of coverage and I disagree that it would be light weight or defensively weak. My only question would be whether Jordie would warrant the starting spot over Beauden Barrett.

[Gumboot]

Not sure how the south won that. Thought the Norf were the better team.

Did you only watch one team?

The South dominated territory, possession (to a lesser extent) and penalties, had a legitimate try disallowed, and squandered several other chances. By contrast, the North capitalised on most of the few chances they got.

I didn't hear if the ref explained his offside call. The only reason that seems to make sense is that Laulala momentarily detached from the maul and was marginally in front of Taylor when he re-attached.

@2:16

[mrbrownstone]

I'd like to see the following:

9. Smith
10. Mo'unga
11. Bridge
12. ALB
13. Goodhue
14. Jordan
15. BB

21. TJP
22. Ioane
23. Jordie

The problem with that backline is its filled with midgets and apart from ALB and Goodhue poor defenders.

I like the balance of that backline and bench. It gives plenty of coverage and I disagree that it would be light weight or defensively weak. My only question would be whether Jordie would warrant the starting spot over Beauden Barrett.

On form, yes. But on talent is still think BB is a top 10 player in the world, and our most proven & experienced back at test level (aside from Snecky). Like McCaw or Nonu before, I wouldn't drop him on SR form, only if his test form warrants it.

[Wild Beef]

Jordie might get wing over Jordan if they want his kicking boot on the field.

[Kiwias]

The problem with that backline is its filled with midgets and apart from ALB and Goodhue poor defenders.

I like the balance of that backline and bench. It gives plenty of coverage and I disagree that it would be light weight or defensively weak. My only question would be whether Jordie would warrant the starting spot over Beauden Barrett.

On form, yes. But on talent is still think BB is a top 10 player in the world, and our most proven & experienced back at test level (aside from Snecky). Like McCaw or Nonu before, I wouldn't drop him on SR form, only if his test form warrants it.

I like that backline. R Ioane has not shown he is clearly the best 13 in the land, whereas Goodhue/ALB are the incumbent mid-field. All I want from Foster is a commitment to decide on his best combination as early as possible and stick with it. Say what you like about Hansen but in the 2012~2015 period he stayed with Nonu/C Smith and SBW on the bench wherever possible. That is one major factor in our 2015 victory.

[Wild Beef]

Sticking with single combinations early on is dangerous. They tried that last time with BB and he was clearly surpassed by Mo’unga. Then there’s always the chance of injuries.

[Kiwias]

Sticking with single combinations early on is dangerous. They tried that last time with BB and he was clearly surpassed by Mo’unga. Then there’s always the chance of injuries.

Start with the best proven combination and only change it if there is a clearly superior candidate. R Ioane can get decent playtime off the bench to prove himself. BB was surpassed by Mo'unga way before Hansen bit the bullet, and that was really only because DMac got badly injured.

[Wild Beef]

Then you a contradicting yourself when you say Foster needs to pick his best combination and stick with it.

[Jb1981]

Watching the highlights is reiterating the number of big plays Sam Whitelock made and how he pulled the team in when they went down. They might have been scratch teams but that was a real follow me leadership display.

[Carter's Choice]

Watching the highlights is reiterating the number of big plays Sam Whitelock made and how he pulled the team in when they went down. They might have been scratch teams but that was a real follow me leadership display.

Sam Whitelock is by FAR the best captain in NZ at the moment. The fact that Sam Cane is going to be leading the AB's into the future and not him is a travesty. Its actually a farce.

[Wild Beef]

Last year, after the England game, I would have completely disagreed. A lot has happened since then. Whitelock has been immense.

[Jimmy Smallsteps]

Not sure how the south won that. Thought the Norf were the better team.

Watch the replay, but just focus on the packs.

Remind yourself where the game is won, and administer yourself a stiff uppercut.

[Jimmy Smallsteps]

Not sure how the south won that. Thought the Norf were the better team.

We watched a different game. The SI had a fair try disallowed, and then a non-try given against them and still won the match. The NI had a massive advantage when it came to players to select from, but lost because they play dumb rugby and lack the heart and courage of their Southern opponents.

Eggs crackerly. The South had a classic rolling maul try denied for fun, while the North didn't actually ground their ball under the sticks. Paul Williams does not strike me as the cream of the NZ refereeing crop.

[Dan54]

No try for Barrett surely. Was never back for that line out.

I agree he wasn't back if lineout was formed, but there were also 2-3 South players inside the 10m (Whitelock was one) so not sure why he just didn't make them throw it again or something.

The lineout was 5 metres out from the SI tryline, so their entire team was inside the 10m. Did you actually watch the game?

You don't really understand rugby laws do you ? They could be inside the 10m but a couple of them were standing on the wrong side of the tryline? Yes I watched the game and suggest you do to. If the lineout had formed everyone from South that wasn't actually in lineout should of been BEHIND the tryline. The only argument is maybe they were part of lineout, but was a pretty crokked lineout. Not a biggie or anything, just as I watched replays I thought it was no try, but perhaps another throw (to South again) was a bit better option.

[Carter's Choice]

Not sure how the south won that. Thought the Norf were the better team.

We watched a different game. The SI had a fair try disallowed, and then a non-try given against them and still won the match. The NI had a massive advantage when it came to players to select from, but lost because they play dumb rugby and lack the heart and courage of their Southern opponents.

Eggs crackerly. The South had a classic rolling maul try denied for fun, while the North didn't actually ground their ball under the sticks. Paul Williams does not strike me as the cream of the NZ refereeing crop.

The rolling maul decision was a farce. The referee actually ruled that the maul had been stopped and then became a 2nd maul. It was a terrible decision. Watching Ted then trying to justify the ruling because Laulala, who was behind the ball, shifted his bind was hilarious. Players behind the ball join in mauls an change binds all the time.

[Jimmy Smallsteps]

We watched a different game. The SI had a fair try disallowed, and then a non-try given against them and still won the match. The NI had a massive advantage when it came to players to select from, but lost because they play dumb rugby and lack the heart and courage of their Southern opponents.

Eggs crackerly. The South had a classic rolling maul try denied for fun, while the North didn't actually ground their ball under the sticks. Paul Williams does not strike me as the cream of the NZ refereeing crop.

The rolling maul decision was a farce. The referee actually ruled that the maul had been stopped and then became a 2nd maul. It was a terrible decision. Watching Ted then trying to justify the ruling because Laulala, who was behind the ball, shifted his bind was hilarious. Players behind the ball join in mauls an change binds all the time.

Paul Williams flat out sharted the bed. Then gave it a second blast when refusing to even refer the North try under the sticks to the TMO despite being implored to do so by South captain Sam Whitelock.

Not a test referee's ringpiece.

[Kiwias]

Then you a contradicting yourself when you say Foster needs to pick his best combination and stick with it.

I did not think it needed explaining that I did not mean he should stick with his best combination regardless of the form of those players and the players challenging for the position.

[Magpie26]

We watched a different game. The SI had a fair try disallowed, and then a non-try given against them and still won the match. The NI had a massive advantage when it came to players to select from, but lost because they play dumb rugby and lack the heart and courage of their Southern opponents.

Eggs crackerly. The South had a classic rolling maul try denied for fun, while the North didn't actually ground their ball under the sticks. Paul Williams does not strike me as the cream of the NZ refereeing crop.

The rolling maul decision was a farce. The referee actually ruled that the maul had been stopped and then became a 2nd maul. It was a terrible decision. Watching Ted then trying to justify the ruling because Laulala, who was behind the ball, shifted his bind was hilarious. Players behind the ball join in mauls an change binds all the time.

In real time I thought it looked a bit suspect, watching it on replay the first time I thought it was good, on second view I thought that they did step across......

[Steve]

Maul was a farce call.

[JPNZ]

Forgot my login password on my phone over the weekend but enjoyed the game a lot.

Maul try was incorrect call, should have been awarded. Paul Williams in general was pretty poor if he's the best NZ ref then we are in trouble. Sanders had a great game for his 1st at this level, big future. Smith added a lot to the North when he came on, great game. Would be great to see this game played again next year too

[Gumboot]

Maul try was incorrect call, should have been awarded.

I'm still unclear about how the ref explained it. Did you hear what he said?

[Steve]

Maul try was incorrect call, should have been awarded.

I'm still unclear about how the ref explained it. Did you hear what he said?

He claimed it was stationary which was patently untrue.

[JPNZ]

Maul try was incorrect call, should have been awarded.

I'm still unclear about how the ref explained it. Did you hear what he said?

From memory, he said that the maul had stopped (it clearly hadn't) and therefore having maul players in front of the ball carrier was a truck and trailer obstruction situation.

[Steve]

Maul try was incorrect call, should have been awarded.

I'm still unclear about how the ref explained it. Did you hear what he said?

From memory, he said that the maul had stopped (it clearly hadn't) and therefore having maul players in front of the ball carrier was a truck and trailer obstruction situation.

in a nutshell