Spiffy wrote: ↑Sat Nov 19, 2022 7:57 pm
Faz gets a knock, Smith starts playing like the boss man, and England nick the draw.
I think that's imposing a narrative that wasn't there. Farrell was a key part of the transformation in attack in the last 10 minutes and played 10 with pulling the ball back to Smith on several occasions (which, with a less pleasing result, would usually be interpreted on here as him "playing like the boss man" and stymying Smith).
I think Ribbans was a huge factor. Ran hard onto the ball (most notably for a 15m run up for the crash ball before Stuart's second) and he sort of dragged the rest of the forwards with him. Amazing how different we looked with players looking to run aggressively and set a platform.
Mellsblue wrote: ↑Sat Nov 19, 2022 8:00 pm
Even Gatland asking if Farrell stymies Smith!!! and then Carter ruins it. Never watch your heroes in post match analysis.
Stymying is basically the issue with this England set up. Just have two flankers and two locks. Pray for a 12 appear. I understand the idea to see if one can experiment based on the abilities of a few outstanding individuals but this crop if players isn't skilled enough or smart enough. I really hope that from now on they just work on simplifying.
Also, agree with puja that Farrell wasn't the problem today. Shouldn't be captain but there were bigger issues elsewhere.
Eddie: “Ref hard on the attacking ruck so it (Smith accepting the draw) was the right thing to do”. In hindsight, and for literally the first time ever, I may be wrong. #theraynalshow
I'm wondering would the result of those cute kicks we kept putting in would have been if we'd been up against French or South African outside backs (except le Roux, because he is a flappy annoying kok)?
Spiffy wrote: ↑Sat Nov 19, 2022 7:57 pm
Faz gets a knock, Smith starts playing like the boss man, and England nick the draw.
I think that's imposing a narrative that wasn't there. Farrell was a key part of the transformation in attack in the last 10 minutes and played 10 with pulling the ball back to Smith on several occasions (which, with a less pleasing result, would usually be interpreted on here as him "playing like the boss man" and stymying Smith).
I think Ribbans was a huge factor. Ran hard onto the ball (most notably for a 15m run up for the crash ball before Stuart's second) and he sort of dragged the rest of the forwards with him. Amazing how different we looked with players looking to run aggressively and set a platform.
Puja
Statement performance from Ribbans. He was fine last weekend but this was the type of performance that should be making Eddie sit up and take notice. Hill was ineffective but Ribbans was quite the opposite.
Stuart and dare I say it Youngs also made great impact from the bench. England suddenly had some momentum and Smith really turned up in the second 40, Steward was fantastic and when he started coming onto the ball at pace it was exactly what we needed. Of course all the England tries were scored after the introduction of Guy Porter so we know the real catalyst.
Mellsblue wrote: ↑Sat Nov 19, 2022 8:59 pm
Porter the catalyst to an unsatisfactory draw? Sounds about right.
Isn't it the first time NZ haven't won after leading by 14 points or more at half time or did I mishear that stat? So catalyst for record breaking result?
morepork wrote: ↑Sat Nov 19, 2022 8:50 pm
I'm wondering would the result of those cute kicks we kept putting in would have been if we'd been up against French or South African outside backs (except le Roux, because he is a flappy annoying kok)?
I’m less worried about those. You could argue they were an effective tactic against a flat defence. But I see you point.
I’m more concerned by yet another rabbit in headlights period in a match we shouldn’t have been close to losing.
Mellsblue wrote: ↑Sat Nov 19, 2022 8:59 pm
Porter the catalyst to an unsatisfactory draw? Sounds about right.
Isn't it the first time NZ haven't won after leading by 14 points or more at half time or did I mishear that stat? So catalyst for record breaking result?
Porter catalyst for breaking of record that leaves everyone underwhelmed. Sounds about right.
There are no positives here. Not for anyone. We are drowning in a molasses of mundane mediocrity. Best not to try and fight it. Just let the tide bring you back to shore.
Question for the NZ supporters. If your side had been in England’s situation, ie had the upper hand and with a one-man advantage, would they have booted the ball into touch to get a draw?
francoisfou wrote: ↑Sat Nov 19, 2022 9:44 pm
Question for the NZ supporters. If your side had been in England’s situation, ie had the upper hand and with a one-man advantage, would they have booted the ball into touch to get a draw?
Probably would have run it. In the past that would have been good. But if you rewind 5 mins to Perenara putting in an aimless kick with about a minute and a half left rather than letting the forwards kill the game off you may see that NZ’s tactics aren’t exactly to be trusted this year.
francoisfou wrote: ↑Sat Nov 19, 2022 9:44 pm
Question for the NZ supporters. If your side had been in England’s situation, ie had the upper hand and with a one-man advantage, would they have booted the ball into touch to get a draw?
Probably would have run it. In the past that would have been good. But if you rewind 5 mins to Perenara putting in an aimless kick with about a minute and a half left rather than letting the forwards kill the game off you may see that NZ’s tactics aren’t exactly to be trusted this year.
Ref was whistle happy. NZ had already killed a minute I'd have good odds on the ref calling a sealing off penalty before blowing the full time whistle.
Mellsblue wrote: ↑Sat Nov 19, 2022 8:11 pm
Eddie: “Ref hard on the attacking ruck so it (Smith accepting the draw) was the right thing to do”. In hindsight, and for literally the first time ever, I may be wrong. #theraynalshow
Although, having said that, weren't NZ down to 13 players at that point with Perenara off injured? Not saying that we couldn't've fucked it up if we'd tried to go, but it was as good a chance as we were likely to get.
Mellsblue wrote: ↑Sat Nov 19, 2022 8:59 pm
Porter the catalyst to an unsatisfactory draw? Sounds about right.
Isn't it the first time NZ haven't won after leading by 14 points or more at half time or did I mishear that stat? So catalyst for record breaking result?
Porter catalyst for breaking of record that leaves everyone underwhelmed. Sounds about right.
In defence of Porter, I have to say he did a very decent job when he came on. Made about 4-5 quality interventions in our successful 10 minutes and didn't make any mistakes. Not saying that I'll be happy with him inevitably starting next week, but thought he went well.
francoisfou wrote: ↑Sat Nov 19, 2022 9:44 pm
Question for the NZ supporters. If your side had been in England’s situation, ie had the upper hand and with a one-man advantage, would they have booted the ball into touch to get a draw?
Basically because NZ have the skills and more importantly the belief that they would be able to execute it. England have neither at the minute (if we ever had).
Remember how much grief Robshaw and Lancaster got for "going for it" against Wales rather than taking the draw in 2015?!
Lawrence Dallaglio obviously didn’t enjoy The Raynal Show given he’s moaned about the 28(!) penalties awarded; however, he can’t have been paying that much attention as he thought the ref was Andrew Brace. #justiceformathieu
I was quite drunk watching it live, and it felt soul-destroyingly bad for 70 minutes (partly due to the fact that every time we did something we'll we immediately cocked it up) and then so insane for 10 minutes it was impossible to understand.
I've watched it back sober this morning, and it seems to be exactly the same. Happy to note that every time we did make a mistake we stored it in the memory banks for repetition later on when we "needed" it. The last 10 minutes shouldn't be allowed to mask the fact that the first 70 was horrifyingly bad.
