Aussie look good so far

-Dr.J- · 24th September 2007, 15:13

Hmmmm not good

Very professional team as always, doing the right stuff at the right times

Again struggling for handling but looking better than I thought they would in their build up

Certainly better than the Saffas

Concerning

wugambino · 24th September 2007, 15:21

yep you are a fool to write Australia off when it comes to any sort of sporting event. they seem to lift to play the AB's and are a lot smarter side.

In saying that take away gregan / larkham or mortlock and they are in the stoop .... and they have the worst front row in world rugby.

Ab · 24th September 2007, 16:49

There are only two areas in which Australia is impressive, and those are "Latham" and most importantly "Gregan-Larkham/Barnes-Mortlock". The Australian set pieces are crap, the scrum is the laughing-stock of world rugby, Smith and Waugh are shadows of what they once were, and the wings might as well not be there. But Latham can counter-attack from anywhere, and the Australian midfield is strong at exactly the point where the All Blacks are weakest. That scares the shit out of me.

_Incubus_ · 24th September 2007, 18:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ab

There are only two areas in which Australia is impressive, and those are "Latham" and most importantly "Gregan-Larkham/Barnes-Mortlock". The Australian set pieces are crap, the scrum is the laughing-stock of world rugby, Smith and Waugh are shadows of what they once were, and the wings might as well not be there. But Latham can counter-attack from anywhere, and the Australian midfield is strong at exactly the point where the All Blacks are weakest. That scares the shit out of me.

Agreed...George Smith is like Samson after his hair cut...

slippers · 24th September 2007, 18:24

I don't think they look that good.. Pretty average really.

Of course you can't write them off, but I'm not worried.

Helious · 24th September 2007, 20:17

Without reading a complete post in this thread, bar the first few lines of what the author wrote. One thing I'll give Aussie is, they can step their game up when it matters and they know, they fuckin' know that when it comes to the games that matters, that's when they do it.

I envisage us finishing this tournament with at least 50 points clear of Aussie, but mark my words, we'll be in the final with them and again, they'll step their shit up(and so will we) and they MIGHT, just might be victorious due to this fact.

I hate admitting it, but fuck they're strong and statistically, judging on position held-by players, we should win. But overall gameplay and completion of set plays under pressure sees Aussie slightly ahead. Cunts.

caffiend · 24th September 2007, 21:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by -Dr.J-

Certainly better than the Saffas

I disagree. SA vs England was the best overall performance of the cup so far IMO. And you can't go by the Tonga game. It was an SA C-side starting line-up, you saw what happened as soon as guys like Matfield came on in the 2nd half, and Tonga played out of their skins and were very opportunistic against an unassuming SA.

I still think the 1st string SA team with Schalk Burger back in the line-up is the danger squad.

That being said, we should be concerned about Aussie. Just more concerned about SA. None of the NH teams are even remotely worrying.

buckies · 24th September 2007, 22:42

Saffas don't have depth like us to each position, but their #1 team is the greatest threat to the ABs. I don't think that can be disputed as they have good players all over the park, and with the refs not penalising lazy fat fuckin forwards, and preventing rucking etc, they'll just kill the ball at every breakdown and piss up our back line.

Aussie could win, but only if Henry lets them. If he continues to play Smith and Howlett instead of Toeva/Mils and Roko then we're fucked.

Pretty unlikely Aussie will be in the final with us Helious. It's looking like NZ vs AUS & SA vs ARG for the semi finals thus far.

andre · 25th September 2007, 06:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by buckies

Pretty unlikely Aussie will be in the final with us Helious. It's looking like NZ vs AUS & SA vs ARG for the semi finals thus far.

not just unlikely...it's impossible for us to play the wallabies in the final...the possibilities are :
- meeting them in the semis
- them losing to tonga/england (so we'd play the winner in the semis)
- us losing to france/argentina/ireland (whatever!)
so we'll most likely be up against the boks...assuming gregan doesn't get another opportunity to mouth off "4 more years boys".
still, i hope the ABs manage to make a big improvement on their handling before facing the aussies, they won't let sloppy mistakes go unpunished. and carter better be on song too...he threw away 4 conversions and a penalty on sunday!

Helious · 25th September 2007, 08:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by buckies

Pretty unlikely Aussie will be in the final with us Helious. It's looking like NZ vs AUS & SA vs ARG for the semi finals thus far.

Yeah cheers bro, about 30mins after I posted I actually studied the Fixtures and saw what was blatently apparent :p

My brother would slap me for such a mistake - haha.

Rince · 25th September 2007, 09:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by caffiend

we should be concerned about Aussie. Just more concerned about SA. None of the NH teams are even remotely worrying.

QTMFT

blueballs · 25th September 2007, 13:59

nz could lose to romania and scotland beat italy by like 200 points, wouldn't nz be able to meet australia in the final then?

Ard Righ · 25th September 2007, 14:58

The Wallabies have put in a few good performances, and so have the Springboks. But at this stage of the tournament, all the teams should be worrying about avoiding injury, and concentrate of the basics.

It doesn't matter if we look good beating Romania by 100 points if we lose 2 of our top players for the rest of the tournament. Why would Henry put Mils and Toeava out in the field to potentially take out the backups we have for centre/fullback ?!!

Toeava has had some game time. I can't remember how many minutes Mils has played so far, but I disagree we need to start those 2 before the quarters.

Ab · 25th September 2007, 21:05

The only team that's gonna beat the All Blacks is the All Blacks themselves. If they play to the standard we know they can, no other team has a hope in hell. If they fall apart without a B plan like we know they can, any other strong team can win.

Heresy · 26th September 2007, 22:04

uh oh.

Freak injury rules Larkham out of quarterfinal: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/event/stor...ectid=10465990

Thats gotta suck, that sounds horrid...

(i am secretly happy about this)

Ard Righ · 27th September 2007, 12:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by Heresy

uh oh.

Freak injury rules Larkham out of quarterfinal

Barnes has been reasonable enough. Who are the Wallabies looking at playing in the quarters ?

Heresy · 27th September 2007, 21:11

Tonga or England

Yeah he's been reasonable against low-quality opponents like Wales and Japan. Put them up against some decent pressure and he might falter, ala Francois Steyn. Still, Larkham could be fixed come semi final time.

Ab · 30th September 2007, 03:04

The way Australia are playing against Canada, I'd put money on the Sacred Heart netball team to beat them.

Helious · 30th September 2007, 12:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ab

I'd put money on the Sacred Heart netball team to beat them.

haha

24th September 2007, 15:13	#1
-Dr.J-	Aussie look good so far Hmmmm not good Very professional team as always, doing the right stuff at the right times Again struggling for handling but looking better than I thought they would in their build up Certainly better than the Saffas Concerning __________________ J

24th September 2007, 15:21	#2
wugambino Electric Boogaloo	yep you are a fool to write Australia off when it comes to any sort of sporting event. they seem to lift to play the AB's and are a lot smarter side. In saying that take away gregan / larkham or mortlock and they are in the stoop .... and they have the worst front row in world rugby.

24th September 2007, 16:49	#3
Ab A mariachi ogre snorkel	There are only two areas in which Australia is impressive, and those are "Latham" and most importantly "Gregan-Larkham/Barnes-Mortlock". The Australian set pieces are crap, the scrum is the laughing-stock of world rugby, Smith and Waugh are shadows of what they once were, and the wings might as well not be there. But Latham can counter-attack from anywhere, and the Australian midfield is strong at exactly the point where the All Blacks are weakest. That scares the shit out of me.

24th September 2007, 18:24	#5
slippers	I don't think they look that good.. Pretty average really. Of course you can't write them off, but I'm not worried.

24th September 2007, 20:17	#6
Helious	Without reading a complete post in this thread, bar the first few lines of what the author wrote. One thing I'll give Aussie is, they can step their game up when it matters and they know, they fuckin' know that when it comes to the games that matters, that's when they do it. I envisage us finishing this tournament with at least 50 points clear of Aussie, but mark my words, we'll be in the final with them and again, they'll step their shit up(and so will we) and they MIGHT, just might be victorious due to this fact. I hate admitting it, but fuck they're strong and statistically, judging on position held-by players, we should win. But overall gameplay and completion of set plays under pressure sees Aussie slightly ahead. Cunts.

24th September 2007, 22:42	#8
buckies	Saffas don't have depth like us to each position, but their #1 team is the greatest threat to the ABs. I don't think that can be disputed as they have good players all over the park, and with the refs not penalising lazy fat fuckin forwards, and preventing rucking etc, they'll just kill the ball at every breakdown and piss up our back line. Aussie could win, but only if Henry lets them. If he continues to play Smith and Howlett instead of Toeva/Mils and Roko then we're fucked. Pretty unlikely Aussie will be in the final with us Helious. It's looking like NZ vs AUS & SA vs ARG for the semi finals thus far.

25th September 2007, 13:59	#12
blueballs	nz could lose to romania and scotland beat italy by like 200 points, wouldn't nz be able to meet australia in the final then?

25th September 2007, 14:58	#13
Ard Righ	The Wallabies have put in a few good performances, and so have the Springboks. But at this stage of the tournament, all the teams should be worrying about avoiding injury, and concentrate of the basics. It doesn't matter if we look good beating Romania by 100 points if we lose 2 of our top players for the rest of the tournament. Why would Henry put Mils and Toeava out in the field to potentially take out the backups we have for centre/fullback ?!! Toeava has had some game time. I can't remember how many minutes Mils has played so far, but I disagree we need to start those 2 before the quarters.

25th September 2007, 21:05	#14
Ab A mariachi ogre snorkel	The only team that's gonna beat the All Blacks is the All Blacks themselves. If they play to the standard we know they can, no other team has a hope in hell. If they fall apart without a B plan like we know they can, any other strong team can win.

26th September 2007, 22:04	#15
Heresy yawn.	uh oh. Freak injury rules Larkham out of quarterfinal: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/event/stor...ectid=10465990 Thats gotta suck, that sounds horrid... (i am secretly happy about this)

27th September 2007, 21:11	#17
Heresy yawn.	Tonga or England Yeah he's been reasonable against low-quality opponents like Wales and Japan. Put them up against some decent pressure and he might falter, ala Francois Steyn. Still, Larkham could be fixed come semi final time.

30th September 2007, 03:04	#18
Ab A mariachi ogre snorkel	The way Australia are playing against Canada, I'd put money on the Sacred Heart netball team to beat them.