Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Harry Stottle

NZ v Australia

Recommended Posts

20 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

I'm pretty sure I didn't say 'questionable ability', just not as scary as we have seen on the wings for New Zealand and Australia in the past.  Anyway, on your question.

Rapana is a strong dummy half runner but he can be undisciplined at times and has an error or two in him.  Maumalo is a good strong wing with a good work ethic.

I would have Mcgilvary above both of these as he has both the work ethic and strength to help out his team returning the ball from their own half and his finishing is first class.  Makinson is not fully tested as you say but he is very capable of beating a man and is a great finisher.

Of the four, I would have McGilvary and one other and if that one other is Makinson then yes I would take them above the Kiwi wings.

Thanks for the reply Dunbar, I hope you are prooved to be right, but just to throw the proverbial spanner in there, the level that the NRL lad's play in week after week is closer to the level of test football than our own who perform in the SL, it is a step up in class and intensity, you may not agree with that, *a lot of people don't, but that would be your prerogative, from your answer to make the comments you do about those individuals you obviously watch the NRL, the point I make is that some have a tendancy in not comparing player's in likewise situations.

* Only last week over a pint and talking to an old sparring partner, the subject of Zac Hardacre came up, my old mate proclaimed he is the best full back in the world, I said he did not make such a good impression in Aus, and if I thought about it I could probably quickly name 10 NRL fullbacks better than he is, "rubbish and ah but" he replied it's because the Aussies don't like us and didnt give him a fair crack, I asked him did he watch the NRL, "no, but I know he is the best"

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, northamptoncougar said:

Who’s our left centre? The kiwi right one is immense.

Joseph Manu is the Kiwi centre and has been a revelation for the Roosters while Latrell Mitchell has been missing. NRL commentators have been banging on about Mitchell being the new Greg Inglis and it's a fair call. Think we could be looking at the new Sonny Bill in Joseph Manu. I know it's a big call but he seems to get better with every game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Thanks for the reply Dunbar, I hope you are prooved to be right, but just to throw the proverbial spanner in there, the level that the NRL lad's play in week after week is closer to the level of test football than our own who perform in the SL, it is a step up in class and intensity, you may not agree with that, *a lot of people don't, but that would be your prerogative, from your answer to make the comments you do about those individuals you obviously watch the NRL, the point I make is that some have a tendancy in not comparing player's in likewise situations.

* Only last week over a pint and talking to an old sparring partner, the subject of Zac Hardacre came up, my old mate proclaimed he is the best full back in the world, I said he did not make such a good impression in Aus, and if I thought about it I could probably quickly name 10 NRL fullbacks better than he is, "rubbish and ah but" he replied it's because the Aussies don't like us and didnt give him a fair crack, I asked him did he watch the NRL, "no, but I know he is the best"

The NRL is a stronger competition than the Super League, there is no doubt about that.  I thoroughly enjoy watching the NRL and this year I have watched on average five games a week (and sometimes all of them!).

But I think you do have to try and treat each player on merit.  Yes, the NRL is stronger but every time McGilvary has been asked to step up and play test footy he has excelled and always looked like the world class player he is.  I see Makinson play and I think his skill set and abilities would be transferable to the NRL and he would do well... he certainly made his mark against an NRL made up Kiwi team in Denver.

On your example of Hardaker, it's a funny one. I think there are a number of better full backs in the NRL than him (the two playing today are better in my opinion) but it is harsh to judge him on his stint down under as he was played off the interchange bench for Penrith and then at centre when he came on.  As he didn't get a run at full back in the NRL he couldn't really prove himself.

Edited by Dunbar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Thanks for the reply Dunbar, I hope you are prooved to be right, but just to throw the proverbial spanner in there, the level that the NRL lad's play in week after week is closer to the level of test football than our own who perform in the SL, it is a step up in class and intensity, you may not agree with that, *a lot of people don't, but that would be your prerogative, from your answer to make the comments you do about those individuals you obviously watch the NRL, the point I make is that some have a tendancy in not comparing player's in likewise situations.

* Only last week over a pint and talking to an old sparring partner, the subject of Zac Hardacre came up, my old mate proclaimed he is the best full back in the world, I said he did not make such a good impression in Aus, and if I thought about it I could probably quickly name 10 NRL fullbacks better than he is, "rubbish and ah but" he replied it's because the Aussies don't like us and didnt give him a fair crack, I asked him did he watch the NRL, "no, but I know he is the best"

Agree The NRL is much higher standard. The worst team in it would still give a top SL team a good game.... This is why we need salary cap to go up at least 50%....Zak played centre at penrith so thru clearly didn't rate him that highly if he couldn't get in at FB.... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Southerner80 said:

Agree The NRL is much higher standard. The worst team in it would still give a top SL team a good game.... This is why we need salary cap to go up at least 50%....Zak played centre at penrith so thru clearly didn't rate him that highly if he couldn't get in at FB....

Matt Moylan was the Penrith full back (and captain) that year.  Hardaker was never going to get a run at full back arriving mid season unless Moylan was unavailable.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

The NRL is a stronger competition than the Super League, there is no doubt about that.  I thoroughly enjoy watching the NRL and this year I have watched on average five games a week (and sometimes all of them!).

But I think you do have to try and treat each player on merit.  Yes, the NRL is stronger but every time McGilvary has been asked to step up and play test footy he has excelled and always looked like the world class player he is.  I see Makinson play and I think his skill set and abilities would be transferable to the NRL and he would do well... he certainly made his mark against an NRL made up Kiwi team in Denver.

On your example of Hardaker, it's a funny one. I think there are a number of better full backs in the NRL than him (the two playing today are better in my opinion) but it is harsh to judge him on his stint down under as he was played off the interchange bench for Penrith and then at centre when he came on.  As he didn't get a run at full back in the NRL it couldn't really prove himself.

I think your last sentance sums it up, and the question is why did he not have the chance to proove himself, I am sure in the confines of the training ground and behind closed doors he would have had the opportunities to display to the coaching staff what he could do, and did he not go there with the Man of Steel gong around his neck, I am sure they will have seen a lot of him on TV, sorry but why if he could have been better than the incumbant at Penrith why would they not play him or at least trial him in an easier game - if there is such a thing In the NRL?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

Matt Moylan was the Penrith full back (and captain) that year.  Hardaker was never going to get a run at full back arriving mid season unless Moylan was unavailable.

And now Moylan is a Stand Off?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

I think your last sentance sums it up, and the question is why did he not have the chance to proove himself, I am sure in the confines of the training ground and behind closed doors he would have had the opportunities to display to the coaching staff what he could do, and did he not go there with the Man of Steel gong around his neck, I am sure they will have seen a lot of him on TV, sorry but why if he could have been better than the incumbant at Penrith why would they not play him or at least trial him in an easier game - if there is such a thing In the NRL?

As I say above, Moylan wasn't just the incumbent full back at Penrith when Hardaker arrived but he was also the captain.  It was always unlikely that Hardaker was going to push him out of the number 1 jersey.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

And now Moylan is a Stand Off?

Yes.  He is no Darren Lockyer but the move is not unprecedented.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

I think we have to be careful labelling this Australian team as young.  The average age of the Kangaroo 17 today was 26 which is not young in Rugby League terms these days.

Players like Cherry Evans (29), Damien Cook (27), James Tedesco (25) and Luke Keary (26) are not particularly young, it is just that there were much better players in Cooper Cronk, Cameron Smith, Billy Slater and Jonathon Thurston keeping them out of the side until they all just retired.

Good point. Inexperienced was probably a better word

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is why this game today needs to be placed into context and it is not all doom and gloom for England in the test series.

It was a very good game to watch and New Zealand were better than they have been recently but Australia have fallen back more so.  Not because they don't have good players but because they don't have great players.

Who would you rather face, an Australian team with these names on the team sheet..

1. Tedesco

6. Keary

7. Cherry-Evans

9. Cook

or these...

1. Slater

6. Thurston

7. Cronk

9. Smith

The Kangaroos have just lost some absolute legends of the game and the team is weaker than it has been for a good few years.  No matter how well the Kiwi's played, that is why the Australians lost. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whilst I agree that McGillivray always steps up to the plate for England and Hall's record demands respect don't forget the players that didn't play today for various reasons, if Tuvasa-sheck had played  DW-Z would have played on the wing Whilst the Australian's have Inglis, Mansour and the 20 year old Nick Cotric who's something special again for the wings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Harry Stottle said:

Agree they are in my opinion the best two we can field, McGilvary has prooved his worth in this company, I hope he can refind that form of last years WC, Makinson has yet to prove himself long term albeit he had a good game in Denver, It has taken a long time for him to get the recognition he deserves for mine.

Given the opportunity would you swop the players of your 'questionable abillity' in Rapana an Maumalo for Makinson and McGillvary?

McGilvary - absolutely. Makinson is a quality winger and would look great outside Mitchell or Manu. Hall is top rate and then you’ve got the likes of Johnstone coming through. Manfredi is another top drawer winger if not for his injury...

And whilst waxing lyrically about Mitchell et al, Watkins was the best centre in the WC last year; he was awesome. We have some great talent over here... they just need more game time on the international stage.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good game , enjoyable .  Kudos to the Kiwis but I don’t think either of these teams are anyway the standards of teams of yesteryear . 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

Don't get me wrong Oxford,

As a sport we spend far too much time nit picking and worrying over silly little issues and forget Sport is about the Fun!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, DavidM said:

Good game , enjoyable .  Kudos to the Kiwis but I don’t think either of these teams are anyway the standards of teams of yesteryear . 

Not just yesteryear.  Last year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I enjoyed the women’s test . Very physical and some good structure and skills . Not sure why the kiwi hooker took a quick tap and hit up on the last play , but they certainly pushed them all the way

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

Don't get me wrong Oxford, it is good that the "Tongan" (italicized purposefully) guy's are sticking together and it is good to get something meaningful as far as entertainment value is concerned in the World Cups for without the contrived rules we would have a four team competition, but there are those player's who represent these countries have never even set foot in their supposedly 'fatherland' let alone speak the 'mother tounge'.

I think Pacific and Lebanese families are still exceptionally Pacific and Lebanese for generations to come. That's why heritage teams work for them, they get massive crowd support and their players are so passionate about representing. 

Welsh, Scottish and Irish families and those nations supporter bases you would need a different tactic and eventually get home grown talent. They all have great teams in different sports of home grown players and don't have any interest in supporting what they see as English men (or Australians) representing their nations.

For now I think they need to stick with their heritage players because with out them they will drop to an amateur level but hopefully they can get a team in League 1 or some other development technique. As soon as more homegrown players start replacing the heritage players, as long as they are competitive I think you will find more support coming from those nations for their national team. 

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, B rad said:

They all have great teams in different sports of home grown players and don't have any interest in supporting what they see as English men (or Australians) representing their nations.

Only what someone told me Brad as I have no interest whatsoever in Rugby Union,  but don't thousands of Jock's flock to Murrayfield to watch a  Scottish team mostly made up of foreigners?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Only what someone told me Brad as I have no interest whatsoever in Rugby Union,  but don't thousands of Jock's flock to Murrayfield to watch a  Scottish team mostly made up of foreigners?

I don't know if they've ever had "mostly" heritage players on the pitch, but they always have a good number of 'genuine Scots' in their team and squad. Certainly nothing like the nonsense that you get with the Scotland rugby league team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That win was what Kiwi Rugby League is all about. Australia has 5 X more people than NZ, Rugby League is more popular in Australia than NZ, the Kiwi's side have a history of self imploding and being there own worst enemy but every couple of years we beat Australia. On paper I thought the sides looked fairly even and the Kiwis had a side capable of winning with a committed effort. The Kiwi's defense on Latrell mitchells side of the filed was shaky as #### for the 1st 10 minutes. DWZ had a blinder as captain on defense and after catching kicks return the ball back into the Australians at 100 miles an hour. Brandon Smith looks like a high school kid but schooled Australia out of dummy half and in defense. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Disappointing crowd and TV ratings could also be better (though worth noting it was also shown on Fox League), but the NZ win will do a lot. I think there's definitely been more coverage in today's news because of the result. Reckon we'll see a good increase for the Tonga game as a result - now Tonga just need to turn on a good performance! Being greedy, I'd say announcements confirming plans for next year's proposed Pacific championship and GB tour to coincide with a great Australia v Tonga Test would be ideal...

Edited by ghost crayfish
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That’s not greedy GC; that’s absolutely sensible and builds on momentum. Seize the initiative rather than wasting it. The latter is something we do regularly sadly.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...