Does anybody really think the Wallabies can stay within a converted try (or a couple of penalties) of the AB's. Maybe they will but it is sure hard to bet that way.
I daresay there isn't a single Wallaby that the AB's would swap for. They'd certainly consider Folau and Pocock, but I doubt that they would swap for them. So man for man they have by far the better side. As far as teamwork goes they are better placed, having played together more. As far as goal-kicking, well lets not even go there. Recent record? Nah - 8 losses (only once by less than 6) and 2 draws in the last 10 clashes.
So what should the start be or conversely what should the odds be at 5.5 start? That is for each of us to decide but surely the AB's should be giving more than 5.5 or at that start should surely be shorter than the $1.95 on offer.
It's a funny thing the bounce of a football and maybe we can pull off an unlikely victory (and hopefully do) but as far as the punt is concerned for me it's a no-brainer.
New Zealand -5.5 @ $1.95.
Good punting all.
0
To remove first post, remove entire topic.
Does anybody really think the Wallabies can stay within a converted try (or a couple of penalties) of the AB's. Maybe they will but it is sure hard to bet that way.
I daresay there isn't a single Wallaby that the AB's would swap for. They'd certainly consider Folau and Pocock, but I doubt that they would swap for them. So man for man they have by far the better side. As far as teamwork goes they are better placed, having played together more. As far as goal-kicking, well lets not even go there. Recent record? Nah - 8 losses (only once by less than 6) and 2 draws in the last 10 clashes.
So what should the start be or conversely what should the odds be at 5.5 start? That is for each of us to decide but surely the AB's should be giving more than 5.5 or at that start should surely be shorter than the $1.95 on offer.
It's a funny thing the bounce of a football and maybe we can pull off an unlikely victory (and hopefully do) but as far as the punt is concerned for me it's a no-brainer.
Totally agree with you here. New Zealand -5.5 is basically giving money away. I think they have factored in a "home ground advantage" which won't mean much as ANZ stadium isn't much of a "home ground"" Especially when the stadium will be filled with 50% NZ suppourters.
0
Totally agree with you here. New Zealand -5.5 is basically giving money away. I think they have factored in a "home ground advantage" which won't mean much as ANZ stadium isn't much of a "home ground"" Especially when the stadium will be filled with 50% NZ suppourters.
If you both got that sure. Well nz 1-12 good money than -5.5.
Each to his own but I never bet a window.
As for the Shute Shield games I think Uni will knock off Manly H2H. Uni have the better personnel and Manly get jittery come play-offs. Southern Districts always play well against Eastwood. I'm a Woods man but this is not a good betting game IMO.
GL whatever you decide.
0
Quote Originally Posted by Target2million:
If you both got that sure. Well nz 1-12 good money than -5.5.
Each to his own but I never bet a window.
As for the Shute Shield games I think Uni will knock off Manly H2H. Uni have the better personnel and Manly get jittery come play-offs. Southern Districts always play well against Eastwood. I'm a Woods man but this is not a good betting game IMO.
The average winning margin in Australia the past decade is 4 points to the ABs, in the past 5 years it's 3 points. In New Zealand it is 16 points.
12-12 draw and a last minute one point loss at home last year for the Wallabies, while getting smoked in NZ exemplifies this.
This team looks better than the one they fielded last year but the locks, where Simmons being out is the only thing keeping me from backing the Wallabies. He's totally dominated the lineout and is a workhorse, normally 2nd only being the openside flanker in tackles. However I think Cheika has made the right call by going completely selling out on the locks to go with the Hooper/Pocock combo that wouldn't work with Skelton starting.
The Wallabies haven't conceded a point in the last 20 minutes of both their games this season, this is bucking the typical trend of the Wallabies. They look fitter and more committed than ever. For the first time in a long time their is a genuine front row rotation and the Scrum has had ascendancy with the right front row(and locking) combinations.
The whole man for man the ABs wouldn't swap any players thing has never made any sense to me, it's a massive oversimplification.
Talent wise the top 5-6 teams in the world are all neck and neck, it's the psychological aspect of the game that the ABs dominate. It's something that rarely gets talked about but the ABs have an extremely good sports psychologist. You can pick out a handful of games over the past few years where teams had their foot on the ABs throat and couldn't put it down(bledisloe 3 last year, boks 2 weeks ago, Ireland 2013, boks wellington 2014, England multiple times)
AB's rarely blow teams out anymore, this seems to get disguised because they win so many games.
I haven't decided what way I'm going in this one yet.
0
The average winning margin in Australia the past decade is 4 points to the ABs, in the past 5 years it's 3 points. In New Zealand it is 16 points.
12-12 draw and a last minute one point loss at home last year for the Wallabies, while getting smoked in NZ exemplifies this.
This team looks better than the one they fielded last year but the locks, where Simmons being out is the only thing keeping me from backing the Wallabies. He's totally dominated the lineout and is a workhorse, normally 2nd only being the openside flanker in tackles. However I think Cheika has made the right call by going completely selling out on the locks to go with the Hooper/Pocock combo that wouldn't work with Skelton starting.
The Wallabies haven't conceded a point in the last 20 minutes of both their games this season, this is bucking the typical trend of the Wallabies. They look fitter and more committed than ever. For the first time in a long time their is a genuine front row rotation and the Scrum has had ascendancy with the right front row(and locking) combinations.
The whole man for man the ABs wouldn't swap any players thing has never made any sense to me, it's a massive oversimplification.
Talent wise the top 5-6 teams in the world are all neck and neck, it's the psychological aspect of the game that the ABs dominate. It's something that rarely gets talked about but the ABs have an extremely good sports psychologist. You can pick out a handful of games over the past few years where teams had their foot on the ABs throat and couldn't put it down(bledisloe 3 last year, boks 2 weeks ago, Ireland 2013, boks wellington 2014, England multiple times)
AB's rarely blow teams out anymore, this seems to get disguised because they win so many games.
I haven't decided what way I'm going in this one yet.
David Pockock playing number 8..... The wannabes scrum is going to get DESTROYED! The way I look at it - super 15 form last year, Australia's team was very close to NZ teams. This year however the kiwi teams carved is shreds. As good as Pocock will be around the ground, we lose a line out jumper and some serious weight at the base of the scrum. Line has moved to -5 at William Hill.
0
David Pockock playing number 8..... The wannabes scrum is going to get DESTROYED! The way I look at it - super 15 form last year, Australia's team was very close to NZ teams. This year however the kiwi teams carved is shreds. As good as Pocock will be around the ground, we lose a line out jumper and some serious weight at the base of the scrum. Line has moved to -5 at William Hill.
While I'm a great believer in the "champion team" v the "team of champions" maxim, the wouldn't swap comment was to point out that NZ simply have the better cattle. If you were picking a combined Aust/NZ side the vast majority (if not all) would be from across the ditch. If not, with due respect, let me suggest that you would be a poor selector. Let me further suggest that the Wallabies, at least at this stage, are neither a team of champions nor a champion team whereas the ABs can lay legitimate claims to being both.
NZ record at ANZ isn't overpowering although 2 of the last 3 they have won by more than 5, although admittedly not so convincing prior to that.
I think lineouts should be ok but I don't share your view that Australia has had the ascendancy in scrums and this is an area of concern to me on Saturday. Our work at the breakdown has been subpar with Pocock the only genuine pilferer in the side. Assuming NZ win the battle at the breakdown they should have more possession than the Wallabies, probably in excess of 55%.
AB try scoring ability beats ours hands down with danger across the paddock from their rampaging pigs, their exceptional halves or their damaging outside backs. They have the advantage in both size and speed.
Where will Australia's tries come from? I expect some high kicks to Milner-Skudder with ACC and Folau pouring on pressure and this could be effective, however Hansen will have addressed this. Rolling maul perhaps. To be honest, the Wallabies attack, with the exception of Folau and perhaps Kuridrani, wouldn't be causing much restless sleep (except for Cheika).
Foley might find his kicking boots and DC might have an off night, but nothing recently suggests either of these will occur.
As you have pointed out NZ also have the psychological advantage.
Yes Australia can win or at least keep it close, but to my way of thinking the All Blacks represent excellent value giving 5.5.
GL whatever you decide.
0
simple3 thanks for your contribution.
While I'm a great believer in the "champion team" v the "team of champions" maxim, the wouldn't swap comment was to point out that NZ simply have the better cattle. If you were picking a combined Aust/NZ side the vast majority (if not all) would be from across the ditch. If not, with due respect, let me suggest that you would be a poor selector. Let me further suggest that the Wallabies, at least at this stage, are neither a team of champions nor a champion team whereas the ABs can lay legitimate claims to being both.
NZ record at ANZ isn't overpowering although 2 of the last 3 they have won by more than 5, although admittedly not so convincing prior to that.
I think lineouts should be ok but I don't share your view that Australia has had the ascendancy in scrums and this is an area of concern to me on Saturday. Our work at the breakdown has been subpar with Pocock the only genuine pilferer in the side. Assuming NZ win the battle at the breakdown they should have more possession than the Wallabies, probably in excess of 55%.
AB try scoring ability beats ours hands down with danger across the paddock from their rampaging pigs, their exceptional halves or their damaging outside backs. They have the advantage in both size and speed.
Where will Australia's tries come from? I expect some high kicks to Milner-Skudder with ACC and Folau pouring on pressure and this could be effective, however Hansen will have addressed this. Rolling maul perhaps. To be honest, the Wallabies attack, with the exception of Folau and perhaps Kuridrani, wouldn't be causing much restless sleep (except for Cheika).
Foley might find his kicking boots and DC might have an off night, but nothing recently suggests either of these will occur.
As you have pointed out NZ also have the psychological advantage.
Yes Australia can win or at least keep it close, but to my way of thinking the All Blacks represent excellent value giving 5.5.
It's not the team of champion analogy I was going for. It's simply the fact that there isn't that much of a talent gap that Aussie can't run with NZ and you know that yourself. NZ is the better team on paper absolutely but Aussie isn't far behind and with enough hunger and conviction they can beat them.
Aussie has had the ascendancy at scrum time in the 2nd half of both of their matches so far, Slipper is the weak link right now(fatigue/injury) but some extra rest and coming off the bench may see him come right. Sio/Holmes have been scurmmaging well, Kepu is the best scrummager on the team but also was suffering from a bit of fatigue I think. TPN is an excellent scrummager off the bench, much better than Codie Taylor.
Skelton played a bit part of the scrum issue against the Boks, Horwill fixed that. Skelton's technique was abysmal in that game but it was better against Arge.
Aussie didn't have problems scoring tries in the 3rd Bledisloe last year, I don't expect them to have problems again.
There is not a lot that seperates these two teams, it comes down to the All Blacks aura which hypnotizes people I think.
0
It's not the team of champion analogy I was going for. It's simply the fact that there isn't that much of a talent gap that Aussie can't run with NZ and you know that yourself. NZ is the better team on paper absolutely but Aussie isn't far behind and with enough hunger and conviction they can beat them.
Aussie has had the ascendancy at scrum time in the 2nd half of both of their matches so far, Slipper is the weak link right now(fatigue/injury) but some extra rest and coming off the bench may see him come right. Sio/Holmes have been scurmmaging well, Kepu is the best scrummager on the team but also was suffering from a bit of fatigue I think. TPN is an excellent scrummager off the bench, much better than Codie Taylor.
Skelton played a bit part of the scrum issue against the Boks, Horwill fixed that. Skelton's technique was abysmal in that game but it was better against Arge.
Aussie didn't have problems scoring tries in the 3rd Bledisloe last year, I don't expect them to have problems again.
There is not a lot that seperates these two teams, it comes down to the All Blacks aura which hypnotizes people I think.
the "aura" surrounding the all black continues to slowly die.
Aus scrum totally dominant, another ref may have given them a lot more calls.
Scary thing is aussie is winning these game starting a halves combo that is not test calibre. Toomua is scary good...if he stops knocking himself out he is going to be a vital cog.
Poetic justice for Nic White...now can he maintain some form? Better than Phipps either way, at least he has a good boot. Genia? Hmm. 9 is definitely the big question for Aussie.
Backlash factor next week....going forward though, ABs are faaaar from invincible away from NZ.
0
the "aura" surrounding the all black continues to slowly die.
Aus scrum totally dominant, another ref may have given them a lot more calls.
Scary thing is aussie is winning these game starting a halves combo that is not test calibre. Toomua is scary good...if he stops knocking himself out he is going to be a vital cog.
Poetic justice for Nic White...now can he maintain some form? Better than Phipps either way, at least he has a good boot. Genia? Hmm. 9 is definitely the big question for Aussie.
Backlash factor next week....going forward though, ABs are faaaar from invincible away from NZ.
simple3, yes Phipps was poor again. To say his service is ordinary is to flatter him. White was excellent in his brief appearance (and I am not a Nic White fan) and it was good to see him take the ball into contact in a situation where 9 of 10 times he would have kicked. Scrum was good, line-out was poor - contrary to what I anticipated. Hooper and Pocock showed that they can work in tandem and must both start in the big games. Gits defence was good and if there was any doubt about AAC starting, then he put that to rest.
There was much more good than bad from an Aussie point of view but that was a very bad AB performance. Good defensive line speed rattled them as it did in the Samoa game and those 2 tries on the edge were uncharacteristic defensive lapses. In fact it was a most uncharacteristic display by the men in black in many aspects.
Haven't seen the SA game but am also left scratching my head about that score line. Beats me what's going on.
Anyhow go the Woods and good punting to all.
0
simple3, yes Phipps was poor again. To say his service is ordinary is to flatter him. White was excellent in his brief appearance (and I am not a Nic White fan) and it was good to see him take the ball into contact in a situation where 9 of 10 times he would have kicked. Scrum was good, line-out was poor - contrary to what I anticipated. Hooper and Pocock showed that they can work in tandem and must both start in the big games. Gits defence was good and if there was any doubt about AAC starting, then he put that to rest.
There was much more good than bad from an Aussie point of view but that was a very bad AB performance. Good defensive line speed rattled them as it did in the Samoa game and those 2 tries on the edge were uncharacteristic defensive lapses. In fact it was a most uncharacteristic display by the men in black in many aspects.
Haven't seen the SA game but am also left scratching my head about that score line. Beats me what's going on.
I really think AB's are only marginal favorites for the world cup this year, definitely not the level of favoritism as the current odds suggests. Carter is well past it, has been for the past few years. ABs are missing Cruden bigtime.
Pecking order for me is ABs, England, Sth Africa then Australia/Ireland
0
I really think AB's are only marginal favorites for the world cup this year, definitely not the level of favoritism as the current odds suggests. Carter is well past it, has been for the past few years. ABs are missing Cruden bigtime.
Pecking order for me is ABs, England, Sth Africa then Australia/Ireland
the "aura" surrounding the all black continues to slowly die.
Hot Forum Topics
