Todd trains with All Blacks
12 Oct 2011
Openside flank Matt Todd joined the All Blacks at training although the management has denied that his involvement is a sign that Richie McCaw is battling with injury.
The All Blacks have operated for the entire World Cup campaign with no specialist cover for McCaw. New Zealand’s premier opensider and captain has struggled with a foot injury since before the 2011 Super Rugby season, and insiders say that he will undergo surgery after the global tournament.
There were doubts that he would play against Argentina in last week’s quarter-final, and rumours persist that he is not full fit ahead of this week’s showdown with Australia.
Todd was spotted at the Auckland airport earlier this week, and then at an All Blacks training session on Wednesday. According to stuff.co.nz, the All Blacks management has said that Todd ‘provided opposition’ at the practice session, as did several Blues players. Todd apparently did this in the lead up to the All Blacks’ pool game against France when the team was training in Christchurch.
All Blacks manager Darren Shand suggested that Todd’s presence in Auckland was coincidental, as he was already in town to visit his girlfriend.
The All Blacks have managed to win without McCaw at this tournament, but they would struggle to compete against a team as strong as the Wallabies, who possess the world’s leading fetcher in David Pocock, without a specialist No 7. If McCaw was unavailable, Todd would prove a worthy alternative.
There could even be a case made for Todd’s inclusion on the bench, as McCaw may also battle to last 80 minutes this Sunday.
83 Comments
Pages: « 1 [2] Show All
13 Oct 2011, 02:09 am
@chch(chch)-39:
You’d be sweating on Beale’s fitness.
13 Oct 2011, 02:18 am
@jeest(jeest)-49:
“including their coach who seems to be unable to lift his team for Trans Tasman clashes. Funny that…where is he from again??”
Hang on, is there another conspiracy?
If Oz lose the Sfinal then Deans is cheating?
13 Oct 2011, 02:36 am
@Hurricane(Hurricane)-52:
You are onto it, there is a conspiracy at every turn.
If NZ and Wales get to the final and Wales lose, that will be because Warren Gatland will have taken a fall in favour of getting first dibs at the AB’s coaching job.
13 Oct 2011, 02:51 am
@Brads(Brads)-53:
Amazing how out of the top 4 teams in the world, Kiwi coaches 3 of them.
13 Oct 2011, 03:19 am
@Hurricane(Hurricane)-54:
Yes it is amazing.
I don’t have a proper understanding of how the IRB rankings are calculated, but am aware that RWC games are worth double points.
Perhaps someone here can work it out.
If Wales beat France on Saturday, do they get any points, and if so, could they overtake SA?
13 Oct 2011, 03:28 am
@Brads(Brads)-55:
Yeah and thats the only problem i have with the ranking. You should not get double points at a RWC
13 Oct 2011, 03:34 am
@Brads(Brads)-55: It is double points indeed.
http://www.irb.com/rankings/explain/index.html
13 Oct 2011, 03:36 am
@Nils(Nils)-57:
Hmmm but homeside has a handicap, well lets say whoever beats the homeside gets more points.IF Wales wins this week, SA will probably slip to 4th place.
13 Oct 2011, 03:41 am
@Hurricane(Hurricane)-58: Not sure how it applies in the WC as everyone apart from hosts are “visitors”.
SA can slip at worst to 5th, no more. It will require loser of Wal/Fra SF doing something special to in the last game. It’s open for all. Even Aussies can be either 1st or 5th. Kiwis will not drop below SA, so worst scenario is 3rd place in the rankings.
13 Oct 2011, 03:43 am
@Hurricane(Hurricane)-58: And in worst case loser of Wal/Fra SF can land somewhere between Argentina and Tonga.
13 Oct 2011, 03:47 am
@Hurricane(Hurricane)-56: I disagree, WC is like Grand Slam in tennis, if one can use that comparision. A different value, once in 4 years.
Of course, that means, the winner likely will be 1st unless it is a 2nd tier nation or far enough behind losing finalist/semifinalists. That’s they way it is.
13 Oct 2011, 03:53 am
@Nils(Nils)-60:
Well that sucks.
Assuming France fell apart and were thrashed by Wales, it seems hardly kosher to me that it makes France a lesser ranked team than Argentina, who slipped up at the 1/4′s and didn’t even play France during the competition.
13 Oct 2011, 03:55 am
@Nils(Nils)-61:
So therefore the ranking is not a true look at who is winning consistently to a point. I notice after 2007 RWC the universe was in shambles but it didnt take long for NZ to take back its rightful position.
13 Oct 2011, 03:56 am
@Brads(Brads)-62: France did lose to Tonga, remember. In any case, france will slip between Argentina and Tonga (8th and 9th place) only if they blow both games.
In that case they fully deserve it.
13 Oct 2011, 03:59 am
@Hurricane(Hurricane)-63: NZ never ever dropped below 2nd place, so no, ranking do represent real balance of power. England (and SA respectively) climbed to the top spot as the WC winners and fell straight after next games.
13 Oct 2011, 04:09 am
@Brads(Brads)-62:
That is not how the system works… a team does not lose points and places when losing a game nor win points for losing… it can only get leap-frogged by winning sides moving up the ladder…
13 Oct 2011, 04:11 am
@bryce_in_oz(bryce_in_oz)-66: “a team does not lose points and places when losing a game”
It certainly does.
13 Oct 2011, 04:14 am
@Nils(Nils)-65:
Yeah as i said after the 2007 RWC, things started to return to normal.
But get this.
Ranking on August 27 2007
1) NZ 93.37 points
2) OZ 87.00 points
3) France 86.83 points
4) SA 85.36 points
5) Ireland 80.99 points
6) Argentina 80.71 points
7) England 78.83 points.
So after beating Fiji(Ranked 13) ,Argentina and England they took over as #1 ranking cos of double points. I think double points is not fair even still.
BUt hey we have to live with it
13 Oct 2011, 04:15 am
@bryce_in_oz(bryce_in_oz)-66:
While I would like that to be true, I was under the impression the points gained by the winner came off the loser ranking points.
That being the case, and double points apply, where does the winners douuble points come from other than the loser.
13 Oct 2011, 04:15 am
@Hurricane(Hurricane)-68: Do not forget NZ lost a huge chunk of points thanks to France.
13 Oct 2011, 04:18 am
@Brads(Brads)-69: Winner wins points AND loser loses. Simple illustration.
Before NZ and Aus loss in QF 2007.
1(1) NEW ZEALAND 93.37
2(2) AUSTRALIA 87.73
3(3) SOUTH AFRICA 86.40
4(4) ARGENTINA 85.53
5(5) FRANCE 84.50
After
1(1) NEW ZEALAND 89.59
2(5) FRANCE 88.27
3(3) SOUTH AFRICA 86.40
4(4) ARGENTINA 85.83
5(2) AUSTRALIA 84.20
Big difference.
13 Oct 2011, 04:19 am
@Brads(Brads)-69: Including Aussie beaters English, the picture is as follows.
Before
1(1) NEW ZEALAND 93.37
2(2) AUSTRALIA 87.73
3(3) SOUTH AFRICA 86.40
4(4) ARGENTINA 85.53
5(5) FRANCE 84.50
6(7) ENGLAND 80.07
After
1(1) NEW ZEALAND 89.59
2(5) FRANCE 88.27
3(3) SOUTH AFRICA 86.40
4(4) ARGENTINA 85.83
5(2) AUSTRALIA 84.20
6(6) ENGLAND 83.60
13 Oct 2011, 04:21 am
@Nils(Nils)-67:
It’s core rating after that game can/does fall but Brads’ example of Argentina/FRance above cannot be reality…
As for the Boks… if Wales win and then lose they would replace the Bok’s at 3 just (depending on margins)… cannot see France doing the same unless there was a 15 point win (1.5pts assuming handicaps are thrown out)…
There is no way the Bok’s could fall to fifth with either France/Wales losing then winning over Aus for Bronze…
13 Oct 2011, 04:22 am
@Brads(Brads)-69: Before QF now
1(1) NEW ZEALAND 90.62
2(2) SOUTH AFRICA 86.71
3(3) AUSTRALIA 84.84
4(4) ENGLAND 84.54
5(6) IRELAND 83.14
6(7) WALES 80.73
7(8) ARGENTINA 80.28
After
1(1) NEW ZEALAND 90.62
2(3) AUSTRALIA 87.21
3(2) SOUTH AFRICA 84.34
4(6) WALES 83.21
5(8) FRANCE 82.68
6(4) ENGLAND 81.58
7(5) IRELAND 80.65
8(7) ARGENTINA 80.28
13 Oct 2011, 04:25 am
@Brads(Brads)-69: NZ did not get anything, as points difference between them and Pumas exceeded 10 points. Therefore Pumas did not lose anything, as well.
@bryce_in_oz(bryce_in_oz)-73: Who knows, maybe 3rd/4th game loser beats NZ and therefore gets much more points than beating Australia. I do not know exactly so I say, 5th place is the absolute worst scenario.
13 Oct 2011, 04:27 am
@Nils(Nils)-71:
Wow, thats alot of point difference
13 Oct 2011, 04:27 am
Ouch, it’s early morning here, time to sleep a for a change.
Cheers folks, take care.
13 Oct 2011, 04:29 am
@Nils(Nils)-75:
What I find interesting is that no team that has not topped it’s table has ever won the event… that means France, Wales and Aus would have to rewrite the history books…
13 Oct 2011, 04:34 am
@bryce_in_oz(bryce_in_oz)-78:
Well that is great news.
Finally we have history on our side other than choking
13 Oct 2011, 05:02 am
@bryce_in_oz(bryce_in_oz)-78: Fair enough, and may that continue…
13 Oct 2011, 07:34 am
@NZINCHINA(NZINCHINA)-51:
I hope Beale is fully fit, he’s a magic player to watch. Sensational this season too.
13 Oct 2011, 07:35 am
@Brads(Brads)-53:
youre finally learning.
eyes to the front.
13 Oct 2011, 08:16 am
@Black Panther(Black Panther)-82:
There your assumption is wrong.
I have been on and off keo since 2003
I have learnt nothing especially new about the attitudes of Saffa’ supporters and those of AB, England or Aus that I didn’t already know.
Pages: « 1 [2] Show All
Have your say
You must be logged in to post a comment.