-
AuthorPosts
-
For all the comments about the Diamonds being so experienced (and stale), the teams named tonight have similar levels of experience. Tonight the Diamonds have a 12 with 506 test caps and the SF 462. (Hopefully I can add up!) The Diamonds definitely do have the most conservative approach to introducing new players to the court, NZ sits somewhere in the middle, and then the Roses seem to be the most bold in blooding new players. All approaches have pros and cons. Teams have to have succession planning and expose the next generation of players, but it is a national team and I think there is an expectation that Australia puts its best foot forward in the CC (although that obviously hasn’t worked out for them this time) and plays its best 7. I agree with other comments that Australia perhaps missed the chance in the England series to give Dwyer etc more time.
I think the Diamonds success, particularly at major tournaments, in the last few years has been remarkable and has been during phases of rebuilding after some big departures. SM started in 2020 and 2019 saw the retirement of the two Caitlins and during her tenure Bueta has also been unavailable. I don’t have strong opinions either way on SM, but I do think that on the whole she has a great record.
Earlier in the thread there was a comment about the Diamonds being under pressure, thus some of the errors and misses. Sure, but I think what is unusual is historically various iterations of this Diamonds team have encountered enormous pressure and committed so few errors. I also think the Diamonds are missing Fretwell, not just for her playmaking, but for her leadership.
Crossing my fingers for an Austin revival tonight and hoping Australia can avoid the whitewash.
In my opinion, the higher you are up in the rankings, the less risks you feel you can take with every test match, particularly those that sit close to you.
With the way the weighting works, it can be detrimental to your ranking if a team well below you beats you (and the opposite for beating a team well above you).
Interestingly, with NZ now sitting 3rd, these consecutive wins against number 1 carry extra weight.
When England sat in 3rd don’t have much to lose so giving their players that exposure and experimenting outside of major tournaments is not too risky to their ranking and pays dividends for giving their players experience.
I predict at the next review NZ will likely be back to 2nd, especially if England have some losses against Jamaica.
Wow! Walmsley with the start.
I really don’t understand Stacey’s obsession with Klau in GD. Stop playing her there, or at least try it for a quarter or two and change it when it’s not working. No way can she win a matchup against an on-fire Eke. I think Klau is an awesome player, but just in the one third!
Glad to see Walmsley start for NZ. I don’t think NZ lose much at all with her instead of Nweke, and hope she’ll get a full game to show that.
Surprised Klau starting over Aryang for Australia.
I wish she would put Klau at GK with a shut down WD and GD out front and actually let her build into the game.
I wish they’d turn the music off!
Nweke on.. Ekenasio off. Noels please don’t go back to musical bibs!
1/4 time: 15-15
Garbin 7/7 (100%)
Austin 8/8 (100%)Walmsley 9/11 (82%)
Ekenasio 6/7 (86%)Gains: AUS 2-1
Penalties: AUS 13-11
Turnovers: 4-4A cracking first quarter. Walmsley has now been replaced by Nweke, and Klau replaced by Aryang.
I thought Walmsley deserved more than one quarter!
Apologies. Neglected to mention that Maia Wilson came on to replace Ekenasio to start this quarter as well, so a whole new shooting lineup for NZ. AUS 20-19
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.