Sport is always about bringing performances week in and week out. For the two teams involved in the second Tri Nations game tonight, South Africa and New Zealand, one kept the same level as last week and another stepped up marginally.

South Africa were totally outplayed last week. This week they performed at a good standard at points in this game - 10 min after half-time, a few patches in the second half - which may be enough to get them over Australia, but not this current All Blacks side.

The story for NZ was the opposite. For the majority of the game we played an outstanding, exciting kind of rugby, but something which has cropped up over the 5 tests we've had this season is that there's been a consistent teething period of 5 - 10 minutes when the bench has rolled on where everything turns a little Yakety Sax.

Passes that are more like 20/80 than 50/50 get thrown, forwards get left to chase down stab-through kicks and players are caught out of position on returns. It's a lucky thing that the All Blacks' coaches have such emphasis on defence or this period of games could have proven costly at this point in the season.

On the whole though, this team is peaking. It's still early in the campaign and I'm reluctant to say it until we play Australia but I really don't see them offering anything in the way of a challenge, so I'll throw it out there.

This is a 2005 standard All Blacks unit. We pantsed the Lions that year and aside from South Africa nobody even looked like touching us. This season it appears that it'll be the same story, except not even SA is near us. Yes, you can feel free to come back here and point out how I was wrong if we lose one.

It's a tough thing to go undefeated - in fact, we haven't done it since 1997 when we won 11 and drew with England - but this is an All Blacks side which isn't demolishing teams in a dominant fashion, it's subtly and slowly piling on pressure and leaving other sides to play catchup.

In terms of tonight's performances, there are a couple of standouts and a couple who deserve a bit of a seeing to. First up is Dan Carter. Much is always made of his 'form slumps' and how he has purple patches but this is a two-way street. He was given a lot of space and time last week as the Boks appeared to focus on Cowan and Nonu, whereas this week he was almost completely nullifed. Even when he managed to get a kick off it was pretty touch-and-go. His goalkicking wasn't up to par but it's something commented on every time he plays in Wellington.

Next was Rene Ranger. He's had to slot in to a semi-established combo, but I'm left to wonder why Zac Guilford didn't get the call up. Ranger's a good player, but he's one of those young Carlos Spencer hit-or-miss players, even on defence. Whenever he has the ball in his hands he's looking to spark something - usually for himself - and when he's tackling he goes in 100% and either knocks someone for 6 or gets beaten. I just think somebody needs to sit him down and remind him he's in a team of outstanding players, not the Blues or Northland.

In terms or praises, I'm gonna wax lyrical about the loose forwards. We've finally got a trio to replace the effectiveness of the So'oialo/Collins/Masoe relationship. One of the massive benefits of musketeers McCaw/Read/Kaino is that all of them can play for 80 minutes, and all of them can play at each position. In a discussion during tonight's game the question 'who is the best player in international rugby at the moment' came up - the usual suspects, McCaw, Bryan Habana, Dan Carter were thrown up but I think Kieran Read is getting near that mix. He's everywhere on defence, he clears the ruck and fetches, he can link with backs and how many times have we seen him throw that last offload 5m from the line to a back to storm over? Mainstream pundits, you can go on and on about Pierre Spies but this year Read is better. And that's coming from a reformed Read hater.

I didn't want to write anything throughout the week in case I jinxed the team again, but here's a bit of a milestone that was missed by those in the media. Remember all those weeks ago when I wrote that the last time the All Blacks didn't score a try was in 2004? [Here it is if you missed it] Well tonight's game was the 75th consecutive game that the ABs have managed to cross the white line.

So from here we turn the evil eye of Mordor to Brisbane for next week's tussle between the under-performing Boks and the baby Wallabies. Can either side step up and offer something that will put a stick in the front wheel of the Kawasaki that is the 2010 All Blacks?

Final score: All Blacks 31, South Africa 17.

All Blacks;
Tries to Ma'a Nonu, Mils Muliana, Rene Ranger, Israel Dagg. Dan Carter 2 penalties, 1 conversion, Piri Weepu 1 penalty.

South Africa;
Tries to Danie Rossouw and Schalk Burger.
Morne Steyn 1 penalty, 2 conversions.

­­

­It is tough to offer to much as a blogger with the level of media saturation that goes along with these big test matches.  Still, I have a couple of thoughts about last week's game and the build up to this week.

Lucky All Blacks:  Make no mistake, the All Blacks deserved this victory.  To deny them the satisfaction of well beating the old enemy would be a total misreading of the game.  Nothing about last week suggested the Boks had any right to win.  I would suggest, however, that the margin was due in part to the bounce of the rugby ball.  In particular I think about Nonu's try.  In the lead up, he tried a sorry little chip that ricocheted off a defender and ended up right back in Ma'a's hands.  In the second half there was a quick throw in the New Zealand 22 that was almost picked off, Carter barely missed a defender, and the kick was hastily made.  Somehow each bullet was missed, the Africans let the ball bounce twenty meters, and a strong defensive line came forward.  The All Blacks made a good bit of their own luck, but they still enjoyed the rub of the green.

Injuries Make a Difference:  South Africa was without Fourie du Preez and Heinrich Brussow for this match.  Given the inefficiency of the kicking and the quality of the Kiwi ball, both were missed.  Again, I don't think those two would have meant a different outcome, but I think the margin and tenor of the game would have been much different.  Injuries happen and depth is imperative, so no free passes to South Africa.  Still, between the Boks this year and the All Blacks last year, when is the last time we have seen a South Africa/New Zealand clash where both teams were not missing a vital cog?  It may have been in Hamilton last year, but McCaw and Carter were just getting back into fitness.  It is a shame we can't see how the two stack up with du Preez in the mix.

Arm Chair Selectors Look Foolish:  About a week ago voices were coming from everywhere that it was time for the future.  In particular, many wanted to see the back three fully participate in a youth movement.  Roks and Mils are over the hill, throw 'em out!  Those folks look a little silly now.  The most interesting insight into the difficulty of fans selecting a team from their living rooms came from Muliaina.  Asked about the break that led to the Conrad Smith try he said, "I got a really good call from Joe Roks to come back in, as I was
planning to go down the sideline."  Now sitting in a recliner screaming at the TV that play looked like pure brilliance by Mils.  In fact, the media has done much to declare him one of the men of the match.  When you talk to the fullback, however, he makes it clear that a call from his teammate changed his decision making.  That is the sort of thing you just can't see on a TV screen or sitting in a production booth.  Those calling for Rokocoko, Muliaina, or any other player to be dropped should remember that the coaches select based on a lot more information than we can.  Combinations and communication are important.  Selecting a team is not selecting a fantasy rugby squad, blinding filling spots based on tries scored or line breaks.

World's Best Domestic Competition:  I am tired of hearing about the Currie Cup.  We hear that it is the "preeminent provencial competition" in the world, but I don't buy it.  First, the standard of rugby is much lower than the Air New Zealand/ITM/Do-you-have-money-because-we-will-rename-this-sucker-anything/no longer NPC Cup.  That is if you are looking for skill.  If you want to watch massive kicks and endless pick and drives the Currie Cup is for you.  The ITM Cup is much faster and the players are more skilled.  New Zealand also fields 14 teams, a good 10 which are competitive.  The Currie Cup has only 8, and the bottom three are generally pathetic.  South Africa may be having a golden age right now, but their depth is not as good as New Zealand's.  The ITM Cup is at the very least far more interesting to watch. 

The Boks' Strength:  Combining the Currie Cup and this last test, we can see that the Africans still have a limited repertoire.  While the backs have improved, South African rugby still depends on naked aggression and the kicking game (which typically includes the entire forward pack playing miles offsides).  Botha's head butting is hardly surprising for a country that plays with such physicality.  The line between physicality and thuggery is often thin, and the Boks love to walk it.  If you celebrate players like Botha and Steyn, it says a lot about your approach to rugby.  Even the talented Habana is often only involved in a boring game of fetch with the first five-eigths.  If rugby keeps the laws in a place where the advantage goes to fast, skilled players, New Zealand will be dominant.  If, like last year, they allow the game to become more stagnant and physical, we will see a strong South African side. 

Changing the Laws:  On a related note, often the Northern Hemisphere teams complain that changes to the laws are pushed by New Zealand and Australia just so that they will have an advantage.  That would be half right.  Laws that encourage counter attack and ball-in-hand play do work well traditionally for All Black and Wallaby sides.  The only problem is the world "just" or "only."  The NZRU believes that a faster game is better for the game and John O'Neill believes it is better for his pocketbook.  The All Blacks' push for a faster game is not a mere cynical ploy for dominance, but such a game sure does help.  As fans watching last weeks game, I think we all can agree its best for us too.

Picture the following scenario:

A large company launches a new product. All goes well until a few months later when technical complications prevent customers from being able to use said product. People from all walks of life are cut off from the service you provide. Some of them made major investments to be early adopters. They get upset and leave your company for a competitor.

But as fate would have it, you're a major sponsor of your country's largest national sport team. That same team has lost a lot of the support it previously almost unquestioningly had due to its apparent 'failure' to be successful.

How can you combine these two negatives to come up with a positive?

Some bright spark at Telecom had the idea of creating BackingBlack, kind of an All Black street team. I'm all for it, great to see someone getting out there and giving some positive energy to the All Blacks after the amount of flack they cop.

But - and I know it's early days - having followed their progress for a wee bit, I'm wondering where it's heading. At the moment it's just a group of people going to matches, giving stuff away and chanting - there are some mid-week activities to be sure - but isn't this just preaching to the converted?

When I heard about the campaign I thought it'd be using social media to connect with the Gen Yers. Instead, it's more of a disconnect. There's a Twitter account that doesn't seem to take any steps to interact with people, a Facebook page with a different name and of course, their own website.

Now, Scott [I thought] did a great job on his Northern Hemisphere tour last year with the insight and footage he was sending back. But do the others behind the social media drive realise that social media is about engagement? Nobody wants to watch you talk amongst yourselves and film yourselves hanging out. Where are the visits to the 80-year-old widow in Cromwell who has a signed jersey from the 1974 team?

A few friends of mine went to the game in Hamilton - and I know others who were at Carisbrook. The running theme seems to be much the same as I feel; it's a great idea with a lot of potential but at the moment that potential isn't being realised. Why are we having marches to the game to amp people up? They will do that themselves. Why are we forcing other fans to chant during the game? The drunken student mob already have that one covered.

Also, is it even needed? The All Blacks get a rough time in the papers and on talkback, there's no mistaking that. But when they get out on Eden Park, Rugby Park or any of the other venues in NZ they look around and see a capacity crowd. Rugby passion isn't dying at the top level, it's dying at the regional level.

The stuff they're doing for the All Blacks is meaningless. New Zealanders are always going to be able to support their rugby team, just like their football, cricket and netball teams. They get the exposure.

What should be the focus is the local base.

How many people, upon hearing Adam Thomson or Jerome Kaino's name in the All Blacks' squad three years ago said "who?" - I did - and on a regional level there are loads of these players who don't get exposure other than among their team base and if they score a try or become a phenom. The disconnection between the punter and the All Blacks starts at a regional level.

It used to be easy to follow a player and their rise through the ranks. You'd go to the games, your mates would talk about them, you'd read the match reports. The MY SKY generation have it even easier. Too easy. The fall in viewership may not be so much in a growing boredom with rugby as an ability to choose. You may not want to watch Wellington play Northland, so you'll record it - or skip it altogether. Then before you've watched it, you might hear the score - rendering the match useless unless you really wanna see it.

It's all well and good to give each other back slaps and feel good after you've gotten to go along and have select seats and camera time but ask yourself, BackingBlack, are you growing rugby support or are you just maintaining it? Get your same network together and put your weight behind some ITM Cup teams instead of wasting energy trying to get people excited about a game they're already willingly shelling out for and while you're at it, re-assess the way you're doing things. Are you going to focus on one age group or all? If you're gonna focus on Gen Y get into high schools, get along to local rugby matches, take some injured ABs or local players with you. Do some skill sessions, go go-karting or something similar. Just because we don't chant doesn't mean we don't have passion.

Disclaimer: I'm not a part of BackingBlack, so I don't know what their plans are. If you've already planned to do something special for the ITM Cup, good on ya. While this may come across as a bitter, jealous post, I genuinely wish the BB crew all the best.

 So the South Africans came to Eden Park to try and overturn a legacy of unbeaten All Black sides and continue their Tri Nations form from last season, but the Blacks stood up and said 'like fuck!'

In the heart of latte country and in front of a capacity* crowd, the New Zealanders were the superlative side and picked apart a bokke carcass that struggled to provide any real answers.

It looked tight for the first quarter with both sides mounting some promising attack and meeting stoic defense and each walking away with 3 points, though the All Blacks' gained a one man advantage when Bakkies Botha was sent off.

Bakkies will probably be seeing the judiciary in the next couple of days after being caught on camera tackling Jimmy Cowan and headbutting him from behind. Bakkies was mistaken if he thought this would affect Jimmy's gameplaying ability, as the Southern man is used to a sore head from years of drinking sessions - if anything it brought back the 2007 era Jimmy, a man unafraid to run straight at the biggest man on the field.

The only concern I'd like to raise is with regard to the tactical kicking. There wasn't much and when it was attempted it wasn't pretty. The ABs have gained Mils Muliana back from injury, but it's worth throwing up for discussion that Israel Dagg's tactical abilities, at the moment at least, appear to have the edge.

The return from injury of Mils and Ma'a Nonu was superb with both players performing as though they'd been in the team and getting minutes for the entire Steinlager Series. Mils' first touch of the ball made people in pubs up and down the country throw their hands in the air as he went up to field a kick and landed awkwardly, coughing up the pill. From then on he atoned for his sins, setting Dan Carter, Cory Jane and Joe Rokocoko alight as he split through the South African defense on the counter-attack like the Russian forces against Napolean.

Ma'a had a standout game as far as I'm concerned, working the draw-and-pass with great effect and putting up a few kicks [?!] which wouldn't have been the preferred option but were very successful. And one which wasn't.

Piri Weepu came off the bench with 25m left and once again showed why he's an explosive bench player - he comes off and injects a sense of pace in the backline, getting to the ruck and spreading the ball faster than the tired opposition defense can react.

In terms of set piece, both the lineout and scrum have progressed since last season. The All Black scrum, in my opinion, hasn't been a concern since 2008 - since then we've managed to hold our own. But how fantastic was it to not only see them hold their own, but the green-booted South African loosies backpedalling and slipping as the All Black pack put the heat on in several scrums.

Every team's lineout should be judged against the South African side as long as Victor Matfield is on the field and I'd say ours is at the same level, which it arguably hasn't been since 2006 when the Ali Williams/Matfield rivalry was at its fiercest. Keven Mealamu, Brad Thorn and Tom Donnelly were in sync throughout the whole game and once the Springboks sent on their bench their lineout fell to pieces.

The most noteable thing to walk away with though is penalties. This is what lost us the games against the republic last season. Morne Steyn can kick almost anything within a range of 50m of the posts so it was fantastic to see him only get a few chances and have to look for two drop goals - once as a last resort and once on an offensive drive that would have left a few South African players unimpressed with his decision. That's something to be applauded.

Final score: All Blacks 32, South Africa 12.

All Blacks;
Tries to Conrad Smith [16th international try], Ma'a Nonu [15th international try], Kieran Read [2nd international try], Tony Woodcock [6th international try]. Dan Carter 2 penalties, 3 conversions.

South Africa;
Morne Steyn 4 penalties.

Righto, so we are getting up and already the bus stops and bus arses and bus insides (are buses the new google column ads????) are being adorned with marketing and propoganda for the All Blacks Team of 4 Million RWC 2011 siege.

But advertisers will be taking a cautious first few footsteps when it comes to injecting current all blacks into those ads. Outside of captain Ritchie and Dan Carter, both of whom could probably be arrested and imprisoned for life and still be allowed out to play the cup, who is an absolute shoe-in to make the team and be star?

 ­­
As the Tri-Nations comes upon us again, it once again looks as if the Aussies at best can hope for second and the real title race is between New Zealand and South Africa.  What makes this year so interesting is the uncertainty around the All Blacks and Springboks.  Which of these teams is really the favorite?  Who are the underdogs?  

One option is to look at the betting situation.  Most betting sites that I have looked at seem to put the All Blacks as favorites, closely followed by the Springboks.  Betting is always a tricky way to look at these things, however, because the bookie wants to make money more than predict the right answer.  Popular teams tend to be "taxed."  In other words, internationally known teams like the New York Yankees or Manchester United or the Los Angeles Lakers tend to pay less.  Public opinion of these teams is inflated, which means they are bet on more, which means their odds have to be shortened to protect the bookie.  My guess is the All Blacks are often too short because of this phenomenon.

The consensus in many (NZ) media sources is that the Springboks need to be dethroned before they lose their favorites status.  They have won the last three meetings, four of the last six, and the last two on NZ soil.  In provincial play, the Bulls have been dominant and the Bulls make up the bulk of the Boks.  Until the All Blacks prove otherwise, the crown remains in African hands.

On the other side of that discussion are the tests that have been played since last years Bok victory in Hamilton.  New Zealand played well on tour in Europe, rolling France in Marseilles.  South Africa, however, fell all over themselves in France and Ireland, as well as bad losses to Saracens and Leicester.  This June the All Blacks regained some of their attacking mojo as South Africa was solid.  Some will dismiss the IRB rankings, but the Kiwi dominance of them currently is due to superior performance in the last nine months.

So who should be seen as the favorite?  I think one has to consider the All Blacks the favorites for several reasons.  They are playing two of the three tests at home.  The losses in Hamilton and Dunedin are significant, but should not be seen as the status quo.  Furthermore, the All Blacks are in a better place mentally with a better squad then last year.  The young guys' energy is greater than the experience of those they replaced.  Also, the proper (rather than new) rule interpretations will force the Boks to actually play instead of live off of others' mistakes.  South Africa's dominance has been based on deconstruction, and now the referees are requiring positive play.

This tournament will be significant mostly in defining the main story lines of the 2011 RWC.  If South Africa continues to win, the pressure on Graham Henry and the rest of the management will be immense.  The Sprinboks will be described as an unstoppable machine, the Achilles heel of the All Blacks. 

If the new look All Blacks, however, manage to win, the media will turn.  They will start to recognize that the Boks are aging.  The drain of Super 14, tests, and Currie Cup is starting to show on South Africa.  Almost all the major players in the Bok set up (Matfield, du Preez, Smit, Burger, Botha, Habana) are now getting to the wrong side of 25, if not 30.  The injuries to those players are signs of that drain.  The question will be whether or not 2009 was the peak of the Sprinbok wave and (ironically) it is New Zealand properly timing their run to the World Cup.

My guess is that the second scenario is more likely.  By this time next year I think the All Blacks will be Tri Nations champions (barely) and the new combination will be becoming concrete.  South Africa will be obviously too long in the tooth against the youth of the All Blacks.  Then again, that is only a guess.  Another South African methodical march to the Tri Nation crown and the story will look very different for the underdog All Blacks.

It has been forever since I have p­o­sted, but I’m back. In the last six months I finished a Master’s degree and my wife and I had our first child, so I’ve been a bit busy. None the less, here are some quick thoughts about the current world of r­ugby. Hopefully this will be the first of a series of more regular posts.

-I have written about Joe Rocokoco before and don’t need to
repeat that here. None the less, I am still amazed how quickly people get angry at his presence in the team. He has had a solid year and deserves a
spot. Does that mean that I wouldn’t select Guildford or Gear? No. The biggest mistake in this squad is taking a spot that should go to Hosea Gear (who for the first time in his career is significantly impressing me) and giving that spot to Rene Ranger. Ranger is a loose canon and cannot be trusted. In his debut test he butchered an obvious try by selfishly hanging on to the ball. Ranger still plays for Ranger, and until he can start putting team first he should play ITM Cup rugby.

-Its funny how quick international sport changes. One year ago, after a sweep of Italy
and defeat of France, many media members were talking up Matt Giteau as the best flyhalf in the world with Dan Carter down. Now, he can’t get past either Berrick Barnes or Quade Cooper for the 10 shirt. The whole left and right kicking duties the other night seems to suggest that Robbie Deans has lost a lot of faith in Giteau. After that miss against England it will be interesting to see if Giteau can recover some confidence before the Tri-Nations.

-Argentina and France are two fickle teams. Argentina gets beat two weeks in a row by a Scottish side whose score is always divisible by three, then romps over France. France, meanwhile, seems to be annoyed they were asked to play games in June again. The French attitude toward certain competitions (Heineken Cup in years past, June internationals) just stinks. How the fan base tolerates such lows after the high of the Six Nations is not hard to understand.

-Graham Henry was featured in a video on allblacks.com in which he interviewed Victor Vito. I realize many in the media dislike Henry for being condescending and having a headmaster persona, but I like the way he deals with players. I have never seen a professional coaching team that seems as holistic and didactic as the All Blacks. You get the sense that Henry wants first and foremost to develop young men. That may sound quaint, but the “better men make better All Blacks” concept is refreshing. Plenty of pro sports teams are full of full-grown adolescents and eventually that shows on the field. Caring for the whole person is part of what makes Henry so successful.

-Here in the US, the big news is the contract the IRB has signed with NBC. Basically, NBC
will show the next two RWC finals, and some other important games, on network TV in the States.  Before this, access to the RWC was largely limited to a satellite network no one had or online subscriptions. Either way, it was expensive and no one had access unless they really wanted it. Now, almost every TV in the country will get to watch the RWC. That has to pay dividends for the future of the game here. It's also one of the first tangebile ways that the Olympics has made a dent in USA rugby. NBC doesn't make this deal without the increased interest in sevens. They show the Olympics in the states, and the sister network now showing rugby is for olympic sports.

-The soccer World Cup has shown one important thing to rugby: refereeing needs to be high caliber on the international stage. The downright ludicrous mistakes some
FIFA refs have made have risked making the game a mockery, particularly for new fans. One of the greatest threats to the NBA has always been the charge that refs decide the winners, and many Americans feel that way about soccer now. The weight of history and stardom leads to bad decisions. Both New Zealand and the USA have suffered from those decisions. If rugby will make in roads with new audiences, the officiating has to be better than what FIFA has offered. Then again, it would be hard to be worse.

-I've included a little photo of our new baby. As you can see she is being raised well.

As long term readers will be aware, last year I wrote a post about the declining number of tries being scored in international rugby. I think I went deep enough into the trend there and my reasoning behind it, but today I got to thinking:

What about specific teams?

Everyone knows 'oh we last beat those guys in xxxx' but what about tries? The Welsh test on the weekend made me wonder, because we didn't concede a try on that tour of course and 2008 was a great NH trip too.

The answer? November 19, 2006. And that was dotted down by a flanker. That's one hell of a drought, no wonder they had a winger taking a penalty on Saturday; he just wanted to be able to say he scored against the mighty All Blacks!

This dubious record is only exceeded by Scotland, who haven't scored against us since 2005. There's obviously a large discrepancy in the stats though - for example we've only played the Scots twice since 2005 but we've had four matches against Wales in the same period - but it's still an interesting stat-line to look at and may be helpful in seeing where some teams are going wrong later in the year. So here're the stats for 3N teams v 6N;

New Zealand:

v England - Last try was 21 June 2008 in Christchurch. They lost that match 44-12 and scored two tries to the All Blacks' 5. The two sides have met twice since.

v France - Last try was on June 20, 2009 in Wellington. They lost that match 14-10, with both sides scoring one try each - to Ma'a Nonu and Cedric Heymans respectively - but France ultimately lost due to NZ slotting 3 penalties. The two sides have met once since, in Marseille, where the All Blacks romped to a 39-12 victory.

v Italy - Last try was on 08 September 2007 in Marseille. The two sides met in pool play at the Rugby World Cup with Italy being throughly outplayed in the All Blacks' 76-14 win. The two sides have met twice since, both in 2009.

v Ireland - Last try was 12 June 2010 in New Plymouth. A match which will probably be remembered more for Ireland's lack of discipline than the dominant performance put forward by the All Blacks, Ireland went down 66-28. This is the most recent time the two sides have played.

v Scotland - Last try was 26 Nov 2005. The All Blacks would emerge on top 29-10 scoring four tries to Scotland's one. The two sides have met twice since, but not since Nov 2008.

v Wales - Last try was almost a year after Scotland to the day, 25 Nov 2006. The All Blacks won that game 45-10. The two sides have played each other three times since at the time of writing, with a fourth match to be held this weekend.

In looking into these I also checked out the All Blacks try-scoring stats. Incredibly, the last time we didn't score a try in an international was 07 Aug 2004 against Australia who beat us 23-18 - their sole try making all the difference. That's a 61-match streak the All Blacks sit on where they have scored a try in which they have lost 11 matches - seven to South Africa and two each to France and Australia. That's insane!

Conversely, the last time Australia were held tryless was last year at the 3N match at the Caketin which the All Blacks won 33-6 [you know, the one against the All Blacks that James O'Connor looked real out of his depth in. What do you mean that doesn't narrow it down?] Their record against the 6N is as follows:

Australia:

v England - Last scored a try on June 19 2010. The English won this match 21-20 in Sydney, their first win over Australia since the 2007 Rugby World Cup quarterfinal. This is the most recent time the two sides have played.

v France - France last crossed the chalkline on 22 Nov 2008. They lost that match 18-13. They have met once since, in 2009.

v Italy - Last try was June 13 2009. Australia won that game 31-8. The two sides have met once since, a week later.

v Ireland - Last scored 15 Nov 2009. That match ended in a 20 all draw. As much as the All Blacks appear to have the wood on Ireland, they seem to be Australia's bogey team. Since the last time Australia held Ireland tryless - 09 Nov 2002 - they've met seven times with the shamrock men always able to get across no matter what the score difference is. This is the most recent time the two sides have played.

v Scotland - 25 Nov 2006 is actually a bad day for both the Welsh and Scottish, as it's the last time the Scottish scored a try against Australia. They played last year - 21 Nov 2009 - and won 9-8 despite being held tryless. Last year's match was the only one which has been contested between the two sides since 2006.

v Wales - Last try scored on Nov 29 2008. Wales won that match 21-18, equalling Australia's two tries and getting an extra penalty. The teams have met once since, on Nov 28 2009.

The mighty imperial empire of South Africa is actually, on paper, a bit odd. For example, they're the 3N team most recently held tryless as they failed to take a five pointer against the Wallabies on September 05 2009.

South Africa:

v England - England last scored a try against the bokke in the leadup to the 2007 World Cup on June 02. The Boks seemed to learn from that match which they won 55-22 anyway, holding the English tryless in both pool play and the final at the RWC. The two sides have met three times since the last time England scored a try.

v France - Les Blues managed to get across the line twice on 12 Jun 2010, despite being thoroughly pantsed by the Saffers. This is the most recent time the two sides have played.

v Italy - Italy followed France and played SA this past weekend, managing to score one try. This is the most recent time the two sides have played.

v Ireland - Last scored a try on 28 Nov 2009. Like Australia v Scotland, SA have only played Ireland once since 2006. Almost unbelievably, Ireland have won their last three games against SA - in 2009, 2006 and 2004. This is the most recent time the two sides have played.

v Scotland - Last scored 15 Nov 2008 in their 14-10 loss to SA. This is the most recent time the two sides have played.

v Wales - Last scored on 05 Jun 2010. This math was even on the try ledger with both sides scoring three tries. SA ultimately grabbed the W with the final score being 34-31.

So while logistically we can't take much from these stats there are some interesting stats - for example South Africa appears unable to hold teams out from their tryline, but end up winning through a superior penalty count. The All Blacks have bucked the SH trend against Ireland and Australia seems to be like South Africa in struggling to maintain a stoic defense.

So what I posit is that we are too harsh on the All Blacks' defense at times. While it is relatively common to concede a match at 3N level, can't we put it in the perspective that we are playing Australia and South Africa more frequently than the 6N teams so of course we will figure out each other's differences.

In other words, we have a wall of blackness to celebrate, not lambast.

How on earth can we judge the merits of this All Blacks performance when a test match effectively became a mismatch before even quarter of an hour had passed? We can't, that's the simple answer.

Excuse me, Marc Hinton, but I'm going to disagree with that. We can analyse last night's 66-28 win. STOP. Hammertime:

Lineouts:

 We had a lineout which operated well, keeping all of our throws and competed with the Irish - winning one of theirs and in two other Irish throws we looked like almost skimming it off the top too. Boric, Thorn and Whitelock worked well for their respective stints. Mealamu's throws looked to be hitting the correct tempo and while he only threw [I think] one in, Aled de Malmanche had it sailing right down the middle like a silver arrow.

Scrums:

Some concerns came out of this. The two Franks boys and Mealamu had a respectable night up the front but there wasn't much communication with the rest of the pack - we got pinged for pushing early on one feed and it had happened a few other times throughout the night. Kaino and McCaw got caught on the back foot detaching a couple of times and allowed an Irish scrum without a number 8 to get some metres off the set piece.

Forwards:

In general the A unit combined well. It was clear, however, that we weren't competing at the ruck in our half. Not that we were getting dominated but we weren't going for it. There were several times when the Irish would have a ruck with one defender - in one case there was no-one there - and the forwards didn't go for it. So, it didn't come as a surprise to me when the Irish counter-ruck attack had some initial success in the second half. It seemed to be a clear tactic from the team though, perhaps in an effort to minimise penalties - I remember the Blues using a similar tactic in the Super 14.

I was surprised to learn that Kieran Read hadn't scored a try before because he's often been a linking player. Kaino had a bruising night around the ruck and there'll be a few Irish players who struggled to sleep last night with the image of him sprinting at them emblazoned on their eyelids. Owen and Ben Franks got around the field well - as you'd expect from two brothers - and Mealamu had an exceptional night. He's not the bruising battering ram that Andrew Hore and de Malmanche are, but he's stoic and I didn't seem him make any mistakes. Richie was Richie, I don't know if I need to elaborate. A lot of positive factors from last night's match.

Backs:

I'm going to start off with a negative, though I don't want to. It was his first match and he's in there because of injuries, but Benson Stanley didn't have the abilities of an international second-five. His distribution was great and his running ability was fine, but it was clear that he wasn't physical enough. He got beaten on the inside on defence a fair few times, and brushed off on others. Perhaps it's because I'm used to seeing physical players in the mold of Ma'a Nonu, Stirling Mortlock and Mathieu Bastareud but he didn't come across as a Jaque Fourie or Berrick Barnes.

I'm being harsh but the reason those players succeed and Stanley got shown up a bit is that when you're defending a 12, you need to do two things - shut him down and limit his passing ability. Stanley would do one or the other and it led to the d-line getting burned a lot. But this isn't me calling for him to be dropped - he worked VERY well with Dan and Conrad and this is something that will be picked up on and highlighted in tape sessions no doubt.

To the rest of the back-line, Jimmy Cowan didn't have his best night I didn't think, but it wasn't too bad either. Dan Carter was Dan Carter [see Richie McCaw] and should be commended on his fantastic goal kicking. Conrad Smith atoned for that awful match he played for the Hurricanes against the Waratahs. He was well set on defense and the amount of times he broke the backline and set Cory, Israel or Joe up with open space was great. It was also good to see a player who doesn't often get highlighted get rewarded for his work with a well-deserved try. Cory Jane had an interesting night. He was fine with the ball in hand but there were a few times where he was caught drifting off his man. Israel Dagg had one glaring mistake which almost cost a try when he misjudged a kick and couldn't pick it up, but he definitely didn't look like a youngster on debut, and nor did he, Joe and Cory look like a back 3 who'd never played together. Joe Rokocoko had a Joe Rokocoko kind of night. No major mistakes, was positionally aware, but with the ball in hand couldn't spark that x factor to get across the line and for that reason seemed a bit invisible.

Another thing worth looking at is the restarts - and there were a lot of them - there were two times I saw when the man fielding the kickoff was set and had his lifters with him, only to be dropped. There was also a lineout where Sam Whitelock [I think] got dropped.

The four tries scored against us is a yard-stick that many are using to judge last night's performance but I think a better measure would be the amount of time the Irish spent in our 22 and the ease they seemed to have getting there. It's commendable that we didn't concede a penalty in that situation until late in the game, but it needs to be highlighted that the Irish would get the ball from their territory to ours with relative ease until we manned up. Remember that before Heaslip got sent off they were camped on our line and had been in the 5m line for 8 phases or so.

As to that knee, I think it deserves the same treatment as a gouge. It was deliberate, there was intent and if McCaw hadn't had the fortune to have his head between some Irish thighs it could have had nasty consequences had it connected with his nose or a temple.

Here's a replay [also, I love the Irish call "If there's gonna be a fight you can be pretty sure that Jimmy Cowan will be in the centre of it somewhere... and there he is"]

As always, leave your thoughts in the comments - and here are highlights for those with hazy memories thanks to Rugbydump, as always.