Three wins from four, yet I still don't buy this Manawatu surge
34 points conceded to Auckland tells you everything eh. Three wins by 2, 17 and 6, then Waikato smacked them 36:27 away. Anyone actually lumping NZ$ on this surge before Canterbury rock up at Central Energy Trust Arena on 3 October deserves what's coming 😏
10 posts
-
✓Three wins is three wins, Andy. 34 in Auckland stings, sure, but scoring 40 away counts for something. Canterbury on 3 October settles it.Hype isn't an argument.
-
Nah Kev's got it right tbh 🔥 40 put on Auckland away is no fluke, that takes some doing. Yeah the defence leaked 34 and Waikato gave us a hiding, fine... but 2 and 6 point grinds show they can close a game out now, which they never used to. Canterbury at the Arena will tell us, and I'll be there yelling myself hoarse 💪Heart with the team, head on pause.
-
That 40 points they put on Auckland away is seriously significant, mate; it suggests the attack has genuine power, even if the defence is letting things slip occasionally. The fact they managed those tight wins, 2 and 6 point margins included, suggests they are getting better at closing games out when it really matters. Canterbury on October 3rd will certainly tell us if the whole system is sorted.
-
Back in my day Manawatu used to turn up at the Arena, have a decent dig for twenty minutes, then fall off the cliff entirely, so closing out Taranaki by two means something to me. Seen worse sides win the NPC than this lot, mind. The 34 leaked in Auckland does stick in the throat though, and Canterbury on the 3rd will tell us whether it's a surge or a happy patch 😄Been here longer than some have followed.
-
A defender that gives away 34 points against Auckland needs serious looking at, regardless of the attacking stats. I reckon the current focus on the 40 points put on Auckland away slightly misdirects attention from the sheer inconsistency they’re showing. We’ve seen those narrow wins, Taranaki by 2, and Bay of Plenty by 17 - which is one thing, but the defensive holes are exposed clearly in the Waikato 36:27 loss, and obviously the Auckland game too. If you look at the whole tape, the attack is certainly powerful, that’s true, but the lack of defensive solidity means every big attacking performance can be wiped out quickly, like that loss to Waikato. I could be wrong, but if they want punters to seriously back this surge, they need to fix the leaking first; the numbers just don't back the narrative of pure momentum yet. 📊Do the math before you argue.
-
Is anyone seriously buying this surge as 'skill' when they’re grinding out 2 and 6 point wins? All that talk about the 40 points on Auckland is laughable really because you still shipped 34 points to them. It feels like it's a total lottery, not sport, mate; Canterbury are gonna bloody well expose that leaky defence. 🤡💸
-
Funny how everyone crowing about the 40 on Auckland ignores that defence shipped 34. Two-point grind over Taranaki isn't a surge, hard out. Canterbury on 3 October sorts it.Numbers > vibes.
-
Everyone swears Taranaki by 2 is grit when the same side leaked 34 in Auckland 😏 Canterbury sorts it, and I'll happily put my nz$ where my mouth is.Here to argue, not to nod along.
-
The idea that these results mark a sustainable surge feels premature. While scoring 40 points away against Auckland is impressive, the fact that the defence gave up 34 points there, coupled with the 36 conceded to Waikato, shows definite leakage. We'll see if that attacking form holds up when they face Canterbury at Central Energy Trust Arena on 3 October.Do the math before you argue.