We stunned them in that first derby. Set them on their heels. Bloodied their noses. They wobbled through games and lost points as a result. It seemed like a building point. None of that grit was out there today. For us that is.
If Dome doesn’t let Chief go today, then perhaps I’m fine with a back office overhaul too.
If Dome doesn’t let Chief go today, then perhaps I’m fine with a back office overhaul too.
Admire the enthusiasm, but ‘competing for half a game’ doesn’t really count as a bloodied nose or setting a team on their heels - being moderately competitive is what teams are meant to be doing every week! Never mind squandering the substantial numerical advantage - if anything that galvanises the team that manages to ride it out and take the win. Anyhow…
Well sure. But I disagree.
But first, it showed they didn’t have a cloak of invulnerability: they could be hurt.
Second , they had a starting defender and one of their best from the previous season suspended for the next few games. They had to finish a game with 9 men to prevent us scoring. They sacrificed players and coming games to prevent our best chances.
Thirdly, the Auckland players themselves were introduced to doubt in their abilities.
After playing us they dropped 5 points in the next 2 games. They were rattled. It wasn’t business as usual.
They expected teams they scored against to roll up like we did today.
In that first game we equalised within minutes and then we relentlessly attacked them throughout the second half. They were shocked at our tenacity. Sure, they hung on, but it was by the skin of their teeth. It was Dunkirk, not D-Day, if you like. They hung on but were exhausted physically and mentally from doing so.
That’s not ‘moderately competitive.’ How often do teams we or anyone plays against end up with 9 men?
We picked up more points than they did in the next two games with a good win over Adelaide.
Today…