OPINION: So what do you people think?

The All Blacks took Wales apart by running the ball back at them, using the speed trio of Israel Dagg, Beauden Barrett and Ben Smith, to pick out the slowest link in the kick chase.

They abandoned their kicking game in order to at last counter attack. The results were stunning and yet there was not a mention of this in the halftime television analysis.

ROBYN EADIE/Fairfax NZ Would Israel Dagg, pictured, Ben Smith and Beauden Barrett make a great back three? You might not find out from the TV analysis.

So do you, the viewer, think that the coverage of rugby which the nation is receiving from Sky Television, is good enough? New Zealand is a country of brilliant punditry.

READ MORE:

* Wales save worst for last in NZ: UK media

* All Blacks crush Wales to sweep series

* Dagg all smiles as comeback gathers pace

* ABs send Wales packing, bring on Aussies

* Gifford: AB selections pay off for Hansen

* All Blacks player ratings - third test v Wales

* Julian 'The Bus' Savea struggles to hit top gear

You can go into most bars and listen to many a fascinating discussion.

But turn on the television and we get a parade of former players, some of them articulate and some of them less so, stating the obvious in an atmosphere of smug camaraderie.

We get stuff like "how good does this guy finish", a sentence noticeably in need of an adverb. Cliches like "spoiled for choice" and "an embarrassment of riches" tumble over each other.

Adjectives like "impressive" are repeated in consecutive phrases because the mind is too scrambled to move on. The likes of Jeff Wilson, Christian Cullen and John Kirwan were all great players, but they are not up to the job.

Do you like the constant use of nicknames like Goldie and Kamo?

Do you feel privileged to be a part of this old boys club? And what about the business of Justin Marshall, who is often the best analyst despite pairing lurid blue suits with brown shoes, doing his on pitch piece to camera, holding a ball, and moving up the sideline?

It's as if Sky are delighted to have discovered a former rugby player who can walk and talk at the same time.

There was a brief appearance by a cheerful Ieuan Evans, but otherwise the viewpoint was entirely a New Zealand one, with frequent use of the word "we".

When the BBC or Sky cover rugby union in Britain, there is almost always a studio "expert" representing each of the teams playing.

I am fascinated to know whether a back three of Barrett, Dagg and Ben Smith is a genuine option. It would frighten the opposition to death.

How keen would England be on any sort of kicking game if they were faced with that prospect.

I don't think Barrett would have any problem playing on the wing, but I want to know what the other guys in the pub think.

Too many of the people in Sky's coverage ask interminable leading questions, which usually elicit the response, "Yes, he certainly did." And half the questions are not worth asking. Do you have any interest in the halftime interview as a knackered player is walking off the pitch?

The player, quite reasonably, looks as if he would rather be anywhere else. And almost every one of them says, "We've just got to hold onto the ball a bit better."

The coaches occasionally have something to say. Ian Foster said, "There's obviously a lot of counter attack opportunity. They've decided not to kick the ball out."

Hardly any team kicks the ball out and there is always counter attack opportunity, so why did the All Blacks change now? Many of us have been desperate for more counter attack, for more Wayne Smith, for more Dave Rennie and the Chiefs. Where was the follow up question?

We had to wait until the post-match interview and for Sam Warburton to say, "It was poor today, you know kick chase first half was bad, counter attack ball they got a lot of success from and defence wasn't good enough."

Ian Smith did then, thank heavens, pose a direct question and ask, "What have you learned from your trip here?"

There was no lead to follow, no "It's been a difficult trip, and you must have learned a lot about fitness and focus, haven't you?" It was direct and simple and nearly pulled Warburton apart.

"It's difficult right now," he said through a mist of emotion. "Everything's so raw."

Then we went back to the studio and to the following exchange between Tony Johnson and Cullen.

"They really didn't miss too much of a beat did they?"

"You're right, they didn't miss a beat, they put the sword, the foot down on a pretty tiring Welsh side."

The pictures are terrific, but it does at times feel as though we are in a children's picture book. I confess, I couldn't put up with any more of it at this point, so I switched over to Australia versus England. There were a lot of the same flaws.

No opposition analyst. Too much matiness with Kafe and co. And were they really all wearing black jackets with Fox Sports on them. Are people like John Eales and George Gregan to be branded like cattle?

But at least Eales had some articulate thoughts about the inclusion of Will Skelton and the diminishment of the lineout in favour of pick and go.

And then there was a brilliant bit of pitchside analysis about how the England halfback had been working in training and warm-up on little pop passes around the fringes, and lo, it came to pass, and Dan Cole scored off just one passage of play.

There are men and women up and down this country who can offer this sort of insight, but instead we are given a squad of former All Blacks, some of whom can scarcely speak. We are treated like a country of moronic autograph hunters.

So, I'm just curious, is that what you want?



* comments are closed

Sign up here for the Rio Olympics: Going for Gold newsletter