2016 Under-20 Rugby World Championships - Manchester UK

[Seymour Butz]

I'm guessing they've never been beaten by Ireland before or only scraped over Wales by 1 point either.

This NZ team was beatable. They ran away with it at the end but Australia couldn't land the killer punch when they needed to, despite being in the position to do so.

I think the turning point was in the second half when we were camped in their 22 and spurned the 3 points on offer (several times) and kept going for scrum. When it's close, and there's 20+ minutes on the clock, always take the points. Who cares about winning the scrum contest. Not smart play. Was this the tactic talked about before the game, one wonders? Still, seems to be the same tactic the Wallabies employ. Just dumb.

 

[Big Mal]

A good tactic to take the scrum when NZ were down a player a Barrett had to pack at flanker. Immediate overlap 10 metres out but ball popped out and NZ make their way 60m downfield. Heartbreaker.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Hugh Jarse]

Was that the turning point of the game, or did NZL suddenly decide to play from then onward?

Great that we bitchslapped the NZL scrum time and again, but what actual advantage did we get from that? One sole penalty try, and possibly 15 points from 5 easy penalty kicks left unclaimed.

The coach and selectors must take responsibility for not playing/selecting an 8 that can control the pill at the back of a scrum, or not hooking the incumbent after the 3rd, 4th or 5th time that they proved that they were not capable of doing a core responsibility of an 8.

Why continue to play for scrum dominance when you can not win a scrum because your back row does not know how to control the ball that the fat boys have worked their arse off to partially win for the team?

The continued pursuit of size over capability for the forwards in Australian Rugby is concerning. Tall blokes don't automatically win lineouts. Fat blokes don't automatically win scrums. Big backs don't automatically breach the advantage line, or get the ball into space.

 

[Brumby Runner]

Was that the turning point of the game, or did NZL suddenly decide to play from then onward?

Great that we bitchslapped the NZL scrum time and again, but what actual advantage did we get from that? One sole penalty try, and possibly 15 points from 5 easy penalty kicks left unclaimed.

The coach and selectors must take responsibility for not playing/selecting an 8 that can control the pill at the back of a scrum, or not hooking the incumbent after the 3rd, 4th or 5th time that they proved that they were not capable of doing a core responsibility of an 8.

Why continue to play for scrum dominance when you can not win a scrum because your back row does not know how to control the ball that the fat boys have worked their arse off to partially win for the team?

The continued pursuit of size over capability for the forwards in Australian Rugby is concerning. Tall blokes don't automatically win lineouts. Fat blokes don't automatically win scrums. Big backs don't automatically breach the advantage line, or get the ball into space.

I mostly agree with your comments, but in this case the fat blokes really did do their job, the tall timber were ok at lineout time until a prop came on the throw to the lineout (then lost three on the trot), and the backs were equally or moreso as constructive in attack as their NZ counterparts. It was the backrow, who to my eye were undersized, who let the game get away.

Very poor team management by the coaches in not subbing Jones after the forst two or three shambles at the back of the scrum, and for not starting Leota in his place to begin with. On top of that, bring a prop replacement on to sub for the hooker and everything then went downhill fast.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

^^ The fat blokes doing their job is no good if the Giraffes and Gazelles are also not doing their job at scrum time.

Our Gazelles (6, 7, 8) were worthless at scrum time, and at the tackle contest, and I can not recall any good carries from them either.

We were out coached.

Craig may not have been wanted by the selectors initially, but he has superior line out throwing skills to Taylor, Useless, and Asiata, all of whom were in the Manchester squad and got more game time at the U20 World Cup than him.

Unfortunately I don't think we got to see those in the 90 seconds of game time he played after his emergency 14000 km one way journey to join the team.

Who was the forwards coach? Maybe it is not all Thommo's fault!

 

[Quick Hands]

Unbelievable that the coach will put on a prop at hooker to continue scrum dominance over NZL when our back row doesn't know how to control the ball resulting from that scrum dominance.

Have we reached the Jumping the Shark moment with Coach Thommo?

Thommo's time was up a while a go. The only thing saving him has been the lack of exposure that the 20s team gets even in the rugby media. Surely this level on incompetence can't be allowed to go on?

And we wonder why our test players lack technical nous in game situations and why their basic catch, pass and kicking skills are so poor. Look no further than what has gone on in the 20s. I can't see much elite player development going on.

 

[Highlander35]

Nic Henderson was the forwards coach wasn't he?

Backrow not playing well was not the way the Vics played.

 

[Mr Pilfer]

Have just finished watching the game and my god I have never seen a number 8 so bad at controlling the ball at the back of the scrum, he just looked awkward and like he had never played there in his life, even the ones that didn't spit out the back he kicked them back in to the front row or out the side. The coaches are just as much to blame for not benching him by half time but could have been a different story with a couple more tries there

 

[Lee Grant]

Nic Henderson was the forwards coach wasn't he?

Backrow not playing well was not the way the Vics played.

Yes he was the forwards coach and Gaffney the backs guru and Gilmore and Rapp the assistant coaches.

Was disappointed in 6 Scott-Young and 8 Jones. Leota may have been better at the back of the scrum but he is not an 80 minute player. If the Rebels can make him such for 2017 - his U20 year - we will have a good 'un there.

The trouble is our two tighthead locks (who acquitted themselves well) would have moved on and slighter players, McCauley and Hockings, will be incumbents next year.

At least we have identified a few good tight five players for the future.

The backs were disappointing and as I indicated in Discussion in the blog yesterday: it was galling to watch European opponents playing our Aussie backline game better than we did.

PS - the blog, which includes some Aussie content, is here:

​

http://goo.gl/T0HLfk​

Give it a click;
.

 

[Quick Hands]

England 4 finals in a row and we've appeared in 3 5 v 6 playoffs in a row. There's a trend here. Apart from the obvious coaching issue, it also seems indicative of a deeper problem in player development.

All of these players have been through our junior elite programmes and yet there are significant deficiencies in basic skills.

Meanwhile, England are on the rise and their development system seems to be doing its job far better than ours. Unfortunately, any questioning of our system is met with a "what would you know" and the wagons are immediately circled.

In 2015 the RFU decided to introduce rugby into 400 non-rugby playing schools and provided 10,000 pounds to EACH school to help with the intro

The RFU alloocated 5.2 million pounds to facilities for grass roots rugby clubs (supplemented by another 6.9 million from Sport England)

Both items on page 23 of the attached

The RFU junior development budget for 2015 was 30.7 million pounds. (schools and juniors)

The RFU allocated 44.6 million pounds to its professional rugby

Page 41 of the attached

http://www.englandrugby.com/mm/Document/AboutRFU/General/01/30/64/47/RFUAnnualReport_Neutral.pdf

 

[Strewthcobber]

How do you spend $70m (say) on junior development.

As is who's actually getting the money at the end of the day?

Is there 700 development officers/coaches etc being paid?

 

[Johns]

The backs were disappointing and as I indicated in Discussion in the blog yesterday: it was galling to watch European opponents playing our Aussie backline game better than we did.

Can you expand on this one. The Aus backs gave NZ plenty of headaches yesterday.

 

[Lee Grant]

^^^^^^^^^
NZ is not a European team.

And if they were - you have to agree that the Kiwi backs gave more grief to the Aussies, than the Aussies gave them.

Alas.
.

 

[Quick Hands]

How do you spend $70m (say) on junior development.

As is who's actually getting the money at the end of the day?

Is there 700 development officers/coaches etc being paid?

Club based academies, regional academies, school programmes. Coaching resources (human and equipment).

As to who's getting the money - well that not how I'd put it. Who's benefitting from the money would be a better question. Clubs, schools and the players at those clubs and schools are all benefitting. Obviously the money (i.e. the foldable notes) end up with the people who are being paid to implement the programme.

It seems to me that they aren't trying to pick winners at 10 or 12 or 14 like we are. The bigger the pyramid at the bottom, the more athletes with ability you have to choose from. The more kids that are exposed to well-resourced coaching, the more clubs and schools that have rugby infrastructure the better for the clubs and schools involved. The RFU are clearly trying to not only improve the elite, but are making a big time effort to spread the game beyond its traditional areas.

We clearly don't have the same money, but I'd suggest that we could learn something from their approach.

 

[Johns]

Did anyone happen to catch the rugby league last night? Angus Crichton debuted for the Rabbitohs and was very very strong(though rough around the edges).

What a difference he would have made in Manchester as number 8.