Shiggins
Simon Poidevin (60)
I'm talking about what they get away with.
All black tactics
- Thread starter Shiggins
- Start date
- Status
So did I, if you actually read what I did.
M
Muttonbird
Guest
M
Muttonbird
Guest
Outstanding piece Cyclo. A dispassionate analysis of the facts and shows the way these things should be done.
hawktrain
Ted Thorn (20)
Great piece, the sort of stuff that should be in the papers but that's just beating a dead horse. One of the things I found most interesting was the huge difference in defensive contests between the two. In high intensity test matches that is a massive gap, and it means I'm not going crazy for thinking that the Wobs had a truckload of ball in both games.
Hugh Jarse
Rocky Elsom (76)
Can one report a post from a moderator that inconveniently and gratuitously allows the facts to get in the way of a good old unfounded subjective whinge?
One can try.
Hugh Jarse
Rocky Elsom (76)
When you have done that, Give Old Mate Barak a call in Washington. He needs some help to sort out what to do about the alleged use of chemical weapons in Syria.
Dam0
Dave Cowper (27)
I would start off by looking for the law which makes this illegal before I spent too much time wading through videos looking for instances of it.
Shiggins I examined 2 games in depth. Overall, there was no significant difference between the Wallabies and All Blacks in their slowing of the ball when defending tackles / rucks. I'm not about to do another 10 to make the data more, or less, significant, as I don't have time.
If you want to look at any one game, you will always find a sequence of play, or series of rucks that show repeated "offences", and drawing that out to prove an enduring behavioural pattern is a long stretch. For example, the video at the end of my blog article showed a series of 5 breakdowns in one game where the All Blacks had defending players slow-ish to clear the tackle area. Not all were penalisable, but eventually they did concede a penalty. I saw no other sequences suggesting a programmed pattern, nor was there a clear difference in where the penalties were conceded on the field, although the All Blacks were slightly more likely to concede one in the "red-zone", while the Wallabies were slightly worse overall. Maybe the Wallabies try to slow it as much as anyone, but are less good at it?
I learned one thing - watch both teams over time with the same eye, and it is illuminating. As fans we all tend to howl at the opposition, as do I when games are on, but the cold light of day can reveal a broader landscape.
If you want to look at any one game, you will always find a sequence of play, or series of rucks that show repeated "offences", and drawing that out to prove an enduring behavioural pattern is a long stretch. For example, the video at the end of my blog article showed a series of 5 breakdowns in one game where the All Blacks had defending players slow-ish to clear the tackle area. Not all were penalisable, but eventually they did concede a penalty. I saw no other sequences suggesting a programmed pattern, nor was there a clear difference in where the penalties were conceded on the field, although the All Blacks were slightly more likely to concede one in the "red-zone", while the Wallabies were slightly worse overall. Maybe the Wallabies try to slow it as much as anyone, but are less good at it?
I learned one thing - watch both teams over time with the same eye, and it is illuminating. As fans we all tend to howl at the opposition, as do I when games are on, but the cold light of day can reveal a broader landscape.
Shiggins
Simon Poidevin (60)
Obstructing defenders?
Shiggins
Simon Poidevin (60)
Cheers mateShiggins I examined 2 games in depth. Overall, there was no significant difference between the Wallabies and All Blacks in their slowing of the ball when defending tackles / rucks. I'm not about to do another 10 to make the data more, or less, significant, as I don't have time.
If you want to look at any one game, you will always find a sequence of play, or series of rucks that show repeated "offences", and drawing that out to prove an enduring behavioural pattern is a long stretch. For example, the video at the end of my blog article showed a series of 5 breakdowns in one game where the All Blacks had defending players slow-ish to clear the tackle area. Not all were penalisable, but eventually they did concede a penalty. I saw no other sequences suggesting a programmed pattern, nor was there a clear difference in where the penalties were conceded on the field, although the All Blacks were slightly more likely to concede one in the "red-zone", while the Wallabies were slightly worse overall. Maybe the Wallabies try to slow it as much as anyone, but are less good at it?
I learned one thing - watch both teams over time with the same eye, and it is illuminating. As fans we all tend to howl at the opposition, as do I when games are on, but the cold light of day can reveal a broader landscape.
Dam0
Dave Cowper (27)
OK, but only if they are actually obstructing. hanging around offside waiting for play to catch up with you after a kicking duel or a break for instance is not necessarily illegal. Take a look at 11.1 (or all of 11 for that matter).
Anyways I think Cyclos's post above speaks for me, and I wouldn't add anything further to it.
D
daz
Guest
I think the most obvious mission statement tactic used by the All Blacks is simply this:
"Expect to win every game by thinking, smashing and playing better than the opposition"
Seems to be working for them, the bastards.
"Expect to win every game by thinking, smashing and playing better than the opposition"
Seems to be working for them, the bastards.
D
daz
Guest
Is that a pink mist I see?
- Status