Analysis: Perthfontein - a blueprint for success?

[Gagger]

It’s taken me all week to summon the strength to re-watch The Clusterfµck of Perthfontein, and you know what, it wasn’t nearly as bad as I’d remembered. In fact, I’d go so far as to say that within it are hints that this Wallaby side could become as good as we hoped, and maybe in not as long away as we’d feared. I believe what’s in the video below, together with a few stats I’ve pulled out, back my reasoning.

Link to it rest of post as will look crap here: http://www.greenandgoldrugby.com/analysis-perthfontein-a-blueprint-for-success

 

[Spook]

Gee we were poor when we had numbers out wide. What happened to running a different line, turning the ball inside etc?

Great stuff though Gags.

 

[Gagger]

Thanks mate

Agreed though - got ourselves into much better positions, but still not nailing overlaps, let alone making them

 

[Scotty]

Gee we were poor when we had numbers out wide. What happened to running a different line, turning the ball inside etc?

Great stuff though Gags.

Matt Giteau and a different centre combination happened.

 

[fatprop]

Kafer highlighted how flat and one out we were.

Too flat, no depth, no angles, no options; just catch and pass accross the line.

Kafer also showed an interesting piece from the Bled and specificallly Barnes' try.

Barnes actually takes a few steps back from the line, to give himself better options.


http://www.foxsports.com.au/rugby/video/0,,The Rugby Club_14971,00.html

 

[Scotty]

Kafer highlighted how flat and one out we were.

Too flat, no depth, no angles, no options; just catch and pass accross the line.

Wow, he's brilliant. Someone actually pays him to work that stuff out? :

Just kidding, while I think the above was blatantly obvious to everyone, as was the change when Gits moved to 12 and starting providing a deeper option for QC (Quade Cooper)'s long passes, Kaf normally does have some good analysis points.

 

[rugbywhisperer]

OK laddies, tonight, when Barnes is at 10, lets see how many phases we get from the backline - I have a cunning plan theory

 

[Scarfman]

Care to tell us in advance? Or only after the fact, like economists?

 

[rugbywhisperer]

i do agree he is the better option at 10, but (and it's bin a bit since we seen him there) is that IMO while he takes it to the oposition, after a couple of phases he stalls and the distribution to 12 isn't as flash - myself - I prefer him to take 2 steps and pass rather that make too miay incursions into enemy territory - leave that for about the 3rd or 4th phase, be more of a distributor than a runner.

 

[disco]

Gee we were poor when we had numbers out wide. What happened to running a different line, turning the ball inside etc?

Wrap arounds, one of the simplest moves a backline can do & still one of the most effective moves to date.

As Noddy knows I grew up playing league & didn't discover real rugby until I was in my twenties but as a 5/8th in league I was lucky enough to be coached by a fella called Erroll Slingsby who played along side John Lang at Easts Brisbane during the 70's.

Anyone that is familiar with Qld Rugby League in the 70's will know the name & one of the best pieces of advise he ever gave me was to never ever let my backline do straight hands he always told me that if nothing else do a wrap around.

 

[Scotty]

It wasn't even straight hands that was the issue at times, it was the width and depth of the backline. There was one stage when Elsom was on the wing (the forwards were basically the backline), and he was at least 20m from the sideline! We had numbers on them, but then made it easy to be contained.

RW,

I don't quite agree with that assessment of Barnes. I think if anything he has a tendency to be too much of a pass pusher at 10, and stands too deep. This hasn't been such an issue when he is used to 'pinch hit' at 10 when Giteau has moved a bit wider or been caught in a ruck, but it can be an issue when he is playing the whole game at 10.

When the Reds had a (short) turn around in form last year by thrashing the Bulls, it was after Barnes was switched to 12 and Cooper brought into 10. Latham said to me that he believed that is what changed the Reds attack, 'because Cooper was playing to their game plan, while Berrick wasn't when he was at 10'. Essentially saying tha Berrick was playing too deep and kicking too much.

If he can play closer to the line, then it should be succesful, especially if Gits can range wider and deeper at times.

 

[disco]

When the Reds had a (short) turn around in form last year by thrashing the Bulls, it was after Barnes was switched to 12 and Cooper brought into 10. Latham said to me that he believed that is what changed the Reds attack, 'because Cooper was playing to their game plan, while Berrick wasn't when he was at 10'. Essentially saying tha Berrick was playing too deep and kicking too much.

I agree but that would have been Eddies coaching when he tried to make the Reds pick & drive for 80 minutes & get Barnes to kick to the corners in 2007.