Australia v Scotland, 3:00pm 17 June Sydney Football Stadium

[Sunny]

The lack of defensive effort and ruck involvement by the Wallaby Front Row - apart from Tom Robertson - continues to astound me. It has continued to be part of Cheika's strategy but it makes little sense to me.

The Scots certainly showed how to disrupt the opposition ball/game plan.
While making the best of limited opportunities.
Turn Overs Conceded: Scotland 13; Wallabies 18.


The Wallabies stood off 58% of the Scotland Rucks.
Only a single Wallaby was involved in another 35% of the Scotland Rucks.
In only 6 rucks was there more than a single Wallaby.
Must feel really lonely entering a ruck knowing that support ISN'T coming.

So now you know how a team with very little fire power in their Backs can have only 43% Possession and 38% Territory yet win the game with 3 tries to 2. And 15 Penalties to 8.

Leading Tacklers: Coleman 14; Robertson & Hooper 9; Hunt 8.

Leading Ball Carriers: Kuridrani 17/95; Foley 13/68; Hooper 13/67.

If this is the game plan without Pocock then it's going to be a loooong year of test Match rugby for Wallabies fans.

Can only say that this is how many want to play the game now, big in Queensland to pick ball running forwards, they don't want the hard nose forward who gets in to ruck after ruck anymore. Can't make sense of it either, but thats what they seem to look for when picking out rep/state teams up here.

 

[RedsHappy]

Re FF (Folau Fainga'a)'s analysis above........

...........and Cheika thinks he doesn't need a dedicated, specialised Wallaby forwards coach.

'I know my shit, I'm happy just to do that job myself' seems to be his call on this issue.

 

[cyclopath]

We score tries from ugly opposition errors virtually every single match, and have done so since about 8 months into Cotter's tenure, and Glasgow had been doing that for about the 2 seasons prior.

Surely that history of improved coaching and change of game plan has nothing to do with these two specific tries though.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

I apparently agree with you.

Yes, Scotland played their plan very well and errors come from opposition pressure, but they were still shocking errors.

I think it's unarguable that errors are largely the fault of the team that makes them, unless the Scottish game plan uses magic to create them.
I was not diminishing the impact of Scottish pressure, simply acknowledging the contribution of the Wallabies in their own demise.

 

[amirite]

Well that's clearly the wrong advice then

Well seeing as you know more about Sports Diet and Exercise Science than those employed by the Wallabies, I hope your tenure at the University is going well.

 

[RedsHappy]

Love or hate him, some interesting comments from Paul Cully in tonight's SMH Online:

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-union/u...ft-behind-in-last-decade-20170617-gwtaxx.html

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Well seeing as you know more about Sports Diet and Exercise Science than those employed by the Wallabies, I hope your tenure at the University is going well.

Get off your self satisfied high horse.
It's a comment on the fact that whatever psychological advice they have been getting it is not improving their performance.
So, given you know everything, and you tell us this is what they've been told it must be wrong.

 

[KOB1987]

There's no magic bullet. There is 15-20 years of hard slog from the bottom up to return us to where we were post RWC 2003.

There's plenty of reason to believe a bottom up approach would work - note England's rise.

Coaching has been top down as well. Our best Wallaby coaches all came up through club rugby where they learnt to adapt and learnt from the inevitable mistakes that one makes as a coach.

Rod McQueen's first success was coaching Warringah to a 4th grade premiership. We see today coaches being moved straight from elite player status to coaching at the elite level as either assistants or at 20s level. It ain't working and it ain't going to work.

whilst I agree with pretty much all of this, there's also another reason to 'note England's rise', and all of the Nth Hemisphere teams, in particular those in the UK. It's not all to do with a bottom up focus.

What they have over there is a proper professional competition that allows them to not only pay their own players and coaches properly but also to have to import better players and coaches (including a lot of ours) to fill all the vacant positions and stay competitive.

It's an argument for another thread but somehow someone or some entity in this country needs to get a domestic pro comp going that pays our players and coaches properly and allows those who have to go overseas to earn a wage from participating to stay.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

whilst I agree with pretty much all of this, there's also another reason to 'note England's rise', and all of the Nth Hemisphere teams, in particular those in the UK. It's not all to do with a bottom up focus.

What they have over there is a proper professional competition that allows them to not only pay their own players and coaches properly but also to have to import better players and coaches (including a lot of ours) to fill all the vacant positions and stay competitive.

It's an argument for another thread but somehow someone or some entity in this country needs to get a domestic pro comp going that pays our players and coaches properly and allows those who have to go overseas to earn a wage from participating to stay.

The area covered by the comp is the size of Victoria and has 3 times as many people as the whole of oz, no afl and very little league.

 

[Quick Hands]

If this is the game plan without Pocock then it's going to be a loooong year of test Match rugby for Wallabies fans.

I hate to spoil the party, but I don't think that the return of the prodigal son is going to change very much at all.

 

[amirite]

Get off your self satisfied high horse.
It's a comment on the fact that whatever psychological advice they have been getting it is not improving their performance.
So, given you know everything, and you tell us this is what they've been told it must be wrong.

Touchy. You're a smart guy, you know correlation =/= causation.

People that work in sport understand that whilst "alcohol is bad for athletes" is not necessarily incorrect, managing athletes long term is a lot more nuanced than that. Best practise in sport is being responsible with consumption, not blanket bans (that does not mean there aren't examples of teams with alcohol bans).

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Touchy. You're a smart guy, you know correlation =/= causation.

People that work in sport understand that whilst "alcohol is bad for athletes" is not necessarily incorrect, managing athletes long term is a lot more nuanced than that. Best practise in sport is being responsible with consumption, not blanket bans (that does not mean there aren't examples of teams with alcohol bans).

You're kidding?
You really don't get it?
No wonder you're treated gently by others.

 

[Highlander35]

I apparently agree with you.

I think it's unarguable that errors are largely the fault of the team that makes them, unless the Scottish game plan uses magic to create them.
I was not diminishing the impact of Scottish pressure, simply acknowledging the contribution of the Wallabies in their own demise.

I think we'll end up agreeing to disagree in the end, but at least for Taylor's try (the 2nd being a combination of Genia operating at half pace and Finn being Finn) it's a direct result of our pressure and tactics.

Unless you are of a very high quality, and play either conservatively enough to make close to no mistakes, or high energy enough to always outscore and outwork the opposition on their breaks, a game plan can be constructed to defeat you purely on capitalising on those mistakes. And you blokes my friend, certainly don't look like you're capable of that, even if McMahon/Pocock/Slipper/Beale/Kerevi/Speight are brought into that side.

Phase after phase of Rush Defense + intelligently targeting rucks to slow down the ball + specifically running the intercept line is a creative strategy in and of itself, and some of our best strike players, chief among them Seymour, but Jones, Bennett and Hogg as well have been major beneficiaries of that strategy.

 

[KOB1987]

The area covered by the comp is the size of Victoria and has 3 times as many people as the whole of oz, no afl and very little league.

But lots of soccer.

I know, and I'm not going to harp on about it on this thread, it's not an easy gig but it's doable. Somehow!

 

[ForceFan]

Sorry, I might be a bit dense, but if both teams won 96% of their attacking rucks, how did Scotland "certainly" disrupt our ball? Unless you just mean their defence overall. Apologies if I have misinterpreted. I think their rush defence did that more than any ruck work.

The Scot's line speed and sustained support was impressive.
The Wallabies' was lacking - Cheika keeps talking about it but so far little change.

The ruck doesn't have to be won to disrupt the opposition ball - just slow it down and ensure no clean ball particularly when the attacking team wants it.

I couldn't bring myself to collect the Scot's ruck stats but I'm sure that they'd be very different to our - especially the standing off of rucks.
I know this is being explained by impact of the changes to laws re the breakdown but good pilferers can still exercise their craft without excessive penalties.

Hooper & Alcock are earning >1 TOW/game and picking up a penalty about every 5 games.

George Smith is earning a >TOW/game but getting penalised with the same frequency.

Even players such as Hodgson - once considered a penalty magnet - still gets a TOW every other game and hasn't attracted a penalty in 8 games.

Also, it was 3 tries all.

Thanks - fixed.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

But lots of soccer.

I know, and I'm not going to harp on about it on this thread, it's not an easy gig but it's doable. Somehow!

I admire your optimism.
I just can't see how you fund it.
Every second kid in England is in a club's academy: I just don't know how we can aim for that other than in super rugby as much as I think we are on the wrong side of that.
The optimum impossible dream is to play in the npc.

 

[cyclopath]

The area covered by the comp is the size of Victoria and has 3 times as many people as the whole of oz, no afl and very little league.

And lots of money, playaaa!

 

[Inside Shoulder]

And lots of money

Is that sir Clive?
And it's real money not pacific pesos

 

[ForceFan]

Can only say that this is how many want to play the game now, big in Queensland to pick ball running forwards, they don't want the hard nose forward who gets in to ruck after ruck anymore. Can't make sense of it either, but thats what they seem to look for when picking out rep/state teams up here.

Is the end result of this that Union moves closer and closer to League?
I hope not......

It's pleasing to see the hard work around the park by Props such as Robertson and Smith and young up-and-comers such as Shambeckler Vui _ Mees Erasmus (both at the Force).
To me it's all about balance and currently the Wallabies Forward Pack seems very unbalanced.

It was tough to watch Pocock getting mangled over the past couple of years with little support.
Surely others need to step up to help with the hard stuff?

 

[cyclopath]

I think we'll end up agreeing to disagree in the end, but at least for Taylor's try (the 2nd being a combination of Genia operating at half pace and Finn being Finn) it's a direct result of our pressure and tactics.

Unless you are of a very high quality, and play either conservatively enough to make close to no mistakes, or high energy enough to always outscore and outwork the opposition on their breaks, a game plan can be constructed to defeat you purely on capitalising on those mistakes. And you blokes my friend, certainly don't look like you're capable of that, even if McMahon/Pocock/Slipper/Beale/Kerevi/Speight are brought into that side.

Phase after phase of Rush Defense + intelligently targeting rucks to slow down the ball + specifically running the intercept line is a creative strategy in and of itself, and some of our best strike players, chief among them Seymour, but Jones, Bennett and Hogg as well have been major beneficiaries of that strategy.

I will agree to disagree - I think you're over-attributing just a wee bit.
In any event Scotland played the better game and deservedly won. I had no confidence we would win - called it at the game with more than 15 mins to go that we would not get the points due to our poor attacking structure. I have Barbarian as my witness!

 

[ForceFan]

I hate to spoil the party, but I don't think that the return of the prodigal son is going to change very much at all.

I'm more concerned about the rest of THIS year's Tests.