• Welcome to the forums of Green & Gold Rugby.
    We have recently made some changes to the amount of discussions boards on the forum.
    Over the coming months we will continue to make more changes to make the forum more user friendly for all to use.
    Thanks, Admin.

DPK's Positional Proposition

Status
Not open for further replies.

DPK

Peter Sullivan (51)
(Moving discussion from a thread were my posted had digressed off topic)

1. Alexander
2. Moore
3. Kepu

4. Vickerman
5. Sharpe

6. Horwill
7. Pocock
8. Higginbotham

(At scrum time, Sharpe would pack at 6.)

With the three Ents of Vickerman, Sharpe and Horwill all on the field at the same time, there can theoretically be one of each of them at every ruck the Wallabies contest.

Higginbotham can play a lot looser, acting as a ruck-bodyguard for the backline.

Pocock would have more opportunities as the greater ruck presence of the Wallabies pack would spread the opposition forwards thinner.


I was impressed with the way the front rowers played last night. They defended well and ran the ball very well in a few incidences in particular. However, the main problem was that they lacked support; either there wasn't any, or it was ineffective.

Problems/ other benefits? This is pretty theoretical stuff.
 

Bowside

Peter Johnson (47)
It depends on how the ref interprets the breakdown. It will either work or go horribly wrong like it did for the reds.
 
T

TOCC

Guest
like i said elsewhere, the issue for Australia at the moment is the small statured backline.. We need mobile backrowers to help cover the backline in securing rucks etc.
Having Sharpe play off the side of a scrum severly limits our mobility and options, if he is on the side of the scrum and the ball goes his side, he is unlikely to be able to offer anything in support, likewise if the defence were to attack that side, he would be caught out.
 
D

Doc

Guest
It depends on how the ref interprets the breakdown. It will either work or go horribly wrong like it did for the reds.

It was two games last year, Kev got man of the match in the first and injured in the second. Hardly say it went horribly wrong.
 

Joe Mac

Arch Winning (36)
I would also like to see the bankline shift to
9 Genia
10 QC (Quade Cooper)
11 AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper)
12 JOC (James O'Connor)
13 A Fainga'a
14 Ioane
15 Beale

JOC (James O'Connor) is not a winger. He players his best footy in the mid field. AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) is an alright centre but he is a better finisher and player under the highball and I think that makes him a perfect winger. Plus he doesn't like to pass much...
 

Garryowen

Larry Dwyer (12)
I don't like Horwill in the backrow. He is a great lock, probably the best we have, and is not suited to a role where ball running, speed and mobility are key attributes. That's not to say Elsom is excelling in any of those three areas at the moment either, but I am in the minority of people who think he will come good at the right time.
 
G

gecko

Guest
I don't like the look of that at all. The Reds found out that didn't work very well. I predict such a pack would get killed at the breakdown by NZ or England, snuffing out any chance of victory.
 

Gnostic

Mark Ella (57)
like i said elsewhere, the issue for Australia at the moment is the small statured backline.. We need mobile backrowers to help cover the backline in securing rucks etc.
Having Sharpe play off the side of a scrum severly limits our mobility and options, if he is on the side of the scrum and the ball goes his side, he is unlikely to be able to offer anything in support, likewise if the defence were to attack that side, he would be caught out.

It would be good if those mobile backrowers actually comitted to the rucks in that case instead of loitering in other spots as the tactics of their Divine Leader required. It would also require that workrate to be translated into some real effectiveness. Its no good if your number 8 struggles to clear out the opposition winger and our half back has to fight to get to the ball.
 
T

TOCC

Guest
It would be good if those mobile backrowers actually comitted to the rucks in that case instead of loitering in other spots as the tactics of their Divine Leader required. It would also require that workrate to be translated into some real effectiveness. Its no good if your number 8 struggles to clear out the opposition winger and our half back has to fight to get to the ball.

Groucho, i understand you arent a fan of Deans, but i dont feel its necessary to take a condescending approach to those people who actually like Deans.
 

Ruggo

Mark Ella (57)
It was two games last year, Kev got man of the match in the first and injured in the second. Hardly say it went horribly wrong.

I wouldn't say horribly wrong but I think he is talking about the Force and Tahs games this year. I put that down to Quirk playing the unfamiliar 7 role at the time.

To achieve the objective DPK is talking of, I think Samo is a ready made replacement more suited to that structure. No shifting at scrum time and more pace than Sharpe.
 
T

TOCC

Guest
DPK, stightly off topic but i feel there has been a copyright breach with your new Avatar ;)
 

Bowside

Peter Johnson (47)
It was two games last year, Kev got man of the match in the first and injured in the second. Hardly say it went horribly wrong.

The reds put in two of their 'worse' performances in those 2 games, and link came out after and said it was a failed tactic playing him at 6 due to the way in which the breakdown was being policed...
 
W

Waylon

Guest
(Moving discussion from a thread were my posted had digressed off topic)

1. Alexander
2. Moore
3. Kepu

4. Vickerman
5. Sharpe

6. Horwill
7. Pocock
8. Higginbotham

(At scrum time, Sharpe would pack at 6.)

With the three Ents of Vickerman, Sharpe and Horwill all on the field at the same time, there can theoretically be one of each of them at every ruck the Wallabies contest.

Higginbotham can play a lot looser, acting as a ruck-bodyguard for the backline.

Pocock would have more opportunities as the greater ruck presence of the Wallabies pack would spread the opposition forwards thinner.


I was impressed with the way the front rowers played last night. They defended well and ran the ball very well in a few incidences in particular. However, the main problem was that they lacked support; either there wasn't any, or it was ineffective.

Problems/ other benefits? This is pretty theoretical stuff.

Love it
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top