Scott Allen
Trevor Allan (34)
I'll prepare a video analysis on this very subject with examples of the good and bad - check back on the blog on Monday or Tuesday.
Has Wallaby Back Line Coaching (or Players) Lost The Plot?
- Thread starter RedsHappy
- Start date
- Status
Running Rugby
Sydney Middleton (9)
I see a couple reasons why I believe the Wallaby backline is struggling to find form
1) The speed of phase play- The Wallaby forwards are struggling to control the speed of the breakdown and are continually providing slow ball which is hard to attack from. The speed of service and decision making at the back of breakdown is also not helping this.
2) The backline alignment- Cooper wants and needs to play shallow taking on the line with his feet, throwing inside balls to find out lazy defenders and cut balls that don't allow outside defenders to drift. Gits wants to play deeper and look for penetrating runners to run at holes or use his speed and feet to isolate a less mobile defender.
Both Cooper and Gits need a hard running back to straighten play and take the pressure off them when the ball is slow or the forwards are going backwards. Horne has been disappointing at filling this role although I believe his primary skills are the outside break and setting up outside support.
The wallabies have been using the blindside winger as the 'go forward crash ball' player, regularly we have seen the blindside winger on a roving commission- Ioane loves this role, Mitchell has been losing the ball in or prior to contact regularly. The inside ball seems to be overplayed for two reasons- 1 some early success against Fiji and in game 1 against England has seen Cooper overplay this option and 2- This is where they go when they are under pressure.
My major concern with the Wallaby backline at this stage is their lack of direction. The policy of playing what is in front of you is fine but to break defences down at international level you need to have plans to attack areas of weakness and make weaker defenders make decisions in defence that make them uncomfortable.
1) The speed of phase play- The Wallaby forwards are struggling to control the speed of the breakdown and are continually providing slow ball which is hard to attack from. The speed of service and decision making at the back of breakdown is also not helping this.
2) The backline alignment- Cooper wants and needs to play shallow taking on the line with his feet, throwing inside balls to find out lazy defenders and cut balls that don't allow outside defenders to drift. Gits wants to play deeper and look for penetrating runners to run at holes or use his speed and feet to isolate a less mobile defender.
Both Cooper and Gits need a hard running back to straighten play and take the pressure off them when the ball is slow or the forwards are going backwards. Horne has been disappointing at filling this role although I believe his primary skills are the outside break and setting up outside support.
The wallabies have been using the blindside winger as the 'go forward crash ball' player, regularly we have seen the blindside winger on a roving commission- Ioane loves this role, Mitchell has been losing the ball in or prior to contact regularly. The inside ball seems to be overplayed for two reasons- 1 some early success against Fiji and in game 1 against England has seen Cooper overplay this option and 2- This is where they go when they are under pressure.
My major concern with the Wallaby backline at this stage is their lack of direction. The policy of playing what is in front of you is fine but to break defences down at international level you need to have plans to attack areas of weakness and make weaker defenders make decisions in defence that make them uncomfortable.
naza
Alan Cameron (40)
I think Australian attacking play is completely dependent on getting over the advantage line. We're not good at clean breaks from first phase. We need to string phases together, get some momentum. Our blokes don't do well working as a cohesive unit, so they need structured patterns to work individual magic off.
We've a lot of smallish quick elusive backs. The theory, perpetuated by Spin it Widers like Mark Ella, is that there are lots of holes, you just need to run into them. Wrong. At test level, defensive quality is such that you need blokes like Mortlock, Herbert, Grey.
The guys we have are too small. They don't hit the line at pace, straight and hard, Exhibit A: Matt Giteau. What we see instead is too much pissfarting about behind the advantage line as crabbers like Giteau look for the soft option. We need some powerful centres. Then our elusive backs could run support lines off them, get the offload & create carnage.
We've a lot of smallish quick elusive backs. The theory, perpetuated by Spin it Widers like Mark Ella, is that there are lots of holes, you just need to run into them. Wrong. At test level, defensive quality is such that you need blokes like Mortlock, Herbert, Grey.
The guys we have are too small. They don't hit the line at pace, straight and hard, Exhibit A: Matt Giteau. What we see instead is too much pissfarting about behind the advantage line as crabbers like Giteau look for the soft option. We need some powerful centres. Then our elusive backs could run support lines off them, get the offload & create carnage.
our best teams have always had great backs, sure. The Ellas, Campos, Lynaghs, Horans, Larkhams, etc.
But we tend to overlook the quality of the pack as well. That backs get all the glory for the 84 GS and Ella was great, but Poido, Cuts, Topo, Turtle were all bloody good as well.
Likewise the packs in those other teams. Plenty of ball winners and runners. Backs are nothing without a pack.
But we tend to overlook the quality of the pack as well. That backs get all the glory for the 84 GS and Ella was great, but Poido, Cuts, Topo, Turtle were all bloody good as well.
Likewise the packs in those other teams. Plenty of ball winners and runners. Backs are nothing without a pack.
Scarfman
Knitter of the Scarf
I feel like I'm taking crazy pills!
No offence to you Austin, but that's the biggest load of crap I've ever heard. Do players need to be told to run into holes? I've never played high-level rugby but surely these guys can figure a few little things like that out. I'd ditch the coach and just have a video analyst to figure out a few things before/after the game.
All the backs - especially the 5/8 - has to pass the ball into space whether the player is there or not. At the moment, they're all passing to the man, which effectively shovels the ball out to the sideline without any go forward. It's a simple game!!
Scott Allen
Trevor Allan (34)
Scarfman - no offence taken. I'm with you - I came away from that session thinking this is all too complex and have not used his teachings in my coaching.
Players don't need to be told to run into holes and I agree the passing is an issue but I still feel the biggest issue is that there are no holes to run into. Modern defences are too good, so the attacking team has to be creative and deceptive to make a hole. The Wallabies are not doing that.
Players don't need to be told to run into holes and I agree the passing is an issue but I still feel the biggest issue is that there are no holes to run into. Modern defences are too good, so the attacking team has to be creative and deceptive to make a hole. The Wallabies are not doing that.
HG
Jimmy Flynn (14)
Scarfman I too have reached for the crazy pills.
It is not that simple otherwise you could have anyone playing 5/8. The game is about creating time and space within the defensive line. How a player moves to the line, where he looks while moving and then having the runners knowing how and when to move into the space created. I do understand what Austin posted however he left out a lot as well. Its all about options for players and choosing the correct one 90% of the time.
Scott Allen
Trevor Allan (34)
Video analysis of the Wallaby back line is now up at http://www.greenandgoldrugby.com/video-wallaby-backline-asking-questions/
Scarfman
Knitter of the Scarf
I agree with going with more structure.
Additionally, something is very wrong with a top level side when they - as Austin shows - shovel the ball out to the wings without challenging anything. In those cases, they are also shovelling the ball 15 metres behind the advantage line. They really need to go back to basics. The holes aren't big, I grant you that, but passes should go into the hole, and the receiver can make the adjustment. It's what Bernie did. He threw the ball into the hole and expected his centres to run onto it.
Additionally, something is very wrong with a top level side when they - as Austin shows - shovel the ball out to the wings without challenging anything. In those cases, they are also shovelling the ball 15 metres behind the advantage line. They really need to go back to basics. The holes aren't big, I grant you that, but passes should go into the hole, and the receiver can make the adjustment. It's what Bernie did. He threw the ball into the hole and expected his centres to run onto it.
Blue
Andrew Slack (58)
I accidentally caught the second half of that amazing test against the ABs. think it was 2000? The one where the ABs shot out to a lead, the Wallabies came back and the second half was a cracker. Lomu scored in the last move to clinch it.
Anyway my point is that I couldn't help but notice how well the Wallabies played to a plan. Their structure broke the opposition down. Even though they lsot they actually outplayed the Abs in the second half.
The basic plan that worked was ball retention and quick movement of the ball. End of.
It's a plan that works for Australia in its simplicity and can only work with great ball skills.
That game summed up good Wallaby rugby and the style played to me is the essence of what good Wallaby sides did well.
The Wobs need to go back to that because when they do they play great rugby.
Anyway my point is that I couldn't help but notice how well the Wallabies played to a plan. Their structure broke the opposition down. Even though they lsot they actually outplayed the Abs in the second half.
The basic plan that worked was ball retention and quick movement of the ball. End of.
It's a plan that works for Australia in its simplicity and can only work with great ball skills.
That game summed up good Wallaby rugby and the style played to me is the essence of what good Wallaby sides did well.
The Wobs need to go back to that because when they do they play great rugby.
Ruggo
Mark Ella (57)
My concern is we are not doing enough at the breakdown to ware our opponants down. I agree with Blue in the sense that we are not playing to our strengths. I like what Robbie has done in so many ways but what I don't like is the way he has not adapted to the way we play our rugby. We had so many issues with managment and depth but we always new how to play Rugby our way and to our strengths which is very methodical and intelligent. Looking at the other coaching staff, the lack of coaching experience in Australia is amaizing. I am not saying they are bad coaches but they have applied their trade abroad and seem out of touch with Australian rugby.
Richo
John Thornett (49)
I'm inclined to agree with you, RH, on the confidence of the back line. Accepting that there are big differences between Tests and provincial rugby, it's clear from the S14 level that Australia has incredible talent in the back line. I wonder how much the problems of players like Mitchell, who clearly dominate S14, at the test level are actually problems of coaching -- i.e. not properly taking advantage of players strengths and abilities.
- Status