• 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.

Muggo the Mungo

Status
Not open for further replies.
B

Burke's Boot

Guest
I don't want to get carried away too much about our great victory which was no doubt helped by a couple of clodhoppers the ABs got onto the field. The one glaring area of our game that has gone backwards during Dean's reign has been defence after we were arguably the best defenders in the world during John Muggleton's ten year run as Wallaby defence coach. Lets get him back as from what ive heard he is just working with the Warringah Rats so he must be available.
 

Searsy

Herbert Moran (7)
I'm not sure if Muggo's structured defence aligns with Dingo's 'Just play what is in front of you' strategy. Or, for QC (Quade Cooper), play what is in front of you, play what has run over the top of you, play what is now 15m behind you.
 

RugbyReg

Rocky Elsom (76)
Staff member
I thought the difference between the two sides, despite the loss, was aggression and intent. Either running with the ball or tackling the opposition, the ABs just seemed so much more aggressive than the Wallabies. A sign of great commitment but also superior conditioning.
 

barbarian

Phil Kearns (64)
Staff member
Agree with Reg here. Forget Muggleton, the Wallabies need Bruce Ross somewhere in the setup because Saturday was the first time where the difference in physical size and strength was very noticeable and had a definite impact on the game.

Saying that, who in the current XV is capable of pulling off a real bonecrunching big hit? ..... A few have had their moments (Rocky, McCalman) but all of them are pretty conservative in defence. Normally TPN and Palu would spring to mind automatically and we really missed their added physicality on the weekend. S Fainga'a actually made a noticeable difference in this regard IMO when he came on.
 
B

Burke's Boot

Guest
barb, Dan Vickerman is another who doesn't mind putting his body on the line but sadly isn't available till the next international season.
 

RedsHappy

Tony Shaw (54)
I thought the difference between the two sides, despite the loss, was aggression and intent. Either running with the ball or tackling the opposition, the ABs just seemed so much more aggressive than the Wallabies. A sign of great commitment but also superior conditioning.

RR - great, consistent defence across the whole 22 players is about many dimensions, right?: technique (multiple forms), physical conditioning, mental conditioning, repetitive training, formation design for multi-player defence structures, etc.

Surely the complexity and skills required in all of that commends in-depth and specialist coaching? And, I need hardly tell you, excellence in defence used to be a hallmark of Wallaby rugby. It no longer is. Also, as I think you'd agree, confidence in a team that their defence is excellent, builds further confidence to take calculated risks in attack that, if well executed, yield results.

I think BB is 100%, we need a dedicated, top flight coach in this area, and quickly. Let's be blunt - we have won or come v close to the ABs in the last two games when (a) DC is absent or part-absent and his replacements (bar Slade) have been ordinary and (b) the ABs displayed a higher than normal error rate (for them) at key moments. We have to be able to beat them when these favourable variables are not present. We won't do that with flakey, fall-apart goal kicking or with poor defence stats, game after game.
 

Lee Grant

John Eales (66)
Saturday was the first time where the difference in physical size and strength was very noticeable and had a definite impact on the game.

Normally TPN and Palu would spring to mind automatically and we really missed their added physicality on the weekend. S Fainga'a actually made a noticeable difference in this regard IMO when he came on.

Melbourne was a bit like that and parts of the Christchurch game - but you are right: their superiority of power in the Honkers collisions (even on the scrum hit) and their strength in static situations was more noticeable. It was a bit like the U/20 final.

The absence of the two you mention brings a tear to the eye but there will be a dividend out of it: McCalman will get more time at the top level and ditto S.Finger, even if from the bench. Finger's throwing to the lineout was problematic but his tight work was strong as you say barbarian - and his diligence in the loose was praiseworthy too.

Moore played well, and strongly, but TPN is an effing brute and is always going to be missed in the power and strength contests. Having said that, the two Aussie rakes had it over Kev in that department, likewise Pocock over McCaw, but Kaino and Read had the wood on Rocky and McCalman. They were two of the best for the Kiwis and their physicality was a big part of it, especially for Kaino who is stepping into the boots of Collins belatedly but very nicely.

Kiwi BBBT was top lock brute on the night, as he is most nights - and days, if applicable - though his other attributes seem to be waning (said he hopefully). Dear old Sharpie will be one of the first Wallabies jotted down on the team sheet every week but he's a bit of a wuss. I was a bit surprised in the last quarter when he shifted somebody in a ruck and almost had to look up who he was.

Horwill is another we are missing in the brute department and it underlines how much we have missed a true tight head lock this year.

They had it over us in the back collisions too, though Ma'a skews that assessment almost by himself. Sometimes I think that he should get more MOTM awards for his contribution to both teams, but he is usually a net gain for the Kiwis because of his power point of difference.

Part of the brute problem in the backs was that they were meeting the Kiwis in a reactive way, (and why not when Nonu has the ball?). Rush defence has it's risks but we didn't do enough of it. When you rush and get the tackle you can look like a brute even if there's not much of you. Weight is not everything.
 

qwerty51

Stirling Mortlock (74)
The issue isn't with size. It's attitude and technique. The ABs aren't a big side. Apart from Nonu/Giteau I think we either match them on size or better.

The ABs just play with a greater intensity in attack and defense. I've said it before, Chisholm is the biggest player in the world rugby I think. He is also the softest. Everytime he trucks the ball up he goes backwards - why the f doesn't he use his size more!!
 

barbarian

Phil Kearns (64)
Staff member
Disagree qwerty. Thorn is bigger than Sharpe, McCaw is bigger than Pocock, Kaino is bigger than Rocky, Reid is bigger than McCalman, Franks is bigger than Alexander. They are much tougher to boot, and seem to run a lot harder. That was the case in Honkers anyway.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DPK

qwerty51

Stirling Mortlock (74)
Disagree qwerty. Thorn is bigger than Sharpe, McCaw is bigger than Pocock, Kaino is bigger than Rocky, Reid is bigger than McCalman, Franks is bigger than Alexander. They are much tougher to boot, and seem to run a lot harder. That was the case in Honkers anyway.

Thorn probably a bit wider but Sharpe is taller.
McCaw bigger than Pocock? What is that serious?
Kaino is probably slightly bigger than Elsom.
McCalman is about the same if not bigger than Read - he's quite lean.
Franks and Alexander are the same
 

barbarian

Phil Kearns (64)
Staff member
According to the NZ and Aus official listings:

McCaw - 187cm and 106kg
Pocock - 181cm and 101kg

Couldn't be arsed looking for the others, imagine they are all very close in regards to height and weight. Its how they play that makes the difference though.
 

RedsHappy

Tony Shaw (54)
Size and weight calcs and mongrel assessments all relevant, but wasn't this thread about: considering all factors, do we need a dedicated defence coach - perhaps a Muggleton, or someone else?
 

Groucho

Greg Davis (50)
Disagree qwerty. Thorn is bigger than Sharpe, McCaw is bigger than Pocock, Kaino is bigger than Rocky, Reid is bigger than McCalman, Franks is bigger than Alexander. They are much tougher to boot, and seem to run a lot harder. That was the case in Honkers anyway.

What?

Sharpe is 2.5 inches taller than Thorne and 1 kilo heavier.
Elsom is an inch taller and 5kg heavier than Kaino.
Reid and MacCalman are the same height, and MacCalman is 3kg heavier.
Alexander is 2 inches taller and 8kg heavier than Franks.
McCaw and Pocock are the same weight.
 

Groucho

Greg Davis (50)
According to the NZ and Aus official listings:

McCaw - 187cm and 106kg
Pocock - 181cm and 101kg

Couldn't be arsed looking for the others, imagine they are all very close in regards to height and weight. Its how they play that makes the difference though.

McCaw is the only one who is bigger than his opposite number in the list you made. In every other case the Wallaby is bigger.
 

qwerty51

Stirling Mortlock (74)
I wouldn't base who's bigger on stats, they vary from all sources and probably change. In my eyes, the ABs don't look bigger than us at all. Especially from 4-8. They all play bigger of course.
 

Lee Grant

John Eales (66)
Couldn't be arsed looking for the others ........Its how they play that makes the difference though.

Spot on. I love a bloke who plays bigger than he is. Sammy Tuitupou is a good example but lets not spoil a good story and talk about spear tackles.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top