Gnostic
Mark Ella (57)
Following on from Scott Allens discussions about balancing the backrow I thought this would be a good discussion to have in the lead up to the Lions series.
In the balancing of the backline and most especially when selecting a side to play a team like the Brumbies who kick tactically a lot (and execute it well), I have always liked a side to play two genuine fullbacks.
By genuine fullbacks I mean they actually fulfil the core skill set and responsibilities of a 15. For me these are:-
1) Skills to take the high ball safely and at a very high percentage of attempts.
2) BIG accurate boot to return fire. As with taking the high ball percentage execution of this skill must be very high.
3) Ability to counter attack from depth with an advancing defensive line with little support.
4) Last line of defence defence, must be in position and have the pace to run down a breakout
Advantages:-
playing with two genuine fullbacks allows flexibility in numbers dropping back for each kick, each fullback to cover half the field making tactical kicks of the opposition that much harder. If the Primary 15 (the one with that actual number on his back) counters and is in the line or otherwise out of position the secondary gives full coverage.
Disadvantages -
You could lose a genuine winger either left or right which I still believe can be regarded as specialist positions and not somewhere to plant League converts or juniors you aren't sure have the size to play in their positions in the centres. Also given the propensity of a number of sides, not least the Wallabies to use the 15 position as a repository for a second playmaker the 15 spot itself is no longer a specialist position. This move I believe was made to allow the Wallabies in particular to have their two "bash and barge" centres that Deans favoured last year. Other teams have this set-up for a variety of different reasons not the least of which can include fitting their individually best players all on the park at once.
My argument is that the Wallabies haven't used a specialist 15 since the retirement of Latham and 1st injury to Gerrard. Now it can be hotly debated that is because no player has dominated as a specialist 15 demanding selection. I however believe it is more about an overall theme in selection that the Wallabies have taken under Deans. I would argue that none of the players selected at 15 under Deans fill the three broad criteria that I opened with to be a specialist 15. Let us consider the list of candidates numbering relates to core skills above:-
A) Beale - 1)Can be very hit and miss. Percentage of safety under the high ball would be regarded as average. 2) Has a better than average kick distance but again execution can be problematic, especially under pressure. 3)At his best he is a potent individual returner of the ball, perhaps the best in Australia when on form. 4) He can defend, there is no doubt, but he often gets caught out.
B) JOC (James O'Connor) - 1)a 50:50 proposition at best. With JOC (James O'Connor) at fullback high kicks to him are a good tactic if pressure is applied. He is far from safe. 2)Average kick distance and execution. 3)a gifted counter attacking player, I actually feel he is best suited to counter attack in traffic, doesn't seem to have the penetration that one would expect from the open when compared to his results in a congested field. 4) without a doubt a great defender in the line or one on one.
C) AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) - 1)again a 50:50 proposition. 2)Again average at distance and execution. 3) AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) isn't actually that quick or that allusive. He has well noted passing difficulties out of his right hand and a marked preference for fending with the left. Mr Fixit is a great versatility player who can fill a gap in an emergency at 15, I don't regard him as anywhere near 1st choice. 4)A great defender in close and one on one, but again outright pace could well let him down and has done in the past in this position.
D) Barnes 1) again 50:50 proposition 2) Average distance and execution. 3) counter attack from depth just isn't a strength. His selection at 15 is more about filling that second play maker role from a position other than 12 that I mentioned earlier. 4) technically very good positionally and in execution, but as with AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) he isn't that quick and he has become breakable.
E) Harris 1)Better than average. 2) Better than average 3) I don't see this as a strength of Harris. 4) He like AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) and Barnes isn't that quick and can be caught out. One on one he is better than average as you would expect from a player who primary position is 10.
F) Folau - 1) Excellent. The best player under the high ball I have seen since M. Burke. 2)Here is his great weakness and why he can't be selected at 15 for the Wallabies - his kicking game is virtually non existent at the moment. 3) He isn't making the breaks against other teams that some were expecting but look at the defenders he is attracting on each return, this has to open up options for a side able to generate fast ball off one of his runs. 4)I have been surprised at how quickly he has picked up the defence requirements positionally and in execution. Very good.
G) Mogg - 1)Above average. 2) Biggest accurate boot in Australian Rugby at 15 at the moment IMO. 3) Mogg continues to surprise many who think they have his loping runs contained. Over 70 metres gained for the Brumbies against the Reds last weekend alone. 4)A very good defensive player, I am concerned about his shoulders though, he seems to be carrying a weakness there?
If we look at history the two Australian RWC's had specialist 15s at 15 and on one of the wings.
1991 - Campese and Roebuck. Many would say that Campese was not a specialist 15, but that is where he started his career and he filled all the requirements. You will also note that in most sides Campo played in he was the player who dropped back to make a kick return not only because sides feared him running the ball back at them but because he had one of the biggest boots in World Rugby. Roebuck was the Mr Reliable at 15 for 1991 side and he filled all the skills well.
1999 - Burke and Roff. Burke was the best 15 in Australia throughout the professional era. Many here would argue for Latham, but IMO he just was never as reliable as Burke. Roff was a specialist 15 for the Brumbies and played a similar role for the Wallabies as Campo had earlier.
Who would I select as the back three for the Wallabies with a two 15s structure in mind well:-
11. Ioane
15. Mogg
14. Folau
I know I have said Folau's kicking game is non-existent, but I wonder if that is by direction? He has to be able to kick to some degree after his time in AFL. Intensive concentration on this skill should be able to fix any issue to at least make him a passable kicker.
Of course this approach to the game is all for naught if the Wallabies continue with the bash and barge player at 12 assuming also in that two 10s are wanted on the field, though that is another argument altogether.
In the balancing of the backline and most especially when selecting a side to play a team like the Brumbies who kick tactically a lot (and execute it well), I have always liked a side to play two genuine fullbacks.
By genuine fullbacks I mean they actually fulfil the core skill set and responsibilities of a 15. For me these are:-
1) Skills to take the high ball safely and at a very high percentage of attempts.
2) BIG accurate boot to return fire. As with taking the high ball percentage execution of this skill must be very high.
3) Ability to counter attack from depth with an advancing defensive line with little support.
4) Last line of defence defence, must be in position and have the pace to run down a breakout
Advantages:-
playing with two genuine fullbacks allows flexibility in numbers dropping back for each kick, each fullback to cover half the field making tactical kicks of the opposition that much harder. If the Primary 15 (the one with that actual number on his back) counters and is in the line or otherwise out of position the secondary gives full coverage.
Disadvantages -
You could lose a genuine winger either left or right which I still believe can be regarded as specialist positions and not somewhere to plant League converts or juniors you aren't sure have the size to play in their positions in the centres. Also given the propensity of a number of sides, not least the Wallabies to use the 15 position as a repository for a second playmaker the 15 spot itself is no longer a specialist position. This move I believe was made to allow the Wallabies in particular to have their two "bash and barge" centres that Deans favoured last year. Other teams have this set-up for a variety of different reasons not the least of which can include fitting their individually best players all on the park at once.
My argument is that the Wallabies haven't used a specialist 15 since the retirement of Latham and 1st injury to Gerrard. Now it can be hotly debated that is because no player has dominated as a specialist 15 demanding selection. I however believe it is more about an overall theme in selection that the Wallabies have taken under Deans. I would argue that none of the players selected at 15 under Deans fill the three broad criteria that I opened with to be a specialist 15. Let us consider the list of candidates numbering relates to core skills above:-
A) Beale - 1)Can be very hit and miss. Percentage of safety under the high ball would be regarded as average. 2) Has a better than average kick distance but again execution can be problematic, especially under pressure. 3)At his best he is a potent individual returner of the ball, perhaps the best in Australia when on form. 4) He can defend, there is no doubt, but he often gets caught out.
B) JOC (James O'Connor) - 1)a 50:50 proposition at best. With JOC (James O'Connor) at fullback high kicks to him are a good tactic if pressure is applied. He is far from safe. 2)Average kick distance and execution. 3)a gifted counter attacking player, I actually feel he is best suited to counter attack in traffic, doesn't seem to have the penetration that one would expect from the open when compared to his results in a congested field. 4) without a doubt a great defender in the line or one on one.
C) AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) - 1)again a 50:50 proposition. 2)Again average at distance and execution. 3) AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) isn't actually that quick or that allusive. He has well noted passing difficulties out of his right hand and a marked preference for fending with the left. Mr Fixit is a great versatility player who can fill a gap in an emergency at 15, I don't regard him as anywhere near 1st choice. 4)A great defender in close and one on one, but again outright pace could well let him down and has done in the past in this position.
D) Barnes 1) again 50:50 proposition 2) Average distance and execution. 3) counter attack from depth just isn't a strength. His selection at 15 is more about filling that second play maker role from a position other than 12 that I mentioned earlier. 4) technically very good positionally and in execution, but as with AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) he isn't that quick and he has become breakable.
E) Harris 1)Better than average. 2) Better than average 3) I don't see this as a strength of Harris. 4) He like AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) and Barnes isn't that quick and can be caught out. One on one he is better than average as you would expect from a player who primary position is 10.
F) Folau - 1) Excellent. The best player under the high ball I have seen since M. Burke. 2)Here is his great weakness and why he can't be selected at 15 for the Wallabies - his kicking game is virtually non existent at the moment. 3) He isn't making the breaks against other teams that some were expecting but look at the defenders he is attracting on each return, this has to open up options for a side able to generate fast ball off one of his runs. 4)I have been surprised at how quickly he has picked up the defence requirements positionally and in execution. Very good.
G) Mogg - 1)Above average. 2) Biggest accurate boot in Australian Rugby at 15 at the moment IMO. 3) Mogg continues to surprise many who think they have his loping runs contained. Over 70 metres gained for the Brumbies against the Reds last weekend alone. 4)A very good defensive player, I am concerned about his shoulders though, he seems to be carrying a weakness there?
If we look at history the two Australian RWC's had specialist 15s at 15 and on one of the wings.
1991 - Campese and Roebuck. Many would say that Campese was not a specialist 15, but that is where he started his career and he filled all the requirements. You will also note that in most sides Campo played in he was the player who dropped back to make a kick return not only because sides feared him running the ball back at them but because he had one of the biggest boots in World Rugby. Roebuck was the Mr Reliable at 15 for 1991 side and he filled all the skills well.
1999 - Burke and Roff. Burke was the best 15 in Australia throughout the professional era. Many here would argue for Latham, but IMO he just was never as reliable as Burke. Roff was a specialist 15 for the Brumbies and played a similar role for the Wallabies as Campo had earlier.
Who would I select as the back three for the Wallabies with a two 15s structure in mind well:-
11. Ioane
15. Mogg
14. Folau
I know I have said Folau's kicking game is non-existent, but I wonder if that is by direction? He has to be able to kick to some degree after his time in AFL. Intensive concentration on this skill should be able to fix any issue to at least make him a passable kicker.
Of course this approach to the game is all for naught if the Wallabies continue with the bash and barge player at 12 assuming also in that two 10s are wanted on the field, though that is another argument altogether.
