• 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.

Rocky Elsom professional camper...

Status
Not open for further replies.
O

OppO

Guest
Just rewatched the game and with the amount of time that Rocky spent on the wing he could have pitched a tent and lit a fire...
 
N

Newter

Guest
Just rewatched the game and with the amount of time that Rocky spent on the wing he could have pitched a tent and lit a fire...

And? You need loose forwards playing wide if you want any ball security. Our back three are small lads, they can't clear out on their own.
 
N

Newter

Guest
I think if Rocky is to be criticised, it's for a serious decline in impact as the game wore on. He lost all the juice in his legs quite quickly, and his hit-ups were getting very lethargic. Slowed us right down, and allowed a few turnovers in the end.
 

qwerty51

Stirling Mortlock (74)
No problem with him on the wing, surprisingly he does appear there at the right times.

The concern is his tackling and ball carrying. Neither were effective last night.
 
T

TOCC

Guest
his ball carrying was quite poor last night, probably a result of so long on the sidelines.. but it was concerning nonetheless..
The difference between Higgers and Elsoms ball carry was that Higgers was running at the gaps and hitting them with speed, Elsom seemed to run at the gaps but then stop as the ball is caught and try to change directions, subsequently losing any momentum.

Dont get me wrong, that sort of tactic is not always a bad thing, against bigger and less mobile forwards its actually quite effective at wrongfooting the opposition and making breaks on there inside. But against the All Blacks last night it just wasnt working, there backrow is lighter and more mobile then Australias or South Africas.
 

waratahjesus

Greg Davis (50)
the main difference between higgers and rocky for mine was rocky got the shit beaten out of him by a rampant NZ defence for an hour then higgers came on with fresh legs and hung around out wide just as much as him but looked better for it.

Rocky should stay for mine, he didnt look great last night but neither did Pocock or Mccalman, they were all contained and contained well. If higgers is coming on, he should go to 8 not 6, we need both of them out there not one of them.
 
N

Newter

Guest
his ball carrying was quite poor last night, probably a result of so long on the sidelines.. but it was concerning nonetheless..
The difference between Higgers and Elsoms ball carry was that Higgers was running at the gaps and hitting them with speed, Elsom seemed to run at the gaps but then stop as the ball is caught and try to change directions, subsequently losing any momentum.

Dont get me wrong, that sort of tactic is not always a bad thing, against bigger and less mobile forwards its actually quite effective at wrongfooting the opposition and making breaks on there inside. But against the All Blacks last night it just wasnt working, there backrow is lighter and more mobile then Australias or South Africas.

I like the way Higginbotham runs his lines. Very flat, and he was positions himself on the outside of a frontrower wherever possible. He was very good.

Liked his bodyslams at the ruck too.
 

Jnor

Peter Fenwicke (45)
I'm not going to question Rocky's selection because he's there whethere we like it or not unless he gets injured. I don't get all of the criticism levelled at him but I think almost all of it boils down to a lack of game time in the last six or so months.

Playing him in that state seems to be more Deans' fault than anything else. I also noticed a couple of close-ups on Elsom's face last night; one thing I don't think can be faulted is his determination and will - he just lacks the match fitness to do as much about it.
 

Riptide

Dave Cowper (27)
No problem with him on the wing, surprisingly he does appear there at the right times.

The concern is his tackling and ball carrying. Neither were effective last night.

His tackling was dreadful and his carrying of the ball bordered on the effete.
 

The_Brown_Hornet

John Eales (66)
Rocky's carries worried me greatly last night. He was very upright and didn't hit the line at any sort of pace. He was just setting himself up to be knocked over every time.
 

Bowside

Peter Johnson (47)
I think the captaincy has contributed to elsoms ineffectiveness. Not only from an aggression point of view, but more so the fact that he isn't naturally an 80 minute player, but he has gone to extreme lengths such as dropping weight to make himself into one.
 

jollyswagman

Ron Walden (29)
And? You need loose forwards playing wide if you want any ball security. Our back three are small lads, they can't clear out on their own.

In previous matches, I have been critical of our backs ability to provide any type of effective clean-out or even basic ball security when the ball goes to ground out wide but I felt that did a much better job last night. They need to commit another body or two OR get the ball out of there quickly. Nothing is more frustrating than seeing the ball sitting at the back of the ruck while another back runs in and crouches over the bloody thing and stares at the defensive line. Big forwards love that type of crap and so often we see a late clean-out effort result in a turn over.
 
T

TOCC

Guest
the main difference between higgers and rocky for mine was rocky got the shit beaten out of him by a rampant NZ defence for an hour then higgers came on with fresh legs and hung around out wide just as much as him but looked better for it.

Rocky should stay for mine, he didnt look great last night but neither did Pocock or Mccalman, they were all contained and contained well. If higgers is coming on, he should go to 8 not 6, we need both of them out there not one of them.

well yes naturally you would expect the bench players to come on and play with a level of energy above those already out there, same same with the other replacements like Vickerman.

However, Rocky's running style was poor for large chunks of the match, he poorly positioned his body numerous times when heading in contact, this either resulted in a turnover or slow play of the ball.
 

No4918

John Hipwell (52)
In previous matches, I have been critical of our backs ability to provide any type of effective clean-out or even basic ball security when the ball goes to ground out wide but I felt that did a much better job last night. They need to commit another body or two OR get the ball out of there quickly. Nothing is more frustrating than seeing the ball sitting at the back of the ruck while another back runs in and crouches over the bloody thing and stares at the defensive line. Big forwards love that type of crap and so often we see a late clean-out effort result in a turn over.

Remember OConnor doing this last night. Crouched over and looking menacing and couldn't believe the AB didn't go for the counter ruck as there were a couple close and it was fairly slow ball. Probably weren't sure to attack it or laugh.
 

Gnostic

Mark Ella (57)
Interesting that so many critcize Elsom (and I am not a fan, if any need to be reminded I was one who thought he shouldn't even be selected in the squad let alone as Captain simply on form). No where does anybody question the tactics and team structures that have backrowers waiting out on the wings and front rowers at second receiver. Yes Elsom played up to the standard that he has played at all year, nobody should be surprised by this.

Now we have Vickerman also, who so many lovingly say was effective when he came on the OZ lineout deteriorated and whoopee he contributed to one turnover at the ruck.

The Wallabies this year have been selected by a poor coach and worse assistants who have continuously throughout their reign selected their favourites with complete disregard for form and suitablilty to the task at hand. Said players then get lambasted by all and sundry when they didn't deserve to be in the position in the first place. The easiest examples to quote are Giteau, Chisholm and Brown. McCalman is rapidly becoming that way, Vickerman and Elsom just didn't play enough Rugby this year to deserve a place ON FORM and that is all that matters.

So my point is the players will take the spot that is offerred but the responsibility for their predictable underperformance resides with those whose ineptitude selected them in the first place and then provided them with such shockingly poor tactics to approach the game.
 
T

TOCC

Guest
Interesting that so many critcize Elsom (and I am not a fan, if any need to be reminded I was one who thought he shouldn't even be selected in the squad let alone as Captain simply on form). No where does anybody question the tactics and team structures that have backrowers waiting out on the wings and front rowers at second receiver. Yes Elsom played up to the standard that he has played at all year, nobody should be surprised by this.

Now we have Vickerman also, who so many lovingly say was effective when he came on the OZ lineout deteriorated and whoopee he contributed to one turnover at the ruck.

The Wallabies this year have been selected by a poor coach and worse assistants who have continuously throughout their reign selected their favourites with complete disregard for form and suitablilty to the task at hand. Said players then get lambasted by all and sundry when they didn't deserve to be in the position in the first place. The easiest examples to quote are Giteau, Chisholm and Brown. McCalman is rapidly becoming that way, Vickerman and Elsom just didn't play enough Rugby this year to deserve a place ON FORM and that is all that matters.

So my point is the players will take the spot that is offerred but the responsibility for their predictable underperformance resides with those whose ineptitude selected them in the first place and then provided them with such shockingly poor tactics to approach the game.

Groucho, i think you will find the large majority of people here arent even focussing on the tactical or strategic aspect of the game..

A lot of people are dissapointed in Elsom after that game due to the inability to do fundamental rugby skills right... like positioning his body better before making contact, by picking a running line and sticking to it...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top