Scotland v Australia 12Nov16 Saturday

[amirite]

Scotland are a very talented, young team that have not put anything resembling that talent on the park. There's a reason every year everyone talks them up, they've got a lot of young players who look great in club land, and even in patches for their nation. They're the Timberwolves of rugby.

We shouldn't take them lightly lest they show some of that potential, even if it's likely that they won't.

 

[Muzza]

is leroy Huston in the squad??

 

[Sully]

And is about half speed of Phipps. I also disagree about the better pass, at the start of games Phipps is as good he just fades after 50.

Half? Not up to your usual standard Gnostic. I'd say the difference in speed is negligible. and his pass is clearly better. Also he doesn't push over water boys.

 

[Antony]

Total random note, but I'm heading along to this. That's all - go about your business.

 

[Kev]

Total random note, but I'm heading along to this. That's all - go about your business.

But who will you be cheering for?

 

[Antony]

But who will you be cheering for?

I live in Sydney, so I'm a reasonably enthusiastic Wallabies fan as my second team. I'm a keen follower of the Tahs and it eventually started to feel ridiculous switching on the hatred when they pulled on a different jersey.

Unless I'm sitting next to someone particularly big, in which case Scotland.

 

[Dalai Ninja]

Half? Not up to your usual standard Gnostic. I'd say the difference in speed is negligible. and his pass is clearly better. Also he doesn't push over water boys.

If Genia is "half" as fast as Phipps, then I guess the former Argentine international player was a "boy", here on the Twilight Zone, where time moves in new and unexpected ways.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

TWAS - Be fair, Wales were ranked 5th when we played them.
Their loss and Irelands win dropped them to 7th.

You know I have come on these wallaby threads and seen a lot of criticism of Larkham as an attack coach and as Brian smiths nice little blitz blog shows Larham deserves a lot of credit for those attacking backline plays. But yet seen no credit or dues given to him.

Credit should be given when credit is warranted. Gees tough crowd.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[dru]

You know I have come on these wallaby threads and seen a lot of criticism of Larkham as an attack coach and as Brian smiths nice little blitz blog shows Larham deserves a lot of credit for those attacking backline plays. But yet seen no credit or dues given to him.

Credit should be given when credit is warranted. Gees tough crowd.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's a very valid obserservation, and for the record chalk me up as a Larkham doubter. Main criticsm is the part time role thing, and very much wanted him to return full time to the Brumbies - and prove himself. The current attempted "pathway" to national coach is imo premature.

The attacking performance and setup against Wales was exemplory. If this is Bernie's doing, he deserves credit. Like many I suspect a lot of input from the skills side of things.

I'll be watching this closely, could have called Bernie as MOTM, or maybe most improved or most influential? Let's see it continue and particularly against the higher ranked sides. 10/10 for the last run.

 

[amirite]

That's a very valid obserservation, and for the record chalk me up as a Larkham doubter. Main criticsm is the part time role thing, and very much wanted him to return full time to the Brumbies - and prove himself. The current attempted "pathway" to national coach is imo premature.

The attacking performance and setup against Wales was exemplory. If this is Bernie's doing, he deserves credit. Like many I suspect a lot of input from the skills side of things.

I'll be watching this closely, could have called Bernie as MOTM, or maybe most improved or most influential? Let's see it continue and particularly against the higher ranked sides. 10/10 for the last run.

Yeah, I think we need a more defined coach pathway and it doesn't have to look too different to the player pathway.

1. Prove yourself in clubland and or for rep teams
2. NRC Assistant
3. NRC Head
4. Super Assistant
5. National Assistant
6. Super Head
7. Wallaby Head
** Not sure where National and Super U20 coaches fit in this hierarchy.

Obviously one can't expect ALL coach appointments to fit into this system, but most can.

The convoluted system now of going through Japan and NRC coaches not really progressing on is a bit strange and needs to be neatened.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Larkham deserves credit for one decent performance behind a dominant pack?

The guy has been the Wallabies attack coach for somewhere in the vicinity of 22-26 test matches before last week.

He's been attack coach for the 10 tests leading up to last week.

Any credit to be given is only going to slightly offset the criticism he is surely due.

Then there's the fact that as I noted, it's not like the Wallabies broke the line with amazing frequency compared to other games. They just had the ball more.

 

[PeterK]

Larkham deserves credit for one decent performance behind a dominant pack?

The guy has been the Wallabies attack coach for somewhere in the vicinity of 22-26 test matches before last week.

He's been attack coach for the 10 tests leading up to last week.

Any credit to be given is only going to slightly offset the criticism he is surely due.

Then there's the fact that as I noted, it's not like the Wallabies broke the line with amazing frequency compared to other games. They just had the ball more.

Perhaps the increased skills helped the attacking patterns shine.

Previously the wallabies would make a bad pass or drop the ball so the attack looked and was pedestrian.

 

[PeterK]

Exactly my point. The way to beat Scotland at Murrayfield isn't by playing ten-man rugby, even if the conditions are poor. That's their game, and they're better at it.

My suggestion of not playing Pooper and having 4 lineout targets i.e playing
Fardy, Pocock Timani and respecting the weather, line out and breakdown does not equate to 10 man rugby.

It means in the wet use Hodges boot for distance like he did against Wales.
It means aerial bombardments for DHP and Folau to contest like they did against Wales.
It means the big forwards to smash them in tight like they did against Wales.

It also means running the ball in multiple wave attacks like they did against Wales.

On lineouts though it may mean going to the front more and not as often to the very back.
It may mean more mauls.
It may mean less adventurous offloads.
It means a little bit more kicking for territory.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Nah.

The increased possession and phases merely makes it more noticeable. That and the fact that we played Wales, not England or the All Blacks.

The fact is we aren't seeing an increase on clean breaks, defenders beaten or even offloads other than in the games where we have more phases (and as a result, more possession), we have more of them. We aren't doing this more frequently though.

Improving performances by the forwards helped the success of the attacking patterns be noticed more due to their greater frequency.

 

[Brumby Runner]

Nah.

The increased possession and phases merely makes it more noticeable. That and the fact that we played Wales, not England or the All Blacks.

The fact is we aren't seeing an increase on clean breaks, defenders beaten or even offloads other than in the games where we have more phases (and as a result, more possession), we have more of them. We aren't doing this more frequently though.

Improving performances by the forwards helped the success of the attacking patterns be noticed more due to their greater frequency.

A lot to be said for these views TWAS, but I think better execution also played a big part. How many times did the Wallabies get over the gain line although not making a linebreak, and recycle the ball quickly and more accurately than in previous tests? I don't have any stats but my impression is that they showed a marked improvement in skills execution.

 

[dru]

Larkham deserves credit for one decent performance behind a dominant pack?

Yeah, I think so TWAS. Same way I think he deserves criticsm for the times it didnt work - and I was happy to criticise.

In the mean time you would note that the forward arrangement in attack IS the mainstay of the Larkham system. 1-3-3-1 he uses at the Brumbies too.

As I understand things, this system leads to better retained ball, increased phases, at the expense of less opportunity for lateral backs against sloer forwards. With an "advantage" that it doesnt require the high ball handling skills required in a Kiwi system. Also not as fast is getting the ball wide.

Certainly we have seen consistency in ball retention.

And in this case, won the collisions through the first 3-pod of Coleman-Arnold-Timani. That's a bloody relief.

On the back of that the forward unders decoy lines opened holes for the big bopper centres. This doubled with sensible kick passing from Foley.

Larkham deserves credit. As does Mick Byrne for the skillsets almost matching our opportunities. And Cheika as well for the manner he has introduced and built that key lock-pod.

Scotland will be a different test. But we probably wont really know how the system is developing until England (and NZ) to see how things work against a more effective press defence than Wales mustered on the weekend.

One thing for sure, Greys defensive systems hardly saw any work, perhaps the messy period after 10mins in the second half. A 10 man Scottish rugby, in the wet (maybe) will be a more accurate test to Grey.

I am not at all convinced on Larkham, but he's due some kudos right now. Just like I personally am not at all convinced on Folley, but right now the kudos is all his.

We are happy to criticise, I like to put just a touch of grace with this, as the guys I am not happy with - basically have a blinder.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Absolutely agree BR.

But that's not really anything to do with the attack, or attack coaching. More so to do with the team's breakdown work.

 

[PeterK]

Larkhams attack patterns do not rely on creating mismatches but in forwards getting over the ad line and quick ball.

Since there have been few tests where Coleman, Arnold and Timani have started it is now wonder that only recently has the attack patterns looked better.
It also helps that the skills have improved and passes are accurate and there is less dropped ball.

 

[wamberal]

You know I have come on these wallaby threads and seen a lot of criticism of Larkham as an attack coach and as Brian smiths nice little blitz blog shows Larham deserves a lot of credit for those attacking backline plays. But yet seen no credit or dues given to him.

Credit should be given when credit is warranted. Gees tough crowd.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's about time the backline showed something. They have been terrible all year. Let's wait to see if this is a flash in the pan, or the start of a decent Larkham era.

 

[Viking]

Absolutely agree BR.

But that's not really anything to do with the attack, or attack coaching. More so to do with the team's breakdown work.

Surely forwards re-aligning and hitting half gaps at pace, or even hitting the ball with pace enabling them to get over the gain line is all part of the attack patterns?

I don't think the attach coach is limited to backline plays.