Springboks v Wallabies - Sunday 2 October 1am AEST - Loftus Versfeld

[Strewthcobber]

Forcefan - thanks for your work once again. You do an amazing job each match.

After our discussions last match I thought I would have a quick look at including tackle and carry tats in addition to your ruck stats. And a fairly surprising picture emerged.

Please let me know if you aren't happy for your stats to be used this way, or if I have misinterpreted how to use them

Ruck stats are from ForceFan, others from vodacom Rugby

Edited to fix my errors x 2

Usual disclaimer around involvement not equalling effectiveness

 

[Train Without a Station]

Strewth I think you've undersold McMahon as he played 40 not 80.

Certainly shows that Douglas work rate is very low for a guy who knew he'd only play short minutes.

I think Coleman's is pretty good for a guy that played a full 80 (so it's not extrapolated from a short sub cameo that they may not be able to maintain- i.e. Slipper's) but also provides very good impact in his involvements.

His ruck work rate floated in and out as Force Fan showed which is what I'd expect off a player like him that can offer the big run and the big tackle at moments throughout the game.

 

[Slim 293]

Forcefan - thanks for your work once again. You do an amazing job each match.

After our discussions last match I thought I would have a quick look at including tackle and carry tats in addition to your ruck stats. And a fairly surprising picture emerged.

Please let me know if you aren't happy for your stats to be used this way, or if I have misinterpreted how to use them

Ruck stats are from ForceFan, others from vodacom Rugby

Usual disclaimer around involvement not equalling effectiveness

Those 'minutes played' numbers aren't right.......

McMahon only played 40 mins....... Moore the full 80.............

 

[RugbyReg]

that's a really interesting table. Keen to see it when the minutes played are updated

 

[upthereds#!]

looked like simmons had a high workrate..but based on what i saw..he would have been better just giving the ball to someone else he was so ineffective in contact.

 

[ForceFan]

Please let me know if you aren't happy for your stats to be used this way, or if I have misinterpreted how to use them.

Use the Ruck Involvement stats as you like SC - there's no (c).

 

[Strewthcobber]

Graph edited now above.

 

[TSR]

Sorry I be picky Strewthcobber, but from FFs table, McMahons ruck involvements in 40 minutes were 11. So, even though the minutes played has been corrected, the ruck involvements are now overstated.

Please only take this as an observation rather than a criticism though as it is interesting reading and I appreciate you taking the time to put it together.

 

[Train Without a Station]

SC,

I just looked. Your original graph was correct but just the names in Moore and McMahon's were swapped over.

 

[Strewthcobber]

Man, I clearly need to spend more than 2 seconds at a time doing this. Will correct after lunchtime meeting!

Forcefan - your mantle as top stats man remains undisputed!

 

[dru]

Sorry I be picky Strewthcobber, but from FFs table, McMahons duck involvements in 40 minutes were 11. So, even though the minutes played has been corrected, the duck involvements are now overstated.

Please only take this as an observation rather than a criticism though as it is interesting reading and I appreciate you taking the time to put it together.

I'm loving the "duck" involvements. "OK, duck NOW!"

 

[TSR]

Haha - sorry, fat fingers.

Or maybe just a new breakdown technique.

 

[ForceFan]

Man, I clearly need to spend more than 2 seconds at a time doing this. Will correct after lunchtime meeting!

Hang in there SC!

 

[NTT]

The Wallabies forwards were soft in contact all game, getting dominated in tackles, bouncing off or missing clean outs or just being too slow in support. Our lineout started to missfire again. Pretty disappointed considering the Head coach is a former number 8. These areas killed any momentum from the breaks the backs made. After 4 phases we looked lost. Both problems come from mental application and a lack of fitness to put in multiple efforts at a high intensity.
Hmmm, am i talking about the Wallabies or Force here ....

 

[Braveheart81]

Whilst both Sio and Kepu were playing tremendously well and in hindsight were replaced too early, it was also surprising that our reserve scrum caused us so many issues given how strong they've been otherwise.

Prior to this match most were saying it was a no brainer to replace Sio with Slipper in the starting XV yet Slipper was penalised twice at scrum time (and Robertson once).

Seems like we really missed TPN's impact on the scrum.

 

[Dave Beat]

SebV
Agree with Hooper
Also Hodge to 12. Kerevi cant kick, there are times you need a kicker playing both sides. Also Hodge can out kick Foley and QC (Quade Cooper) and should be first choice kicker. People haven't seen the vision that Hodge has because they haven seen him - he grew up playing 10 and reached Aus 20's 2 years at 10.
It would also stiffen up the D in the channel that needs it.

13. I have mentioned Folua because he generally draws 2 or 3 players, and having a back three that can take advantage of that it could create some havoc in the outside channels. But saying that Kerevi is encumbent.

 

[Brumby Runner]

The Wallabies forwards were soft in contact all game, getting dominated in tackles, bouncing off or missing clean outs or just being too slow in support.

This has been a very concerning aspect of the Wallabies' forwards play for some time. Would really like to see some stats showing metres gained in possession from the time a tackle is made (including negative) and metres made by opposition in possession as soon as a tackle is made by a Wallaby.

 

[Bullrush]

This has been a very concerning aspect of the Wallabies' forwards play for some time. Would really like to see some stats showing metres gained in possession from the time a tackle is made (including negative) and metres made by opposition in possession as soon as a tackle is made by a Wallaby.

I've been saying this for about the 5years or so I've been on this forum. The Wallaby forwards have been soft for years now and with Pocock missing, it's a glaring weakness.

 

[Strewthcobber]

I've been saying this for about the 5years or so I've been on this forum. The Wallaby forwards have been soft for years now and with Pocock missing, it's a glaring weakness.

When specifically do you think they weren't soft?

 

[Braveheart81]

I've been saying this for about the 5years or so I've been on this forum. The Wallaby forwards have been soft for years now and with Pocock missing, it's a glaring weakness.

It is a glaring weakness and is the reason we keep looking for players with a physical edge that are lacking in other areas (like Skelton).

We have really been missing consistently abrasive and physical players like Dan Vickerman for a number of years.

Coleman is the first lock we've had in some time who fills that role but clearly he is new and building into being a test player (which is good because hopefully he'll be outstanding given some more time).

We have fallen into the trap of mistaking niggle and dumb aggression for abrasive, physical rugby this year evidenced by a couple of moments such as Stephen Moore early in the season charging in and getting a penalty reversed and Tom Robertson's first minutes on the field on the weekend.