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

[bigmac]

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.

The lack of intent in the piggies is alarming. Hitting rucks at half speed, too upright, lacking numbers, no drive thru etc. Basic stuff that the darkness does really well but we cannot do the basics.
Not sure if they are trained that way. Cant believe cheika would condone such a gameplan.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

 

[bigmac]

When specifically do you think they weren't soft?

After a bright start the second half saw a drop in intensity as the piggies got tired.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

 

[Bullrush]

When specifically do you think they weren't soft?

I remember when the Wallabies had some pretty hard, tough buggers like Phil Waugh, George Smith, Owen Finnegan, Brendan Cannon, Toutai Kefu, Dan Vickerman.

Who is there now? Pock is a tough bastard but there are no damaging runners or heavy hitters. Too early to tell with Coleman I think.

Vaea was the guy I was watching to come up and provide a bit of hard man edge to the pack.

 

[TSR]

I remember when the Wallabies had some pretty hard, tough buggers like Phil Waugh, George Smith, Owen Finnegan, Brendan Cannon, Toutai Kefu, Dan Vickerman.

Who is there now? Pock is a tough bastard but there are no damaging runners or heavy hitters. Too early to tell with Coleman I think.

Vaea was the guy I was watching to come up and provide a bit of hard man edge to the pack.

I largely agree Bullrush.

I do have some optimism for the future though. I think there are a significant number of more dynamic, more physical young blokes coming through that I am hopeful we can develop to the level required.

Very early days for a lot of them, and a lot can and do fall short, but they appear to have the physical make up and the attitude.

 

[Dave Beat]

Best examples of the ruck and hitting it.

1. How many counter rucks do we allow our ball to be turned over v how many do we achieve.
2. Without the go forward we aren't crossing the ad line, thus are not building, thus aren't turning 70% possession stats into points.

 

[TSR]

I would say I thought we were generally very good in the first half. Even in the second half, we just seemed to be very flat, rather than diabolical from my single viewing of the game.

But I'm lost as to what our strategy was when we got close to the opponents try line.

 

[Dave Beat]

I would say I thought we were generally very good in the first half. Even in the second half, we just seemed to be very flat, rather than diabolical from my single viewing of the game.

But I'm lost as to what our strategy was when we got close to the opponents try line.

Unfortunately it didn't result in the bacon.
"what our stategy is" I'll think on that for a moment.

 

[Dave Beat]

Unfortunately it didn't result in the bacon.
"what our stategy is" I'll think on that for a moment.

Thought - didnt take long, could be part of our problem

 

[Hawko]

We only scored one try in all our invasions into the SA 22. We scored that try by running at them in close a couple of times and then setting our two props, who are both hard runners with the ball, about 10-15 m wide of the ruck to let them run down the 10/12 channel. Draw and pass followed by try virtually untouched. It worked a peach.

So, how many times did we try it again? To my memory, zero. Now I'm away from my tape and can't access Foxtel to watch it again. So I can't be 100% sure that we didn't try to operate about 10-15m off the ruck again with power runners, but I can remember plenty of runs close to the ruck.

Packing up the only strategy that worked and putting it away for another day was, in my view, senseless.

 

[TSR]

Unfortunately it didn't result in the bacon.
"what our stategy is" I'll think on that for a moment.

Yeah, it didn't. And I'm not dismissing the range of criticisms that have been made entirely.

In fact, I probably find it even more frustrating that (IMO) we played enough good football to have won, but that there are so many structural problems to our game that we were beaten quite comfortably.

 

[Dave Beat]

We only scored one try in all our invasions into the SA 22. We scored that try by running at them in close a couple of times and then setting our two props, who are both hard runners with the ball, about 10-15 m wide of the ruck to let them run down the 10/12 channel. Draw and pass followed by try virtually untouched. It worked a peach.

So, how many times did we try it again? To my memory, zero. Now I'm away from my tape and can't access Foxtel to watch it again. So I can't be 100% sure that we didn't try to operate about 10-15m off the ruck again with power runners, but I can remember plenty of runs close to the ruck.

Packing up the only strategy that worked and putting it away for another day was, in my view, senseless.

What shouldnt be missed is the lead up, and Hodge stretching them wide down the left hand side first, then a couple of pick and drives to bring in the stretched defence and it open up for the props.

Thus i think if Hodge 12, Kerevi (or Izzy) 13, we could build a platform for our specialised back three to create space in the wider channels and see more around that strategy.

 

[TSR]

What shouldnt be missed is the lead up, and Hodge stretching them wide down the left hand side first, then a couple of pick and drives to bring in the stretched defence and it open up for the props

I think it's also worth noting the movement was started by Cooper bouncing out of a tackle and finding an offload.

 

[Hawko]

What shouldnt be missed is the lead up, and Hodge stretching them wide down the left hand side first, then a couple of pick and drives to bring in the stretched defence and it open up for the props

Agreed. So why didn't we give it another shot. We made plenty of similar incursions but never tried Kepu/Sio wide of the ruck again?

 

[Dave Beat]

Agreed. So why didn't we give it another shot. We made plenty of similar incursions but never tried Kepu/Sio wide of the ruck again?

And thus the question earlier - why were they pulled.

 

[TSR]

To be fair, the props are always going to go about when they did.

What was disappointing was the drop off in the scrum after the change.

 

[Joe Blow]

I remember when the Wallabies had some pretty hard, tough buggers like Phil Waugh, George Smith, Owen Finnegan, Brendan Cannon, Toutai Kefu, Dan Vickerman.

Who is there now? Pock is a tough bastard but there are no damaging runners or heavy hitters. Too early to tell with Coleman I think.

Vaea was the guy I was watching to come up and provide a bit of hard man edge to the pack.

Timani will certainly bring a hard hitting edge to the pack but the cocern will be if it is consistent and well directed. I hope so. Fardy in for Mumm is a no brainer to up the physicality stakes.
Houston is also a good hard man and can help in this regard as well.

 

[Micheal]

I find myself agreeing with Brumbie Runner in the other Wallabies thread. If you're going to have Timani / Houston in the 23, it makes more sense to go with Houston earlier due to his lack of versatility. I'm keen to see what they can both do.

 

[TOCC]

There's enough versatility elsewhere in the forward pack, it helps when Mumm keeps getting selected out of position.
Mumm can play lock, Timani can cover 6, Fardy can also cover lock... open side is going to be lacking cover regardless of who starts.

Houston hasn't been in the Wallabies set-up for months, Timani has.. I would be very surprised if Cheika went with Houston over Timani for the starting role,

 

[dru]

Fardy in for Mumm is a no brainer to up the physicality stakes.

It would be interesting to attempt a metric for your thoughts on "Physicality".

What we see in the data above is:
Mumm: 29 rucks, 93% Impact; involvements/80: 43
Fardy: 13 rucks, 77% Impact; involvements/80: 40

Not much in it, but the coin toss is to Mumm. I'm guessing though if Fardy runs close, and offers something else as well eg you physicality) then you'd pump for Fardy.

I have a similar experience with Simmons who I just want to grow some mongrel - but the data suggests he equals Hooper as a workhorse.

On another note, I know in that game there were fewer defensive rucks (standing off?), but Hooper (5) and McMahon (6) did as much work as the rest of the team put together (13). These two loosies were busy.

 

[dru]

I'd add to that last comment, it appears we engage defensive rucks only wide where the loosies are on it with speed. Rucks through the guts would seem to have us standing off. An indicator of physicality needed or a coached/planned response?