• 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.

Super Rugby AU Round 5 Brumbies v Reds Saturday 7.15 GIO Stadium

TSR

TSR

Andrew Slack (58)
The Brumbies also score some very well constructed set piece tries off their lineout.

One of the reasons these are normally so effective is that teams know that their forwards have to defend the threat of the driving maul.
 
The Nomad

The Nomad

Bob Davidson (42)
cyclopath said:
My main issue with mauls is in the application of the laws around them. These sort of things, plus the variable enforcing of the ball carrier makes them an unfair lottery a lot of the time. Players still routinely join in front (illegal) and ball carriers "swim" back (illegal) and often we see pods separate and basically act as a flying wedge (look it up if you're not old like me!!). As a game built on the fundamental law of contested possession at tackle, ruck, maul, lineout and scrum, it goes against the grain sometimes.
Of course, if teams are good at it all power to them. Crazy to not use such a weapon. I might add, Aus rugby has lost a few really good "anti-maulers" in recent years, such as Arnold and Skelton.
Click to expand...
Spot on and the first two you mention ( binding in front of the ball and the player with the ball swimming back in the maul rather than the ball being moved back) are not difficult to spot or police from a reffing point of view. One simple TMO review before the conversion attempt would pick them up if the on field ref chose to ignore them .

Think something as simple as making the attacking team use it once the maul came to an initial standstill would even out the contest without changing the fabric of the game .
 
wamberal

wamberal

Phil Kearns (64)
If ever a team deserved to win a game of rugby it was the Reds. Great performance, desperately unlucky to lose that one.
 
Sully

Sully

Tim Horan (67)
Staff member
TSR said:
The Brumbies also score some very well constructed set piece tries off their lineout.

One of the reasons these are normally so effective is that teams know that their forwards have to defend the threat of the driving maul.
Click to expand...

I think this is a false assumption. The Brumbies have a very good maul. The best defence could be to disrupt the lineout as much as possible.
 
TSR

TSR

Andrew Slack (58)
Sully said:
I think this is a false assumption. The Brumbies have a very good maul. The best defence could be to disrupt the lineout as much as possible.
Click to expand...
Quite possibly.

I was more meaning that once the lineout was over, defenders don’t spread so quickly because they are getting ready to hit the driving maul. This gives the Brumbies the jump on them and that crucial half a second which can be the difference between getting through a hole or not.
 
Braveheart81

Braveheart81

Will Genia (78)
Staff member
Sully said:
I think this is a false assumption. The Brumbies have a very good maul. The best defence could be to disrupt the lineout as much as possible.
Click to expand...


I've never understood why more teams don't try this, particularly the Waratahs who have had a pretty good defensive lineout in the last couple of years and pretty poor maul defence.

If you're roughly 50/50 on giving up a try from the 5m lineout maul then why not contest the throw and hope you disrupt it?
 
Adam84

Adam84

Rod McCall (65)
Braveheart81 said:
I've never understood why more teams don't try this, particularly the Waratahs who have had a pretty good defensive lineout in the last couple of years and pretty poor maul defence.

If you're roughly 50/50 on giving up a try from the 5m lineout maul then why not contest the throw and hope you disrupt it?
Click to expand...
numbers game.

Even the best defensive line-outs only manage to disrupt the opposition ball around 20-25% of the time, so teams are faced with the choice of:
25% chance of stealing/disrupting the opposition line out, or
50% chance of disrupting a rolling maul if they don't send up a jumper.

If a team contests the line out but the attacking team still secure their own ball then the opportunity to disrupt the opposition rolling maul is pretty low, against a maul like the Brumbies it would be almost impossible.
 
Dctarget

Dctarget

Tim Horan (67)
Adam84 said:
numbers game.

Even the best defensive line-outs only manage to disrupt the opposition ball around 20-25% of the time, so teams are faced with the choice of:
25% chance of stealing/disrupting the opposition line out, or
50% chance of disrupting a rolling maul if they don't send up a jumper.

If a team contests the line out but the attacking team still secure their own ball then the opportunity to disrupt the opposition rolling maul is pretty low, against a maul like the Brumbies it would be almost impossible.
Click to expand...

We saw it tonight pretty successfully from the Rebels in the first half no?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top