Wallabies front row

[RedsHappy]

The problems will not be fixed by bringing in new locks or back rowers. We all know very well that if the first choice props were playing the scrum could well have dominated.
.......
Maybe now is the time to get all the Aussie props together, bring in the Aussie scrum coaches (anyone remember that Foley guy?), and have a proper scrum training camp within the Wallabies squad (which includes contested scrums - it is easy to smash a scrum machine as it doesn't fight back). ie Robbie, swallow your pride and prove you have the class to learn from your mistakes.

Excellent suggestion IMO. But I sense more, much more, is required, if not now then ASAP/URGENT.

A lack of both depth and incomplete (or inconsistent) technical/skill excellence in our stock of Australian forwards has surely been evident since...5 years back?...or, let's be generous and say since that tumultuous day v England in October 2007. I apologise if I am not a stats guru, but it's fair to say I think that many, many of our losses to the ABs in recent years have come through forwards-related issues such second-best at breakdown after breakdown, coming off less well in the match-altering counter-rucking stakes, the famous Baxter-ref issues, etc. (I would like to also offer a sympathetic word to Baxter here in that I think many of his issues and challenges have arisen through, or out of, pan-Australian rugby weaknesses in forwards depth, coaching etc, and in many ways he was 'the pointy end' of deeper problems for which he was often over-blamed at a personal level.)

Was not the highly embarrassing conquest of our Australia A's elite forwards in Gosford by England A's (and the derived loss of a game we should have aimed to decisively win on home soil) not final confirmation of a dangerous fragility in our forwards stocks and related scrummaging capabilities? This problem did not just derive from the injuries to our top tier 1 props. Was this deeper deficiency not also evident on the fields of Marseille? (And, as but one example, much worse was to arise from the poor TPN being forced to return to play out of position, then to miss the second Test. I mean, how much more evidence is required?)

If we _really_ want to return to the very top league of rugby nations _on a sustained basis_, could it not be argued that we must be able to survive and still win the big Tests with say 4-6 'first choice' forwards out injured for many weeks, that is, to be possessed by long-term development of the compensatory depth in numbers?

Building upon Langthorne's suggestion (and the huge evidence accumulated), I would like to propose for immediate action:

- A proper, all-year-round specialist Australian Forwards Academy (AFA) of world-leading class is funded now 50% by the ARU, 50% by the local RUs. The off-season work is just as important as the supplementing work of this Academy in the on. The AFA is available for both the Wallabies and S15 teams.

- The AFA is staffed by the very best world-class forwards coaches (nationality irrelevant), technical advisory specialists, sports conditioning specialists with focus on forwards special requirements (fitness and all-of-80 speed being incredibly important), and, further, a small number of highly successful but retired international forwards are retained as invaluable ex-practitioners and mentors.

- The AFA possesses the highest tech machines, analytic software, etc to aid its objectives

- Very important that the AFA offers select places to players 16 years and up to build deep long-term Aussie forwards stocks in all positions

- With 2 years from now, we aim to basically be able to comfortably resource at least 3 Test-quality forwards packs, with at least 8-12 of these to be seen as genuine world-class-leading forwards.

- A related 2 year aim is to be able to _consistently_ out-scrummage England forwards at Test and then A and B levels below that (this will likely mean that some of the elite coaches brought to Australia are carefully sourced from England).

- I would propose, no doubt controversially, that either Link or Foley be made part-time Chairman of the AFA.

Would any of my fellow posters support this proposal to the ARU, or do you disagree as to need?

 

[cyclopath]

RH,
I think we want, and need such a set-up. I doubt it will happen. The cancer starts way back below Test level where a loose type of attacking game has become the mantra, so we have a generation of uber-seagulls who get praised regularly for their work around the park, sadly at the detriment to the core requirements of set play.

 

[daz]

Is it possible that this short term front row pain is going to reap 10+ years of dividends in the future?

Sure, these guys are not world class now, and it is embarrassing, etc, etc, etc. But I just wonder if we will be looking back on this as a phase we simply just had to go through to ensure we have a generation of top shelf piggies.

 

[TheTruth]

I think another sub-topic that legitimately arises here: is a second-order price of not bringing back the props old guard that the inexperienced new guard (plus maybe the back 5) really risks a much higher injury rate than would otherwise be the case, with that risk being dramatically increased with those multiple busted scrums and related chaos within them? If there's anything in this, then the refusal to countenance the return of the old guard in any form could be double-recklessness if yet more injuries (a la TPN) accumulate in this manner.

Maybe but he injured his friggin ankle not his neck - could do that roller-skating - question is when does the inexperienced front row becom experienced ??? 1 game 10 or 20 - has to be done sometime. Funny, watched Daley get flogged last week but he seemed to go ok in Super14 games with a good pack behind him- are the pommies any different to SA or NZ front rowers or are back row not performing ??? - maybe someone with a lot more knowledge can shed some light for me

 

[mark_s]

Some interesting (and IMO insightful) comments from Blades and Evans. We don't seem to hear things like this from Noriega...........

Taken from: http://www.foxsports.com.au/story/0,8659,27280192-5016959,00.html

But former Wallabies scrum coach Alec Evans said the Wallabies' back row trio released themselves from the scrum too soon. "The back-rowers were ready to play the game too early, but they've got to stay attached to the scrum until the ball is cleared by the halfback," Evans said. "They've got to trust the defence, which was magnificent last week."

Former Wallabies prop Andrew Blades said the All Blacks packed into the scrum in three rows, which effectively gave them four second-rowers.

The Wallabies would not want to weaken their play at the breakdown, where they comprehensively outperformed England, to strengthen the scrum. But Blades said a commitment to scrummaging did not have to adversely affect Pocock's outstanding play at the tackle contest.

"A lot of number sevens have their heads up to see what's going on," Blades said. "But you can look at the ball through the scrum, release your shoulder and head in the direction you want to go."

"If you are square on, you can get off quickly to where you need to go. You have to be aware of the ball. There is no point in being the first to the breakdown if the ball isn't there."
Given that the flanker's shove is more effective than the number eight's, it might make sense to switch Pocock and the bigger Richard Brown in the scrum, but Blades argued the powerful Pocock was as strong as Brown, if not stronger, and could scrummage just as well.

Pocock said the Wallabies needed to improve their scrum if they wanted to ensure they were competitive against the world's best teams.

Apart from their dominant scrum, England did not have much else to offer in the first Test. But Pocock expected to face a "tougher and smarter" England in Sydney.

 

[RedsHappy]

....for us non-speciialists the quotes from Evans and similar elsewhere highlight what a technical and skilful business being the front 8 really is!

Btw, I am pretty sure Alec Evans is credited by Link with a lot of the big improvements in Reds forward pack/play this year. It was no small feat to compete with parity with the Bulls and Stormers forwards.

 

[Reddy!]

Is it possible that this short term front row pain is going to reap 10+ years of dividends in the future?

Sure, these guys are not world class now, and it is embarrassing, etc, etc, etc. But I just wonder if we will be looking back on this as a phase we simply just had to go through to ensure we have a generation of top shelf piggies.

If you are on the Robbie Deans is going to win us the World Cup bandwagon, you have to realise that IT IS NEXT YEAR. Some of the senior players definitely have another year in them for the World Cup, like Al Baxter and currently he is the best player going around in his position who isn't injured. Developing props who haven't even developed in Super rugby isn't going to reap instant rewards. Robbie Deans was employed to achieve success at test level; long term development plans should happen at grass roots level.

Heres an idea: why don't we get a couple of new born babies, put them at prop this weekend against England so we can start developing for the next 30+ years! Who cares that we already have developed props, they are only going to be around for another 2-5 years and we need to future proof our team. I'm telling you, the 30 year plan is the way to go, we have to start playing new born babies this weekend!

 

[Lee Grant]

Thanks for posting that mark_s. I respect their opinions more than what we punters are rabbiting on about.

They're not saying that it would fix all Oz scrum woes but it would be good to see the two flankers pushing, at least. The scrummie should yell out hands to the flankers if they can't see, as soon as the attacking scrummie has hands on, or even if they can, just in case. Then they can meerkat. If it's a snipe then the defending scrummie can call out left or right instead.

Maybe that's too simple.

 

[daz]

If you are on the Robbie Deans is going to win us the World Cup bandwagon, you have to realise that IT IS NEXT YEAR.

Yes, I had noticed the date. My comments were designed to be more a devils advocate arguement, but there is a bit of my opinion behind it. I DO expect us to have a decent shot at the title next year, but whether we will be able to actually win it is another matter. I just want to see improvement and development so we just don't become the Pom team of 03; RWC winners and nothing at all thereafter. On further reflection and consideration, if that means dropping a test or two in a semi-meaningless mid-season fixture, it would hurt but I guess I can live with that. Barely.

Some of the senior players definitely have another year in them for the World Cup, like Al Baxter and currently he is the best player going around in his position who isn't injured.

We are flogging a dead horse here. If Baxter and co are not going to be picked now, they sure as shit won't be next year unless RD has a complete about face. So, to steal a Deansism, let's play what is in front of us. What is in front of, my friend, is a front row that my granny could fold in half. We all know it.

We can bitch and moan til the cows come home, but we can't change it. Do I agree with it? Not fully. Do I understand it? Not at all. Can I do anything about it? Well, I'm folding myself into the lotus position, lighting incense and humming calming mantra's as we speak to keep my blood pressure down in anticipation of this weekend. It is what it is.

Developing props who haven't even developed in Super rugby isn't going to reap instant rewards. Robbie Deans was employed to achieve success at test level; long term development plans should happen at grass roots level.

I don't believe anyone, even RD, has said it would be instant. Blind Freddy could tell you that what we have seen over the last 2 weeks is about as far from instant you can get. I am by no means unconditionally attached to Deans or his methods, but I have seen enough over the last 2 years to think that maybe the guy does have a clue. (Although I would like him to be a little more forecoming with information to explain his methods to us).

And on that point, doesn't success at test level also include sustained success at test level? See my point about the 03 Poms above. Any manager worth his beans has a strategic plan that takes some time to be fully realised. Or would you rather re-employ Jones?

Heres an idea: why don't we get a couple of new born babies, put them at prop this weekend against England so we can start developing for the next 30+ years! Who cares that we already have developed props, they are only going to be around for another 2-5 years and we need to future proof our team. I'm telling you, the 30 year plan is the way to go, we have to start playing new born babies this weekend!

Ah. That would be sarcasm? Yes, I thought I recognised it.

 

[Scotty]

We are flogging a dead horse here. If Baxter and co are not going to be picked now, they sure as shit won't be next year unless RD has a complete about face. So, to steal a Deansism, let's play what is in front of us. What is in front of, my friend, is a front row that my granny could fold in half. We all know it.

I disagree. I think Baxter will be picked next year if worst comes to worst, and no one else has shown they have the goods. Robbie is trying to expose the likes of Weekes, Ma'afu, Daley and Slipper to as much high level rugby as possible before the end of next years S15, to see if they can improve, and if they can be the international backups we so need for the two Bens. He has to do it now because there isn't enough test matches before the RWC next year to test anyone. He pretty much has to know his RWC squad at the end of this 3N, with a few ins and outs for injury and S15 form next year.

If the 4 above completely fail, and others that I suspect will get a go on the EYOT also fail, then I suspect Baxter will find himself in the RWC squad, obviously pending S15 form.

 

[daz]

I disagree. I think Baxter will be picked next year if worst comes to worst, and no one else has shown they have the goods.
If the 4 above completely fail, and others that I suspect will get a go on the EYOT also fail, then I suspect Baxter will find himself in the RWC squad, obviously pending S15 form.

You could be right. All we can go on right now though are what we are being told, which is that Baxter is not under consideration at all.

In a perverse kind of way, if Baxter does well next year and gets picked for the RWC squad, that really means the humiliation we are seeing this year was all for nothing. That may actually be a bigger insult.

 

[Lee Grant]

Have belatedly watched my recording of the Rugby Club. Kafe may have been faking it but he made sense about the harmful effects of different heights of the players backs etc, and how when Oz did it right with a 7 man scrum they could hold the Poms on their put in.

Can't say I know a lot about the dynamics of the scrum but have always had the impression that good teamwork is required and not just on the obvious occasion of getting the hit right.

It can't be too hard to get the players backs at the same level and facing in the same direction for starters, and locking everybody tight with the arms and the props binding properly. If they still get mullered after the hit and pressure breaks the bindings and/or players have to stand up or go down because of it, fair enough, but why can't 8 men do what those 7 men did once, say, half of the time?

Forward teamwork has never been a great attribute of Wallaby forwards year in year out and we see it in our lineouts, mauls and restarts. Our structures usually compare poorly to that of our peers and that includes working together at ruck time.

We keep on bagging the Poms and they deserve it but they are good at the structural things and that is one direction I'd like to see the Wallabies go - and keep the other good stuff such as aggression at the breakdown and implacable defence at the goal line as well.

 

[Lee Grant]

Somebody provided a link about the Planet Rugby winners and losers of rugby in the last week. Thank you to who ever provided the link but I can't find the original post now.

Oz had mention of it's front row:

Winner
Australia's front row (not the seniors). A little glimpse of the future was afforded in Santa Fe, where Australia's U20 front row trio of Salesi Manu, Siliva Siliva and the monstrous Paul Alo-Emile gave no less than South Africa all sorts of problems at scrum-time. They might not be ready for next year, but roll on 2015 if you're a Wallaby (that's the one in England, in case you needed motivation).

Loser
Australia's front row (not the juniors). Australia's seniors very nearly managed to throw away the utter superiority enjoyed all over the pitch by the rest of the team with two penalty tries conceded and an endless stream of non-scrum infringements from Salesi Ma'afu. The accession of the juniors upwards can't come soon enough.

 

[Sully]

Someone had schooled him pretty well. I am amazed at the screaming coming from some on here about the supposed end of the world in scrumaging term. Yes they aren't our best but it's not that bad. It is only a june test a year away from a world cup. grass muncher baxter will still be around in 12 months if needed. seriously are we really calling for the serial collapser to prop up our ailing scrum. And the young fellas will get better. I have even seen one post praising the efforts of the Qld pack while inferring that these guys should be an example of how things should be done at national level. Conveniently forgetting the 2/3 of the wallaby front row are from Qld.

seriously calm down everyone.

 

[daz]

+1. Well said Sully.

You still need to change your signature though....

 

[Scarfman]

I can't stand this debate any longer. It took Al Baxter 50 tests to start to get good. As soon as he got quite good, we dropped him for someone else who might take 50 tests to get good. I've pulled all my head hair out so I'm having to go south looking for more hair to pull out. Those short ones hurt like hell.

It's my 10th wedding anniversary this w/e. Me and the wife are dumping the kids with grandparents and staying in a fancy hotel to have sex for 48 hours. Do not disturb. I'll catch you guys for the front row post-mortem (literally) on Monday.

Scarf out.

 

[RugbyFuture]

thanks for that info scarfy

 

[Sully]

I can't stand this debate any longer. It took Al Baxter 50 tests to start to get good.

Scarf out.

Actually it took him 50 tests to get average!

 

[Scotty]

Yep, the fact it took him 50 tests to achieve the level he currently has isn't a good thing. We need to look for guys that can get to the level of Robbo in the same or similar number of tests it took (ie probably around 10). And that is what Deans is now doing. Lets just hope we find some more Robbo's.

 

[fatprop]

Yep, the fact it took him 50 tests to achieve the level he currently has isn't a good thing. We need to look for guys that can get to the level of Robbo in the same or similar number of tests it took (ie probably around 10). And that is what Deans is now doing. Lets just hope we find some more Robbo's.

And we all acknowledge that it was a clear problem of our depth and Darwin's injury at the time. I don't want to see anymore of that learning on the job shit in Wallaby colours (as with Baxter tests 1-50) I have seen it once and my therapist doesn't wan't t to happen again.

The funny thing is the best young scrummaging THP is Dan Palmer by miles, but what you gain at scrum time you lose as he bleeds tries in the defensive line. Deans has clearly decided workrate is more important than scrummaging (as did Eddie Jones)