Wallaby Locks

[Chris McCracken]

In light of our recent engine room dramas, I've been asking myself some questions about our locks and their scrummaging abilities.

- Do we need to be reconsidering how we evaluate locks so that we have a scrummaging specialist on the right? Horwill is the only one there who seems consistent on that side.

- If so, who are the options there aside from Horwill now that Douglas and Pyle are no longer available? I'm struggling to think of anyone other than Neville. Even though Carter plays on the right for the Brumbies, I still think of him more of a 4 than 5. Perhaps Coleman?

- Does Dave Dennis at lock solve a problem or is he just another on a long list of good lineout/field operators who may still be a liability at scrum time? Likewise, Fardy, Wykes or Jones.

- Can Skelton become the scrummager we need him to be and make all of this a moot point? And can the lineout work if he's on the field at the same time as say Hooper and Pocock?

 

[Jagman]

Dave Dennis is 192.5 cm according to his profile. I'd imagine that rules him out as a test lock no matter which side he scrummages on. Apart from S Timani and maybe Mark Chisholm there hasn't been a good scrummaging lock around for years and both these were limited in other parts of the game any way.

With Skelton there is no doubt that he is devastating in a maul and if he could use his massive frame for similar good in the scrum he'd be picked despite being suspect workrate-wise andin the line out. This might be a bridge too far for him this year though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Brumby Runner]

At the moment, the Aust scrum holds its own at set piece against most opposition, and actually dominates some, with Simmons and Carter in the second row, and a back row of Fardy, Pocock, Higgers (or Palu) would certainly also add some starch. It is when the reserves come on in the front row or second row that problems arise.

I agree that Carter is much the same as Simmons but I think there were signs last year that Cheika was wanting him to play a more aggressive style in open play.

If and when Will Skelton learns to pack properly and to use his massive frame to advantage in the scrum, he will be the answer to the TH lock problem, but he's not anywhere near it yet. And the set piece really goes to crap when he is used as the replacement lock.

But in looking at the proficiency of the scrum, we should also be looking at the back row. Last year's experiment with McMahon (or Hodgson), Hooper and McCalman didn't seem to add much power to the scrum, and we all are too aware of Michael Hooper's penchant for meerkatting while the ball is yet to emerge. The back row needs to have more weight and muscle imo, and we should get that as Fardy, Pocock, Higgers come back in.

 

[I like to watch]

At the moment,the scrum that holds its own against most opposition includes the captain in the back row.
Get over it,he will continue to be there barring injury.
There is not much point in musing about combinations that exclude him.

 

[Brumby Runner]

At the moment,the scrum that holds its own against most opposition includes the captain in the back row.
Get over it,he will continue to be there barring injury.
There is not much point in musing about combinations that exclude him.

Michael Hooper is a fantastic player and consistently the best forward in open play in the Wallabies' pack over the past couple of years. But if he continues to disengage from the scrums before they have concluded, then he is not contributing as well as he should in that facet.

 

[Sully]

I can't remember the last Australian backrow that did contribute. They all seem to have to meerkat over the scrum instead of looking through the scrum. And all three need to do it instead of one telling the others.

 

[Braveheart81]

One of the problems we consistently had in 2014 is that whilst our starting locks were solid enough at scrum time, they were consistently outplayed by their opposition around the park. This to me is one of the big reasons we're looking at players like Skelton despite his poor scrummaging.

Our lineout is only average even with Simmons and Carter on the field. We had very few steals all year and were generally a throw or two behind our opposition in terms of success on our own ball.

Unless someone really stands up and shows that they should be a test player in 2015, I think we'll end up with the same set of locks we used in 2014 and we just have to hope they all get a reasonable amount better. Carter and Skelton should both be a reasonable chance at making good strides forward in what is only their second test season.

 

[wamberal]

Surely Skelton can learn how to apply himself in scrums?

How can we have a lock who can't win or defend lineouts (other than when the ball is mauled), and cannot scrum?

What does he do to earn his spot? An occasional flashy run and offload?

Time for the forwards coaches to earn their keep.

 

[Braveheart81]

What does he do to earn his spot? An occasional flashy run and offload?.

Some of the physicality around the field that the ones that are good at set piece lack.

None of our locks excel in all the necessary areas. That is why we have such a problem in the position.

 

[Teh Other Dave]

^^ This. We seem to pick blokes as lineout options or for their work in tight - I guess if none of the locks running around in super rugby are bringing it all together at present, there's not much we can do in terms of selection. I have been critical of Skelton's scrummaging and lineout work, but he's not Robinson Crusoe in terms of his one-dimensional game, and he has potential.

 

[Chris McCracken]

Dave Dennis is 192.5 cm according to his profile. I'd imagine that rules him out as a test lock no matter which side he scrummages on. Apart from S Timani and maybe Mark Chisholm there hasn't been a good scrummaging lock around for years and both these were limited in other parts of the game any way.

With Skelton there is no doubt that he is devastating in a maul and if he could use his massive frame for similar good in the scrum he'd be picked despite being suspect workrate-wise andin the line out. This might be a bridge too far for him this year though.

I believe height is simply a means to an end. It provides extra lineout height and leverage in the scrum. But if you can get it without the height, I don't think it's a problem. Although he is a bit on the short side for lock, for sure.

 

[Chris McCracken]

I can't remember the last Australian backrow that did contribute. They all seem to have to meerkat over the scrum instead of looking through the scrum. And all three need to do it instead of one telling the others.

That infuriates me, as well. Even Fardy, who spends most of the Super season playing lock even manages some meerkatting.

 

[TSR]

Some of the physicality around the field that the ones that are good at set piece lack.

None of our locks excel in all the necessary areas. That is why we have such a problem in the position.

I don't see it personally. Sure - his size allows him to make the occasional great play, but they are few are far between. I am encouraged by talk that he is working extremely hard on his fitness so maybe he'll get there but at present I don't see him as someone who offset his poor set peice with his impact around the field. IMO he is well below international standard there as well.

 

[disco]

Unless Horwill can get back to his 2011 form I'd like to see Fardy play Lock with Simmons.
Especially if we go with Pocock 7 & Hooper 6.
Then play Higgers @ 8 because he is such a good lineout jumper.

 

[Braveheart81]

I'd be very surprised if we saw Fardy playing lock and Pocock and Hooper together in the back row at test level. I think it would be seriously undersized and unbalanced.

 

[Brumby Runner]

I can't remember the last Australian backrow that did contribute. They all seem to have to meerkat over the scrum instead of looking through the scrum. And all three need to do it instead of one telling the others.

It seems to me that the meerkatting generally takes place on defensive scrums. Could it be that the back row are trying to get a head start to defend the 10/12 channel where some of the past selections have hardly been reknowned for their dominant tackling? Or in the case of the No 6, defending the side line where one of the weaker tacklers has been hidden on the wing?

Maybe we're not looking at the whole of the question about how our scrum is working. Certainly, the early disconnection by the back row can be seen to have a severely detrimental effect in scrums set close to our try line when the opposition might hold the ball for a second shove, leading in some cases to push over tries against us. But there just might be an explanation for why they disconnect early if they are required to cover for deficient tackling in the back line.

Whatever, I really don't think it's just a matter of the props or locks when our scrum falters.

IMO though, the most rounded lock atm, in terms of scrum and line out work and workload around the ground is Caderyn Neville. I am also a fan of Luke Jones but he probably is better placed as 6 cover.

 

[Brumby Runner]

I'd be very surprised if we saw Fardy playing lock and Pocock and Hooper together in the back row at test level. I think it would be seriously undersized and unbalanced.

I agree BH, but if I'm not mistaken Pocock is bigger than McMahon and probably Hodgson, and certainly plays bigger when fit and in form. Sort of illustrates the folly of playing McMahon, Hooper and McCalman in the EOYT tests.

 

[Braveheart81]

I agree BH, but if I'm not mistaken Pocock is bigger than McMahon and probably Hodgson, and certainly plays bigger when fit and in form. Sort of illustrates the folly of playing McMahon, Hooper and McCalman in the EOYT tests.

I agree. I think McMahon earned a crack after a great game at the start of the tour but I probably wouldn't have persisted throughout with him.

One thing McMahon offered was ball running which seems to be a recurring issue of imbalanced selections. Again I think it relates to the starting locks because generally they aren't providing the tight runs over the advantage line that our closest competitors are getting.

Lots of selections that are compromised because we're trying to make up for shortfalls elsewhere.

It shows why players like Fardy or Higgers (if he'd been in better form) are crucial because they are pretty strong in multiple areas including the lineout.

 

[Jagman]

Will Skelton focusing on fitness without losing weight and strength as well as his positioning in scrums.
http://m.dailytelegraph.com.au/spor...t-around-in-2015/story-fni2fylx-1227197454431


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Forcefield]

It seems to me that the meerkatting generally takes place on defensive scrums. Could it be that the back row are trying to get a head start to defend the 10/12 channel where some of the past selections have hardly been reknowned for their dominant tackling? Or in the case of the No 6, defending the side line where one of the weaker tacklers has been hidden on the wing?

That's what I was thinking. Maybe it is something that is already done, but better ommunication between the backrow and scrumhalf would allow for backrowers to commit to the scrum but detach fairly quickly when the ball is coming out. Better to be slightly slower responding to the opposition play than to give up a penalty. Since Phipps, Hooper and Palu are all likely to be starters and the Tahs scrum had room for improvement, maybe its something that could be tinkered with in Super Rugby.