Wallaby Locks

[Strewthcobber]

Our worst scrum of last year was against New Zealand, just after Simmons got binned and before we tried to stop a pushover try with 7 players.

This was worse than any against England because the kiwis were square and pushed straight on. They didn't need to bore in or anything tricky, just went straight through.

Fardy was in the second row and it was bad enough for him to never be picked there again.

 

[Wilson]

Apparently, Fardy and Carter are being groomed to take over the calling.

Those are the two that'll offer the most flexibility for future selections, here's hoping one of them takes to it quickly.

 

[Hawko]

This is probably the area Aussie rugby could improve the most - getting this type of bloke over the line, probably through some sort of tight 5 academy where players with that potential are mentored over a few years to get to the next level.

Typically those tight 5 players were older before playing at the highest level, but that's no longer the norm. Simmons is a fifty cap Wallaby at 25. The physical maturity to play at that level should only come when you're about 25.
Neville was picked in the Wallaby squad (along with Pyle IIRC) in 2012 when he was 22/23 - some blokes can get a bit jaded with that sort of experience, and that's where some strong tutelage can help. Fardy is another good example. Pyle may have made a good decision to build his game in France, no doubt on a good wicket, and look to return for RWC19?

I hear what you're saying, but why are Etsebeth and Rettallic so good? They are still a few years shy of that mark. There's more to it than just age, IMO its all about the way players are coached to play in Australia. People keep telling them that they only have to get parity in the set piece and that their performance in the open is what counts.

 

[Brendan Hume]

They're probably the exception though - like Eales. You're right, there is more to it than age, that's why I think developing this type of player and continuing to look at early-mid 20s players in grade footy to develop makes sense.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[qwerty51]

I hear what you're saying, but why are Etsebeth and Rettallic so good? They are still a few years shy of that mark. There's more to it than just age, IMO its all about the way players are coached to play in Australia. People keep telling them that they only have to get parity in the set piece and that their performance in the open is what counts.

They're good because they're the prime athletes in their country, they play rugby. Imagine if guys like Aron Baynes and Aaron Sandilands played rugby.. Baynes would be an awesome lock, perfect height, big/strong and very aggressive.

 

[Strewthcobber]

Its an interesting thought isn't it, how many 2m+ guys athletic enough to be pro athletes are there in Australia.

Between the AFL, cricket, basketball, maybe tennis/swimming/volleyball/ there's probably close to 100 and only a small fraction are pulling on rugby boots.

The eternal problem in this country.

 

[Brendan Hume]

A lot more big blokes are playing league too. It's surprising how many 1.95m players are getting around compared to 10-15 years ago.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Brumby Runner]

Our worst scrum of last year was against New Zealand, just after Simmons got binned and before we tried to stop a pushover try with 7 players.

This was worse than any against England because the kiwis were square and pushed straight on. They didn't need to bore in or anything tricky, just went straight through.

Fardy was in the second row and it was bad enough for him to never be picked there again.

I would much rather see Scott Fardy play 6 than in the second row, but it's a bit over the top to attribute the cause of a pushover try to him when there were only seven men in the Aussie scrum. He was certainly more than just an average performer playing a lot of last year as lock for the Brumbies.

 

[Chris McCracken]

Yeah, leave it to the back row.

As an aside, a smart person I met many years ago told me all back rowers should have stupid hair or fluorescent headgear. That way the commentators notice them more "Gee, number 7 is in everything tonight!"

Maybe it's a ploy.

 

[Chris McCracken]

Its an interesting thought isn't it, how many 2m+ guys athletic enough to be pro athletes are there in Australia.

Between the AFL, cricket, basketball, maybe tennis/swimming/volleyball/ there's probably close to 100 and only a small fraction are pulling on rugby boots.

The eternal problem in this country.

We push them out of the game as juniors by picking extra loose forwards in the second row for our rep teams. Taking advantage of the under 19 scrum laws to put extra flankers on the field has sent some of these guys packing.

 

[Strewthcobber]

I would much rather see Scott Fardy play 6 than in the second row, but it's a bit over the top to attribute the cause of a pushover try to him when there were only seven men in the Aussie scrum. He was certainly more than just an average performer playing a lot of last year as lock for the Brumbies.

I didn't write that very well, the scrum I was talking about was the one before the pushover, wgere the ABs forced a turnover against 8 (though AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) was on the side), it was a shocking scrum, the worst of the year with our starting props. The pushover was merely stupid - trying to hold on with 7 v 8

I just think we need to be realistic about where guys like Fardy really stand scrum wisw against international teams. It's no place for part timers.

We push them out of the game as juniors by picking extra loose forwards in the second row for our rep teams.

Timely

 

[TOCC]

We push them out of the game as juniors by picking extra loose forwards in the second row for our rep teams. Taking advantage of the under 19 scrum laws to put extra flankers on the field has sent some of these guys packing.

This doesn't make much sense to me?
I don't see how the scrum laws encourage the selection of shorter locks..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Chris McCracken]

This doesn't make much sense to me?
I don't see how the scrum laws encourage the selection of shorter locks..

Because the under 19 laws have restrictions on binding and how far the scrum can be pushed, there is less onus on the locks to provide the push. In fact, as a junior coach it is the best place to hide weaker players, as well. It used to be the wing, but now those blokes find themselves all alone tackling massive blokes who know the wings are weakest.

So, coaches use the restricted rules to hide players in the second row. Due to the rules and the particularly 'Australian' way it is coached and often reffed, a half way decent front row will win their own ball.

A bad back five in the scrum is not anything to be concerned about if you're smart at the junior level. And just to show that I can be hypocritical, I know this because I've used exactly that to great effect.

 

[Braveheart81]

Does that really equate to there being no place for good lucks at junior level though?

 

[HighPlainsDrifter]

The Sydney Swans scouts attend Basketball tournaments , my son was approached at the Kings Cup at Newington when at school (30 teams from CAS,ISA,GPS) ... Rugby heartland you would have thought , he knocked them back as not keen on AFL , now running around in Subbies just for fun apart from rep basketball , Rugby funnily his favourite sport but could not commit to 2 training schedules as the BB went to State level and career has now taken precedence , I've seen a few like him running around of lock size they are out there , but suspect other sports may be looking harder .

 

[Slim 293]

Because the under 19 laws have restrictions on binding and how far the scrum can be pushed, there is less onus on the locks to provide the push. In fact, as a junior coach it is the best place to hide weaker players, as well. It used to be the wing, but now those blokes find themselves all alone tackling massive blokes who know the wings are weakest.

So, coaches use the restricted rules to hide players in the second row. Due to the rules and the particularly 'Australian' way it is coached and often reffed, a half way decent front row will win their own ball.

A bad back five in the scrum is not anything to be concerned about if you're smart at the junior level. And just to show that I can be hypocritical, I know this because I've used exactly that to great effect.

But........... lineouts.

 

[Brendan Hume]

But..... lineouts.

Junior teams will often lift small loose forwards in lineouts - lifting a 6 foot 14 year old gets a bit hard for the other young fellas!

 

[Brendan Hume]

Does that really equate to there being no place for good lucks at junior level though?

I can mean their development is stifled. Junior coaches (particularly at rep level) are probably more focused on getting a win up rather than developing a big uncoordinated 6'2" 16yo into a senior lock.

 

[TOCC]

I don't know which junior teams you've been involved with but I never had that experience.. we always lifted the tallest bloke on the team, who also happened to be close to the heaviest..

I think we're going to have to agree to disagree..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Braveheart81]

I can mean their development is stifled. Junior coaches (particularly at rep level) are probably more focused on getting a win up rather than developing a big uncoordinated 6'2" 16yo into a senior lock.

Particularly at rep level though, that's probably the prerogative. If you've got a glut of quality backrowers, some of which are big enough to play lock, you'll probably select one there if they're better than the locks.

I don't really get the premise that rep coaches should the ones trying to develop senior locks. Should rep selectors overlook better junior players and pick on the basis of who they think might fit the requirements further down the line?

By the same logic would that mean overlooking smaller players who might excel at junior levels but never be likely to make it in the senior game?