Wallaby Watch 2014
- Thread starter No4918
- Start date
- Status
which may be just the approach that may see a resurgence in Big Kev.
It is what it is
John Solomon (38)
RR, how much of the improvement still to come from Horwill is physical and how much is confidence in your opinion?
I also declare I am a fan of his.
I never considered it to be confidence related. He's a strong willed guy Big Kev, and I'd suggest he'd back himself most of the time. I still sense he is playing on with injury. Would've loved him to have the off-season off, but can understand the need for him to be there.
He is a big physical lad, I hope Cheika can encourage this further.
He is a big physical lad, I hope Cheika can encourage this further.
Brumbieman
Dick Tooth (41)
The chopping tackle being the low, around the legs tackle that drops the ball runner?
I'm a huge fan of it. One of the most infuriating things about watching the Wallabies at the contact zone is how much ground we lose after contact is made.
Regularly, you'll see a hit put on, both players standing up, and then the ball carrier just starts pumpuing the legs (usually assisted by an arriving support player) and the mini maul is then driven that extra few metres further behind the advantage line.
It's a great way to allow the other team to first of all get in behidn your advantage line (making it hard for arriving players to get the easy angle into the ruck, and easier for opposition to charge in and clean out), and secondly to start gaining momentum after a couple of those runs.
What i'd like to see is a mix.
Work as a fucking team, and allocate some roles. "OK, Saia is going to chop Retallicks ankles out, so we'll have two players ready to not just latch onto the ball, but drive through the ruck and take up space on the other side of it".
Slows the recycle down.
While that ruck is being contested, we pick out the next ball runner, or look at their options and then make the choice to either go low (if the ball runner has lots of support and momentum), or go higher in a two man gang tackle and aim for a physical domination of that tackle.
It's not hard for 2-3 players to communicate and come up with the plan of action, and I swear you can see NZ doing it in those tight exchanges around the ruck. THey assess the ball runner and his options and make the decision on how to play that phase.
Scrubber2050
Mark Ella (57)
All blokes but especially big blokes hate being on the end of a 'chopping" tackle. They hit the ground very quickly without often being able to put an arm out to break the fall, without being abkle to pass the ball.
I love 'em. But the sceret to completing that tackle phase is that another player needs to be over the ball immediately.
I love 'em. But the sceret to completing that tackle phase is that another player needs to be over the ball immediately.
Nup, I want to see the ball carrier smashed backwards and the rest pile in to counter ruck driving over the ball, not tackled and still going over forward.
I want to see the attackers knocked backwards every time they can be (or at least jarred to a stop) as our forwards impose themselves on them.
The chop tackle certainly has it's place. If the ball runner is at all isolated it's probably the best way to win a turnover.
If the ball carrier isn't isolated however it can result in very quick ball. If the cleanout is effective it can be turned into quick front foot ball.
There's no doubt that the Wallabies, particularly the forward pack need to make more dominant tackles and greater impact in the collision zone.
The chop tackle is a good weapon to have and we have a few players who are very good at it. We'll win more games by having our players win the collision zone more frequently though.
If the ball carrier isn't isolated however it can result in very quick ball. If the cleanout is effective it can be turned into quick front foot ball.
There's no doubt that the Wallabies, particularly the forward pack need to make more dominant tackles and greater impact in the collision zone.
The chop tackle is a good weapon to have and we have a few players who are very good at it. We'll win more games by having our players win the collision zone more frequently though.
It is what it is
John Solomon (38)
The exception is TPN and his unfortunate propensity to chop tackle and knock himself out.
Let's not encourage this tackle for him.
Let's not encourage this tackle for him.
It's been a while since that happened.
Dumbledore
Dick Tooth (41)
People just don't come back from the injury he had the same. It's not like doing an ACL where the knee actually comes back physically stronger but it's the mental scars that do the damage. He's never going to have that same explosive pop in contact that he once did. However he can certainly keep going as a proper hard bastard lock playing tight in the manner of Brad Thorn.
Brumbieman
Dick Tooth (41)
Well, ideally yes.
Realistically, there needs to be a balance of the two. It's just idiotic trying to win a contact and smash the opposition ball runner back if you're the only tackler and the runner has support ready to hammer on and drive him forward.
Unless you take out the legs in that situation, you're always going to give away easy metres to the runner as he only needs to stay on his feet for a few more seconds while his team mates drive him another 3-5 metres forward.
Chop his legs out and he might gain 1-2 metres, ending that phase and allowing either a supporting playing to drive in for the jackal, or simply fan out al la NZ and prepare a big gang tackle for the next runner, when you've got more support.
Viking
Mark Ella (57)
It's not realistic to just say our forward pack will start winning the collision because that's the way Chieka wants us to plays. There is no Douglas, Palu, TPN, Potegeiter - all players who are great in the collision.
We can't expect the likes of Carter, Simmons, Hooper, Fardy, Fainga to simply start winning the collision. With a rampaging Retallick, Kaino, Franks they simply don't have the strength to dominate.
Our players have a certain set of skills, we need to play to our strengths, which ultimately means there is still going to be a lot of "chopping" tackles. Players like Fardy, Hooper benefit from this style from increased chance of turn-overs.
This is not to say there won't be more emphasis on counter-rucking, leg drive, and collision work. However I simply don't see us playing the dominate work into contact that was evident in the Tahs, It has to be more balanced given our current stock.
Maybe when TPN/Moore, Palu, Pocock, and Horwill finds his old form again, we can implement the strategy.
We can't expect the likes of Carter, Simmons, Hooper, Fardy, Fainga to simply start winning the collision. With a rampaging Retallick, Kaino, Franks they simply don't have the strength to dominate.
Our players have a certain set of skills, we need to play to our strengths, which ultimately means there is still going to be a lot of "chopping" tackles. Players like Fardy, Hooper benefit from this style from increased chance of turn-overs.
This is not to say there won't be more emphasis on counter-rucking, leg drive, and collision work. However I simply don't see us playing the dominate work into contact that was evident in the Tahs, It has to be more balanced given our current stock.
Maybe when TPN/Moore, Palu, Pocock, and Horwill finds his old form again, we can implement the strategy.
Forcefield
Ken Catchpole (46)
I don't see Hooper as the breakdown specialist that your David Pococks, George Smiths or Matt Hodgsons are. That isn't to say that he is bad there- just that this isn't always his main focus. IMO the other guys are likely to benefit more from the chopping tackles. Pocock is perhaps the exception as he is probably more likely to make a dominant tackle.
The_Brown_Hornet
John Eales (66)
It is what it is
John Solomon (38)
If you did an evaluation of his worth, I'd reckon Hooper's ability to make ground with the ball in traffic, would top the list.
His footwork and acceleration are excellent while his leg drive breaks a lot of tackles.
Forcefield
Ken Catchpole (46)
Absolutely. This is why I always wish that Michael Hooper was a back. He is very good at the breakdown. He is very fast. He is a committed chaser. He is tough to tackle and has an eye for running into the space that will see him even harder to take down or make a linebreak or put himself in a position where quick ball can be taken. He is a very good tackler too.
One of the strengths of the ABs is how well each of their players competes at the breakdown. Having a Pocock or a Smith at 7 and a Michael Hooper out wide would bring out a bit of anxiety I reckon.
One of the strengths of the ABs is how well each of their players competes at the breakdown. Having a Pocock or a Smith at 7 and a Michael Hooper out wide would bring out a bit of anxiety I reckon.
T
Train Without a Station
Guest
Spoken like a true Force fan.
Tomikin
David Codey (61)
Hooper played in the backs vs the Lions, didn't work. The guys a 7, he wouldn't make the 15 in any other position.
- Status