• Welcome to the Green and Gold Rugby forums. As you can see we've upgraded the forums to new software. Your old logon details should work, just click the 'Login' button in the top right.

Waratahs 2013

Status
Not open for further replies.
I like to watch

I like to watch

David Codey (61)
If Cheika thinks they lost that game because the players got anxious when they got a sniff,then we have huge issues and need a complete revamp of the player roster.How many Super caps were on the field? How many Test caps?and he says they tightened up like rookies or B graders?
FFS he sounded like Foley, I thought he would be different.
I just wish he had said he was happy with the effort, but the execution needs improvement.
I think tactically we should have played tighter.We got back into the game when the new front row came on and was dominating the collisions.Then we threw the ball away trying too hard to play with width.Had we played tight for the last 20 I think we win.
 
Braveheart81

Braveheart81

Will Genia (78)
Staff member
scaraby said:
Once we realised we were back in it we started to get a bit anxious," Cheika said. "That's normal coming out of the seasons we've come out of the last couple of years..ok wrong..when you are not expected to win its easier..

Cheika identified the Waratahs' falling off tackles as the key area that hurt them,..ok so not anxious.missing tackles?


After watching the game again we were in good position, but fell off a few key tackles at a few key times," Cheika said. "Otherwise, we were in pretty good shape....yup pretty good shape if you are able to come from 21 -points down every game... key missed tackles at key moments=tries


"We did drop a bit of ball, but we could have overcome that by just making a few more tackles that we needed to make...so we also dropped ball..caused by anxiety???

So its not the fact we dropped ball,missed tackles and bounced off collisions.its because we were anxious about finishing near last again????.come on...
Click to expand...

My take on his comments is that despite lots of issues which he highlighted (defence, dropped ball etc. etc.) they were in a position with 20 minutes to go where they could have won the game and didn't because they made some poor decisions and costly mistakes (falling off tackles).

Considering the issue of losing close games in the last 20 minutes was a recurring theme last season, his point that they seem to be getting anxious (and seemingly have forgotten how to win close games) doesn't seem like a wild assumption to me.
 
BPC

BPC

Phil Hardcastle (33)
On a more serious note, if Dennis wasn't the captain (and he was invisible for much of the match) I would be starting Chapman ahead of Dennis. The lineout was much better with Chapman. It would be nice to get back to the Harrison/Vickerman era when the Tahs lineout was a weapon rather than a lottery.
 
Swat

Swat

Chilla Wilson (44)
Anyone else slightly peeved that we didn't seem to want to slow down the reds ball at all? I think standing off at the rucks to put more men in the defensive line isn't the best tactic. Every time the reds looked threatening was when they had quick, front foot ball. I felt this was a major tactical error and I'm verging on somewhat miffed about the whole performance. Almost, dare I say it, I was irked.
 
Gnostic

Gnostic

Mark Ella (57)
Braveheart81 said:
I thought TPN was fine. Our lineout was dramatically better once Chapman was on the field. I really don't think all the lineout woes were TPN. I think Chapman has to start and play 80 minutes (or very close too though). If Chapman can't play 80 minutes, you could start him with Douglas, then bring S Timani on for Palu at the 50 minute mark and then L Timani on for Chapman at the 65 minute mark and move Dennis to lock. Either way, one out of Douglas or Chapman need to play 80 minutes.

TPN made plenty of tackles (third most according to the stats) and had a couple of good offloads and reasonable ruck/maul involvement.
Click to expand...

The issue comes back to what I posted about for both the Tahs and the Wallabies. S. Timani is a lineout liability. With him on the field the Tahs effectively have one main target, Douglas. The Reds effectively cut him off and TPN was left throwing to the front which then limited the attack as McKibben's pass isn't that long, and the tap backs to try and eliviate that issue often went astray. The question must be asked again, can Timani be carried as a non-jumping second rower when so much 1st phase possession is won from lineout? IMO he cannot be selected when Palu is select at 8. Have 1 jumping second rower and Dennis as the only real lineout targets basically assures the opposition unpressured possession on their feed and the Tahs shakey first phase ball, if they get it.

IMO start Palu with Chapman in the 2nd row, and replace Palu after 50 or 60 for Timani and Chapman can go to 6 with Dennis to 8. If they don't do this they had better learn to play of scrappy 1st phase ball or really improve their execution to score off counter attack.

This could be carbon copied for the Wallabies too.
 
Gnostic

Gnostic

Mark Ella (57)
barbarian said:
Yeah the 'AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) can't pass' thing is one of those lazy rugby stereotypes, just like 'Berrick Barnes kicks all the time' or 'TPN can't throw a lineout'. Just patently untrue.
Click to expand...


Like many things the "can't pass" is an over simplification. He can pass very well right to left. He is poor passing left to right, like I might add many other players, though those including me do not have so many first class games to have practised the skill in. As for the other examples Barnes I feel has played the tactics directed for so long at the Tahs and Wallabies it is a bit of a habit. The issue there isn't the amount of kicking but the poor execution and tactics behind the kicks in many instances.
 
Quick Hands

Quick Hands

David Wilson (68)
Anyone expecting the Waratahs to come out in week 1 and play some sort of champagne, expansive, faultess rugby were always going to be disappointed. The coach has had them for an off-season, he didn't pick the vast majority of the players and inherited a completely dispirited outfit who had been "coached" (if that is the right word), to play an incoherent and mind numbingly boring brand of rugby. The fact that the Reds had played a competition game already was also a factor. The fact that the Waratahs were in a winning position half-way through the second half against a team who've had the same coach for 4 years and the same playing style for as long is a positive.

At best this year will see; the development of a coherent style of play (in which there will be errors and mis-steps), a positive brand of rugby and at best a spot in the semi-finals. They made mistakes on Saturday night - sometimes because they tried to be positive and it didn't come off because they aren't really used to playing that way and on other occasions because when pressure and/or fatigue set in they went back to instinct. That's how the human brain works - when it's under pressure it sends messages based on habit not based on thought.

There's no doubt that the kiwi games have mostly been a class above the Aussie games is beyond doubt and on that basis the Wallabies will do it tough.

Interesting to see that Foley has done the seemingly impossible, as everyone's wooden spoon favourite the Kings managed a first up win against the Force. He coached us last year - see first paragraph.
 
Quick Hands

Quick Hands

David Wilson (68)
Gnostic said:
Like many things the "can't pass" is an over simplification. He can pass very well right to left. He is poor passing left to right, like I might add many other players, though those including me do not have so many first class games to have practised the skill in. As for the other examples Barnes I feel has played the tactics directed for so long at the Tahs and Wallabies it is a bit of a habit. The issue there isn't the amount of kicking but the poor execution and tactics behind the kicks in many instances.
Click to expand...
Correct, nothing wrong with kicking. Players need to know when to kick and what type of kick to put in. Mark Ella kicked, but all his kicks were well executed and done for the right reason at the right time in the match. That's where Waratahs and Wallabies have fallen down recently, which is why the statistics trotted out by Hickey all those years ago were totally irrelavent.
 
JSRF10

JSRF10

Dick Tooth (41)
Swat said:
Anyone else slightly peeved that we didn't seem to want to slow down the reds ball at all? I think standing off at the rucks to put more men in the defensive line isn't the best tactic. Every time the reds looked threatening was when they had quick, front foot ball. I felt this was a major tactical error and I'm verging on somewhat miffed about the whole performance. Almost, dare I say it, I was irked.
Click to expand...

think I may have alluded to this on the match thread, the intensity at the breakdown just wasn't there for the Tahs on Saturday. I'm sure Cheika will be drilling it into them all week they need to make it difficult for the opposition at ruck time.

I hope on Saturday we can get some quick ball ourselves and bring our back 3 into the line at pace. Each time they touched the ball on Saturday it felt like they were going from side to side.
 
Sully

Sully

Tim Horan (67)
Staff member
I wrote about my misgivings re Timani before he was picked for last years wallabies matches. I suggested that lineout jumping was a core skill for second rowers and he shouldn't be picked for the wallabies until he was at least an option at lineout time. I stand by my beliefs but at the time I was told lineouts were no longer an important part of a second rowers game and timani was fine as he was.
Good luck.

Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF700T using Tapatalk HD
 
RoffsChoice

RoffsChoice

Jim Lenehan (48)
Sully said:
I suggested that lineout jumping was a core skill for second rowers
Click to expand...

When a mate and I were talking about the game beforehand, we agreed that when the Reds would win in two places: Lineout and Speed. Because of Timani the Tahs only had two lineout options, as opposed to the Red's three (is Schatz an option? If so, four!).

When this is the case, a penalty becomes a tap, three points or a scrum, because your lineout isn't good enough to keep the ball. When your kicker keeps missing and the opponent takes your scrum down, you have one option: Run and gain 5m.
 
Quick Hands

Quick Hands

David Wilson (68)
Inside Shoulder said:
I leave to you guys to say what I'm thinking:
Click to expand...

I'm more worried about this sentence:

That time will be to Deans's benefit. He would only select Folau for the Wallabies if he believes the former NRL and AFL player has developed his game to a sufficient standard.


Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-union/union-news/folaus-start-at-fullback-right-choice-says-deans-20130225-2f1tw.html#ixzz2Ltve7L8c​
The last thing that Folau needs is to fall within the coaching sphere of RD.
 
Richo

Richo

John Thornett (49)
Quick Hands said:
I'm more worried about this sentence:


That time will be to Deans's benefit. He would only select Folau for the Wallabies if he believes the former NRL and AFL player has developed his game to a sufficient standard.​
​
​

The last thing that Folau needs is to fall within the coaching sphere of RD.
Click to expand...

It's not really a sphere, more of a gelatinous mass.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top