Waratahs 2013

[Caputo]

Well with my reasoning Cheika has played most of his squad.
The only ones not sighted Cam Crawford, Michael Hodge and Grayson Hart in the Backs and Ollie Atkins and Jed Holloway in the Forwards.
Will Sam Lane be replaced?

 

[JSRF10]

Have to say I have shouted it down in the past but Folau to 13 is making more and more sense to me. The way he frees his hands in the tackle and his strong running makes me think we need to get him involved as much as possible.

 

[wamberal]

Have to say I have shouted it down in the past but Folau to 13 is making more and more sense to me. The way he frees his hands in the tackle and his strong running makes me think we need to get him involved as much as possible.

I agree. The downside is the difficulties of defending at 13. However, I believe that the game is evolving quickly, particularly the defensive aspects, and the relative difficulty of defending at 13 is not as great now as it was. He definitely needs to be brought into the game. Having been brought up in loig, his background is to play in a very tight structure, we cannot expect him to throw that upbringing off overnight, it would take him years to learn how to be creative in our game.

So put him in the position where the creative challenges are closest to those he is used to. That is, outside centre. He is quick enough, agile enough, to cover up any defensive misreads most of the time.

 

[aussie1st]

Yea 13 is definitely his best spot, Folau just hasn't had the same impact at fullback since the trial matches.

 

[JSRF10]

he could be exposed defensively there but the upside is far more than the downside and its time to give it a go. Lets be fair he won't do any worse than AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper)

 

[Inside Shoulder]

I agree. The downside is the difficulties of defending at 13. However, I believe that the game is evolving quickly, particularly the defensive aspects, and the relative difficulty of defending at 13 is not as great now as it was. He definitely needs to be brought into the game. Having been brought up in loig, his background is to play in a very tight structure, we cannot expect him to throw that upbringing off overnight, it would take him years to learn how to be creative in our game.

So put him in the position where the creative challenges are closest to those he is used to. That is, outside centre. He is quick enough, agile enough, to cover up any defensive misreads most of the time.

I recall how well he stitched up Freuan in the trial and everyone in NZ is talking Freuan up so there isa tiny bit of form to go on.

 

[Gnostic]

I posted in the blog that the Tahs could hardly perform worse if every single "senior" player was dropped or benched. The level of skill execution is what is killing them, along with working off the ball.

Individual players have always had strengths and weaknesses and teams should always be built to balance and compliment for the plan/s that are going to be executed. The Tahs after Hickey and Foley were built to a purpose, that is forward set piece dominance and defence, there is little flexibility. The side was not built for dominance around the field and certainly not for back line play. Chieka has inherited that side and is trying to play a different game plan to what it was built and trained for with only a few changes. I do not think that the side is fit enough to play the fast support play game the Chieka is trying and given the number of Wallaby tourists in the side he hasn't had enough time to get them fit enough. That said, some of the players, and especially senior players have demonstrated in the games so far a lack of will or application to work hard off the ball as required right from the start of the game when that fitness issue should not be a problem.

As for the individual skills execution, this is not isolated to the Tahs. Last night we saw an abysmal level of application from the Reds, though this was out of the ordinary for them before this year, at the Tahs it has been the norm for many years and I have mostly attributed that to the tactics and the way the side was structured. It is a very hard ask for Chieka to step in and change that overnight and perhaps he has made an error in not adopting 2013 as a transition year and playing a hybrid game of last year's tactics and some of this year's attacking structures. We all know that next year we will see a cleanout of playing stocks if Chieka gets another chance and that is when this game plan could be successful.

The real danger is that with crowd figures remaining poor and the team playing poorly, if with much better attacking structures, he will not be given a second year. I certainly hope Chieka had the foresight to ensure he got at least two years guaranteed in his contract.

Lastly for those snidely posting about Timani jumping in the lineout, by my count in a Tahs jersey he has taken or delivered four in two seasons. I ask is that sufficient for a starting lock at the highest level? Do his other strengths make up for this to balance the ledger. I found it truly ironic that because Timani so rarely jumps he was left unmarked at the back of the lineout with two lifters for his clean take to set up the set piece mid field break.

 

[Gnostic]

I agree. The downside is the difficulties of defending at 13. However, I believe that the game is evolving quickly, particularly the defensive aspects, and the relative difficulty of defending at 13 is not as great now as it was. He definitely needs to be brought into the game. Having been brought up in loig, his background is to play in a very tight structure, we cannot expect him to throw that upbringing off overnight, it would take him years to learn how to be creative in our game.

So put him in the position where the creative challenges are closest to those he is used to. That is, outside centre. He is quick enough, agile enough, to cover up any defensive misreads most of the time.

I would suggest that as long as the Tahs have a good defensive fullback to assist he would do well at 13. For that role I would back Turner, he has the pace, is a great defender and is OK under the high ball and kicking. Mitchell was dropped, as he has been in the past for his workrate, and IMO he is still very hit and miss under the high ball and with his kicking. He can out perform Turner when he is on but just as likely he will skew the kick or knock the high ball on. He is more dynamic and beats far more defenders than Turner when he is on, but again is just as likely to die with the ball and not work hard off it. Turner is Mr above average, that will perform and execute.

For me AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) plays on the left wing to use his fend and his lack of an effective passing game doesn't matter so much. If he isn't on the wing he is the ultimate bench utility. He is not a starting 13 or 15, he just doesn't have the skills and hasn't developed them over his long career.

 

[Quick Hands]

I liked watching Cheika as a player - his take no prisoners approach during his time at Randwick was always entertaining and he should have earned higher rep honours. Regrettably he's yet to instill this same attitude in the Tah's forwards and I don't know that he's got the raw material to do it anyway. Mongrel is not a crown that sits easily on the most of the forwards heads - from last night's game Ryan, Hooper and Douglas wore it and Ulugia was next best. As for the others Timani doesn't understand the meaning of work rate, Robbo was OK but by no means as impressive as last week and consistency of performance is an issue, McCutcheon was a major disappointment at 8 and got smashed every time he carried the ball whilst Dennis, as good a player as he can be, is struggling as captain and is not leading by example in defence, attack and general follow me attitude.

Cheika has been quoted as saying that teams must firstly dominate in the forwards to earn the opportunity to go wide - got to say that I didn't see that last night other than for a short period of the second half when the forwards played a tighter and quicker game with repetitive pick and drives and short pass interchanges whilst all the time going forward. My pet hate with the way the Tahs play is the long flat pass from a ruck to a near stationary wide forward who ultimately gets absolutely smashed before getting anywhere near let alone over the advantage line. Ryan, Douglas and Hooper are the only forwards who understand the need to time your run in these circumstances and to run a reasonable line when doing so - they also have something that the other forwards lack - good footwork in tight.

As for the backs McKibben has suffered from not having a dominating pack in front of him and just shit lineout ball - but that said how hard is it to pass the ball in front of your 10 and other runners. I've been shouted down before but Folau should have 13 on his back. You can't play a non kicker at 15 and his propensity to break the line or stand in the tackle and offload is just wasted on the wing. Betham showed plenty of promise and will be better for his first start for the year. Jury's out for me on AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) and Turner - I'd have Mitchell ahead of both of them as he reads the game so well, cleans up heaps, makes few errors and can kick with both feet. Not sure that Foley might be better suited at 15 - but who to play at 10 with Barnes continuing run of injuries? Probably the biggest issue backs wise is that we don't have any real match winners - there's no Beale, Mogg, Cooper, O'Connor, Tapuai or Lealiifano - yes they're not all perfect but they more than often deliver - who's our go to back?

Bottom line - not enough mongrel forwards and no match winner in the backs will consign the Tahs to another poor season. I expect Cheika will be undertaking a big cleanout come season's end.

McKibben is just too predictable. Whether he gets good ball or bad ball, he's just going to shovel it on. We need a half who can run the game and who knows when to kick or run himself. On the few occasions that McKibben chooses to kick or run, it's usually the wrong option. BB probably needs to be released - he's had a horrific run of injuries, he's just started a family - let him go to Japan and earn some money where the games are less intense. TC and AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) just don't seem to fit in to the style of rugby that Cheika wants, Horne has played so little rugby it's hard to judge. I think that Foley is developing well but isn't being helped by the players inside and outside of him. Turner, Folau and Betham are with the script, but the time the ball gets to them they're under pressure.

You and Gnostic are spot on with your analysis of forward play as well.

I'd suggest that the time can't be very far away when the "senior players" need to dropped or benched to at least see what the others are capable of.

 

[p.Tah]

Lastly for those snidely posting about Timani jumping in the lineout, by my count in a Tahs jersey he has taken or delivered four in two seasons. I ask is that sufficient for a starting lock at the highest level? Do his other strengths make up for this to balance the ledger. I found it truly ironic that because Timani so rarely jumps he was left unmarked at the back of the lineout with two lifters for his clean take to set up the set piece mid field break.

I presume the first sentence is directed at me. My comment about about Timani was in reference to comments that he cannot jump. It's a bug bear of mine when people post with definitive statements such as 'x cannot jump, cannot pass, kick, tackle etc.' It would be more constructive if the observation was discussed rather than just a cliche throw away line. I liked your post because of the detailed analysis. It stimulates deeper discussion.

In reference to Timani's jumping. The example you gave, although unopposed indicates he can jump. He took it cleanly, gave McKibbin clean ball and it helped lay the platform for Betham's try. Why isn't he used more often? I've heard he is too heavy to lift, yet he weighs the same as many other locks.

When he is fatigued his hands can be an issue. Are there ways to counter this? Can he be the line out option earlier in the game or after a large break in play. Can he be used more often as the line out decoy?

I don't know what the Tahs strategy is in this regard. All I can go on is that Cheika is picking him so there must some elements of his game that he likes.

Cheika has demonstrated that he isn't afraid to drop high profile non-performers so as soon as Cheika feels that S Timani is no longer contributing to the level he should be he'll be out of the squad.

 

[Quick Hands]

I'm expecting the Blues to be a step up this week, unless we dramatically reduce our basic errors we could be in for a lot of tackling and chasing. I'd suggest that after 5 weeks, Cheika would be looking to bench or drop guys who aren't measuring up.

 

[Gnostic]

I presume the first sentence is directed at me. My comment about about Timani was in reference to comments that he cannot jump. It's a bug bear of mine when people post with definitive statements such as 'x cannot jump, cannot pass, kick, tackle etc.' It would be more constructive if the observation was discussed rather than just a cliche throw away line. I liked your post because of the detailed analysis. It stimulates deeper discussion.

In reference to Timani's jumping. The example you gave, although unopposed indicates he can jump. He took it cleanly, gave McKibbin clean ball and it helped lay the platform for Betham's try. Why isn't he used more often? I've heard he is too heavy to lift, yet he weighs the same as many other locks.

When he is fatigued his hands can be an issue. Are there ways to counter this? Can he be the line out option earlier in the game or after a large break in play. Can he be used more often as the line out decoy?

I don't know what the Tahs strategy is in this regard. All I can go on is that Cheika is picking him so there must some elements of his game that he likes.

Cheika has demonstrated that he isn't afraid to drop high profile non-performers so as soon as Cheika feels that S Timani is no longer contributing to the level he should be he'll be out of the squad.

Chieka is severely limited with regard to the second row choices in the squad. As discussed previously with the combination of second rowers and backrowers available I don't if he has much choice at all who he selects to start. That would be different if Peterson had shown improvement in the time he has held down a contract but from what I read here and elsewhere he just hasn't developed. The question becomes academic next year as he is leaving but I would seriously suggest that he would struggle to hold a starting spot and perhaps a contract if he weren't going, though that is purely in the realms of speculation.

It is funny how perceptions of players is formed and the case of Timani is a great study of this. Here I think a vast number of people believe he is bigger than he is purely on the back of commentary/propaganda of those wishing to see that isn't there. Those people are genuinely surprised when you table the actual figures to show he is on a par with the other TH locks running around in Australia, in particular Douglas and Pyle. What ever the reasons for his under usage at lineout it certainly handicaps the side when they do not have dominant back row lineout options. Long term I think Timani would have been far better served to play as a hard hitting 6 in the mould of Willie O, who was used only rarely as a lineout receiver (he took the ball for the try in the 91 RWC final by Mackenzie/Daley), but as I said I think Chieka is serverely limited in that regard by his squad.

Finally with regard to "cliche" absolute statements about players, I whole heartedly agree. Statements such as AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) can't pass are just plain ridiculous. An accurate (if debatable) statement would be that AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) should pass more often than he does when he has players in support and he has a poor pass out of his right hand.

 

[barbarian]

Two dads frustrates the hell out of me - he could be a great player but his total inability/unwillingness to pass is a liability - everyone except NSW and Aust Coach knows that he will not pass the ball. The defending winger can come in every single time to assist in cutting him down with full confidence he will not pass the ball. Why bother having Folau,Betham et al if your OC is a total U9 ball hog? And the thought of him at IC scares me - fullback or wing maybe (or until tonight at the Force but their backline is starting to look pretty handy especially with HB to come back).

In my opinion this is an example of a rugby stereotype that has no basis in fact. Scott Allen ran through a pretty thorough analysis of the Wallaby 13 options late last year and adressed (and debunked) this point. I will post a link to the video if I can find it.

<edit> Here it is: http://www.greenandgoldrugby.com/who-should-be-the-wallabies-number-13/
.

 

[I like to watch]

I'm not so sure about that.
Saying AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) has an unwillingness to pass is not debunked by that footage.
I would debate with my dying breath,anyone suggesting that AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) is more of a ball player than a ball runner.
It's the fact that his natural instinct is to "squeeze the lemon dry" before passing the ball, that most people are commenting on IMO.

 

[barbarian]

I was more referring to Lincoln's pretty strong criticisms.

I'm not claiming he is a great ball player, just that he is not some 'Under 9 ball-hog' who simply refuses to pass. When he is in doubt, his instinct is to truck it up. That is not a bad thing. He doesn't make the right decision all the time, but the notion that opposing wingers never have to stay on their man is misguided.
.

 

[Paradox]

The problem with Aussie backs at the moment is that most of them just don't have good rugby brains (and they can't pass but that's another issue). For example, they can't see space out wide or opportunities when they're on. Someone like Mogg has shown that's he's not just an athlete but also has a good rugby brain. We need more of those type of players- obviously there are some question marks over his defense. Last night I was shocked at how much pill the Reds kicked away when opportunities were on.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

The problem with Aussie backs at the moment is that most of them just don't have good rugby brains (and they can't pass but that's another issue). For example, they can't see space out wide or opportunities when they're on. Someone like Mogg has shown that's he's not just an athlete but also has a good rugby brain. We need more of those type of players- obviously there are some question marks over his defense. Last night I was shocked at how much pill the Reds kicked away when opportunities were on.

I was about to say that Mogg has the luxury of time at fullback and then I thought, hold on, so do all those other blokes who are not setting the world on fire with their vision even from 15.
I have to say that one of the reasons I dont get the man love for Inman is that I think he has no peripheral vision at all.
So i think you have identified a major problem.
These guys have been taught to play a pattern: they have not had to think about the reasons for it.

 

[Quick Hands]

The problem with Aussie backs at the moment is that most of them just don't have good rugby brains (and they can't pass but that's another issue). For example, they can't see space out wide or opportunities when they're on. Someone like Mogg has shown that's he's not just an athlete but also has a good rugby brain. We need more of those type of players- obviously there are some question marks over his defense. Last night I was shocked at how much pill the Reds kicked away when opportunities were on.

I've been saying the same thing for a while now as well.

 

[barbarian]

Foxsports reporting BB could play this week. Bit of a turnaround, I thought it was pretty serious.

 

[qwerty51]

They did say dislocation or fracture and I think he was cleared of the fracture