As I say I am not sure if it already happens, but if not then why not? They are in the perfect position to do it and have little else to worry about for the most part. They are the logical guardians of off-side IMO.

Dave Rennie (Manawatu, NZ U20 and ex-Wellington coach) said that as a coach he would expect this to be called off-side, because that’s what happens when one person in the defensive line is ahead of the rest. So in a sense Rennie was excusing referee Pearson, and instead was blaming this decision on Traille’s teammates for being lazy in not improving their defensive position right up to the allowable limit.

Rennie has a point. Referees have so much to do that it’s hard to expect them to constantly be looking at where the hindmost feet in a ruck are. Rather, they just quickly look at whether everyone is in a defensive line, and then get back to the myriad other things they have to be looking out for.

The other thing is the time it took between the ball emerging (when the defensive line is allowed to break) and Burgess passing it. Those with good medium-term memories may recall an incident in this year’s S14, where Lachlan Turner intercepted a pass from Blues halfback Taniela Moa just before half-time (at Eden Park). Turner too was actually on-side, but as with Traille-Burgess, he was made to look off-side by the slowness of Moa’s pickup and pass. NSW went on to win that game, but the denial of Turner’s legitimate try cost NSW a 4-try bonus point.

Now that I think about it, NSW missed the S14 semis by 1 point …

Also, I’m expecting the Wallabies to bring out a few set moves from controlled rucks and set pieces in the TN’s – I reckon they’ve kept a few up their sleeves during the warm ups.

Oh and Spiro can you please stop making up ridiculous reasons why the Wallabies were lucky to win just to satisfy your fragile kiwi ego, and can you also please stop using the word “ensemble” or atleast use something different. Try a thesaurus.

It doesn’t seem that long ago that the ABs were written off (2008) and they won TN, Bledsloie and a Grand Slam – the ABs surely have enough history on their side for the Wallabies and the Boks to be cautious (the Boks were very gloriously vocal last year after their win in Dunedin – and we all know that ended in the wooden spin for them).

But saying all that – the Wallabies do look to be improving (but perhaps they needed too) – it should be a cracker TN.

By the way my Kiwi mates aren’t giving me any ods anymore and some of them are flat out refusung to have a friendly punt with me.

May I start reading between the lines?????

Saying that Smith was excellent – yet he seemed forever to be by himself, where was his support and shouldn’t that lead to more go-forward against a tired team?

Deans experimental team of youngsters (2nd test Italy) showed that some of the emerging talent have real potential (and some do not). This looked decidedly like Henry’s AB teams of rotational players. You would have to say that we all learned that it is more important to cover the top talent than merely having a second team. Tumekeheke is quite right – more concern should be given to covering key players. New Zealand has shown what can happen to a team’s momentum, confidence and ability without these key players.

Now, my limited experience only goes as far as coaching/refereeing U8′s, but we have been lucky enough over the past 4 months to have had the ARU run coaches/referees sessions for the club each month, concentrating on Mini’s. One of the things the ARU boys covered early on was ruck and maul – laws and the practicalities of teaching 7 year olds what they should be doing.

Their explanation of when a ruck ends was “when the ball leaves the ruck”.

“How do we know when a ball has left the ruck?” we asked. “Is it when a player puts their hands on the ball ready to pass?”

“It only leaves the ruck when a bird can shit on it.” was their reply. “As long as the ball is on the ground, it is still in the ruck, even if the halfback has his hands on it. It is only out when it comes off the ground, or out past the hindmost foot of the hindmost player in the ruck (in other words when a bird can see it to shit on it).”

Based on that – I reckon he was indeed offside.

Aha! So that’s how it works, I mean, your take on how it should work. I’ve been struggling for a year now with this subject, The New Look.

I gave my daughter, DaniE who posts here occasionally, Matt Burke’s autobiography, “A Rugby Life” for her birthday. On pages 50 and 51, he describes how difficult it was to adjust to Greg Smith’s “sequence of plays”. (The book is in KL with DaniE and I’m relying on my notes; some of the words are in shorthand.)..”A scrum here, work to a point here, after putting on a move….” xxx “That was a pretty regimented approach, and a lot of people in the game had problems with it – in line with the traditional belief that the way to play rugby was to let it flow, to PLAY WHAT’S IN FRONT OF YOU (my caps)…” xxx sequence 1, sequence 2, etc. Two years later it became the norm in rugby – but I think that with NSW in particular, Greg Smith hammered a good thing too much, too early.”

To get a handle about what you said, I relate it somewhat to American gridiron, where a particular coach might dictate the first 5 plays, and then the quarterback makes the rest of the calls, except when the coach sends specific instructions again. (Of course, this is for the offence, but the defense would have their plays too.) That helps me understand the drills.

I’m grateful. I’ll certainly think about your reply.

They have patterns but they’re expected to shelve them if they don’t adequately address what’s in front.

In Deans’ scheme you move out, ie. tackle the guy one out from the guy in front and opposite. But if the guy in front is ‘right in front’, you take him, and your guy inside will either help you put him down or loop around to cover the off-load.

For good players it’s generally what’s intuitively best instead of the book of rules.

The Deans method contracts the defensive line inward which, among other advantages, allows a quicker counter-attack

See what I came up wth, thinking about this as a simplicity, on a paralell thread.

I do not get this ‘play whats in front of you’in terms of defense. They must have patterns to cover the inside pass, the angle run, the ball passed wide. So what it must be is they have the ideal response to certain situations and then when the situation occurs everyone goes where they should. This is different to being programmed since that is a set of responses more than 1 set of steps ahead.

I was disappointed, as I’d hope they’d subject the Wallabies to the same intensity they’d given the All Blacks. The 3 Nations is just around the corner.

What I consider very positive is the way that the Wallas are beginning to play on the same WAVE LENGTH. They’re not really playing “what’s in front of you” (can someone please think up a better term, it’s getting trite from over-use), individually that is. Instead, one or a few make that judgment, but the whole pack sniffs it in the air, and they hunt as one. Remarkable. As Berrick Barnes said in the SMH today, there were some players who were skeptical at first, but not any more. I too was skeptical. I just hope my new appreciation is well-founded.

Ratu Nasiganyavi. I’d like to see him get a run in the centre at 6’5′ and 125kg he’d make an impact.

They also have the cousin earmarked for the wing which is a poor decision. He is too slow for wing at S14 level, and like you suggested far better for 13, maybe even better to play 6 or 8.

I still reckon Mortlock will be there RWC as he is the heart and soul of the team at the moment. He still demands respect and attention from the oppo. He always drags 2-3 defenders.

Click on the test you want and then you can check out players in a range of stats. Has a summary for each teams players and you can go into each stat category to dig a little deeper.

I would make sure ACC gets more time at 13 AND Tahu gets developed for 13.

I agree Mortlock is still the form centre and he still crashs through the line on occasion but I think his commanding runs are becoming less and less frequent. Further, he seems to be injured more often, such as when he knocked himself out putting the hit on Woodcock. I vaguely recall he has taken a few significant injuries over the 08 S14, 08 Test and 09 S14 campaigns. Given his high impact playing styke, I wonder whether the years are starting to catch him up. If so, who will replace him as no one else offers the same thrust in the midfield.

I appreciate that you play the match in front of your, not for the RWC but lets not kid ourselves. Everything seems to happen with an eye to the next RWC. Deans is contracted until the end of the RWC campaign. It has to loom in your thinking. I am not saying we need to immediately start picking the team we will use for the RWC but you have to think long terms about renewal and replacement, in case of injuries, for the RWC and just generally for growth. My concern is that 3 and 13 seem to be areas where the Wallabies lack a long term prospect, not that Baxter and Mortlock should be given the gold watch right now.