Analysing the tackle-shy Bledisloe
Roar Pro By Bruce Ross, 1 Nov 2009 Bruce Ross is a Roar Pro
- Tagged:
- All Blacks, Bledisloe, tackles, wallabies
The Tokyo Bledisloe match featured the clash of two backlines who, basically, can’t tackle to save themselves. Both the Wallabies and All Blacks backs fail in the majority of tackles they attempt.
Let’s look at the Wallabies first, using calculations derived from 2009 Super 14 stats compiled by Verusco Technologies. The first figure is the average number of tackles made per 80 minutes played, and the figure in brackets is the percentage of missed tackles:
Wallabies backs:
Will Genia 7.5 (27.0)
Matt Giteau 10.0 (15.6)
Digby Ioane 7.3 (25.6)
Adam Ashley-Cooper 7.2 (25.0)
Ryan Cross 7.9 (19.0)
Peter Hynes 5.7 (19.5)
James O’Connor 8.5 (14.5)
Luke Burgess 9.7 (15.7)
Drew Mitchell 4.2 (33.3)
Quade Cooper 8.8 (42.0)
Average: 7.7 (23.7)
All Blacks backs:
Jimmy Cowan 6.3 (17.7)
Dan Carter – (-)
Sitiveni Sivivatu 5.4 (20.5)
Ma’a Nonu 8.7 (16.4)
Conrad Smith 8.5 (20.0)
Cory Jane 5.6 (21.7)
Mils Muliaina 4.2 (22.0)
Brendan Leonard 7.1 (27.6)
Stephen Donald 5.6 (40.0
Tamati Ellison 6.5 (25.6)
Average: 6.4 (23.5)
And the situation gets worse with the rest of the injured and non-selected Wallabies backs:
Berrick Barnes 9.6 (25.7)
Kurtley Beale 7.5 (33.3)
Rob Horne 8.9 (29.2)
Richard Kingi 5.6 (33.3)
Stirling Mortlock 6.1 (38.0)
Tyrone Smith 8.6 (29.8)
Matt Toomua 9.1 (28.9)
Average: 7.9 (31.2)
And the man who can’t get a jersey, no matter how many players break down? Tom Carter averaged 12.7 tackles per 80 minutes and missed just 6.7%.
Recommend this story.
- Explore:
- All Blacks, Bledisloe, tackles, wallabies
November 1st 2009 @ 1:57am
Paradox said | November 1st 2009 @ 1:57am | Report comment
These stats completely contradict other stats available .
November 1st 2009 @ 7:27am
Bruce Ross said | November 1st 2009 @ 7:27am | Report comment
I can’t remember ever previously criticising one of my own articles, but The Roar editors in “correcting” one of my sentences have fundamentslly changed its meaning. They have me saying:
“Both the Wallabies and All Blacks backs fail in the majority of tackles they attempt.”
What I actually wrote was:
“Both the Wallabies and All Blacks backs fall off one in four tackles they attempt.”
I really don’t need other people making me look like a goose. I am quite capable of attending to that myself.
November 1st 2009 @ 9:27am
sheek said | November 1st 2009 @ 9:27am | Report comment
Gidday Bruce,
Thank God somebody else is copping it from you!!!
At the risk of being extremely mischievous, whom shall we blame for the Wallabies’ poor basic skills set???
The most insightful ‘skin-deeps’ of The Roar suggest all we have to do is replace Kiwi Deans with an Aussie, any Aussie, & all our problems will be solved!
Or could it be, Australian rugby union has perhaps another two dozen or so problems it needs to address???
November 1st 2009 @ 10:51am
Bruce Ross said | November 1st 2009 @ 10:51am | Report comment
Greetings, sheek.
It’s interesting you ask “whom shall we blame.” I have been working this morning on another article, looking at the physical preparation of the Wallabies. I think it’s worth focussing on how they go about their strength and conditioning.
November 1st 2009 @ 3:10pm
Yikes said | November 1st 2009 @ 3:10pm | Report comment
Not sure that this article would get an airing if Tom Carter played for, say, Randwick!
But seriously, as the stats show, Carter is the best defensive back certainly in the Waratahs and possibly in Australia. Bruce, what is holding him back in your opinion from higher honours? There must be some reason in the selectors’ minds. I think there may be a perception that Tom can’t create opportunities in attack, particularly for those outside of him.
The Waratahs’ defence was again pretty good this year, but missed that spark in attack, no? They were ranked 2/14 in defence but only 11/14 in attack.
November 1st 2009 @ 4:32pm
Bruce Ross said | November 1st 2009 @ 4:32pm | Report comment
You may be right, Yikes, in suggesting that I may not have drawn attention to Tom Carter if he played for Randwick, but I would hope only because I probably wouldn’t have been aware of his defensive record.
The real context for mentioning him is that this is an era when apparently a player who misses 40% of his tackle attempts can find a spot on the Wallabies’ bench and when the norm among both Wallaby and All Black backs is a fail rate of 24%. Yet there is a player who makes more tackles per 80 minutes than any other Super 14 back and only misses one tackle in 16. It is only a decade or so ago that the Wallaby backs took enormous pride in their virtually impenetrable, brick-wall defence.
And what is the net result of this current focus on tackle-shy “playmakers”? Certainly not an improvement in attack if that is measured by the number of tries scored per game.
You ask, “what is holding him back in your opinion from higher honours?” I agree with you that he definitely has a perception problem which has dogged him since he came through from club rugby.
After debuting for NSW on their tour of Argentina in 2004 he was contracted but did not play a minute – not one minute – of Super 14 game time until 2008 when under Ewen McKenzie and Todd Louden, he was an integral part of the Waratahs’ all-but-triumphant 2008 campaign, playing every game despite carrying injuries to both groins through most of the season. Earler this year Louden, who seems to know something about back play, said:
“Tommy can play both a passing game and a block-busting running game, and is capable of adapting and improving his game to any team play or style. He is constantly reinventing himself around what is best for the team. He is a pleasure to coach as it is like working with a fresh canvas each season.”
This year Chris Hickey and Scott Wisemantel only used him in a very limited role and in a limited number of games. They could have their own preconceptions.
I note that the ‘Tahs were ranked second overall in 2008 although I couldn’t find a separate attack rating. Presumably it would have been considerably higher than 11.
November 1st 2009 @ 5:04pm
Yikes said | November 1st 2009 @ 5:04pm | Report comment
Actually, Bruce, no. They were ranked =11th in 2008 in attack as well (based on for and against). Surely the fact that the Waratahs came 2nd and 5th from 08-09 with the 11th best “for” record says everything we need to know about why the crowds are staying away. It seems defence wins you games, not fans!
Maybe the addition of Barnes could add enough imagination to keep Tom in the backline as a defensive weapon. It’s quite a crowded backline next year at the Tahs: assuming Barnes is fit, you have him, Beale, Halangahu, Horne, Carter, Mitchell, Turner and even Holmes (who played as an outside back for Warringah and will certainly be on the bench if Burgess keeps his spot). There’s some redundancy there in case of injury, but still – someone’s going to be unlucky to miss out. What would be your backline, Bruce?
November 1st 2009 @ 5:58pm
Bay35Pablo said | November 1st 2009 @ 5:58pm | Report comment
Yikes, I’ll jump in with:
9 – Burgess
10 – Barnes (when fit)
11 – Turner
12 – Halangahu
13 – Carter
14 – Mitchell
15 – Beale
Without Barnes:
Burgess
Halangahu
Turner
Horne
Carter
Mitchell
Beale
November 1st 2009 @ 6:19pm
Working Class Rugger said | November 1st 2009 @ 6:19pm | Report comment
Bay
We also have Anesi, Sidey ( has played Magner’s) and Nasiyangavi. So a potentially loaded backline next season capable of some great play. Couple that with the foward we had from this season and another frrustrating year of underachieving awaits us. Or could I be wrong. God I hope so. I have re-upped my membership to season tickets next season, so if they could actually win the thing would be nice.
November 1st 2009 @ 5:22pm
Bruce Ross said | November 1st 2009 @ 5:22pm | Report comment
That’s extraordinary, Yikes, although I was assuming that the rankings were more sophisticated than simply points for and against. Without wanting to make too many excuses though, my recollection was that the 2008 backs were relatively inexperienced and they did have a lot of wet weather games.
I don’t think I want to take up your challenge to nominate the backline, although on past form mine would be very different to that chosen by Hickey & Co. My only observation is that a lot of work should be put into helping one of those players learn and perfect his craft. Unfortunately few if any of our coaches have the patience or foresight of a Bart Cummings.
November 1st 2009 @ 11:10pm
sheek said | November 1st 2009 @ 11:10pm | Report comment
Bruce,
I think you are hitting on one of the problems of Australian professional rugby union here – the fall-off in quality coaching through each age group right up to the super coaches. It’s blindingly obvious many Wallabies are down in their basic skills set.
And this must go back to the coaching they received before reaching the Wallabies. Although there are plenty who will tell us “it’s all Dean’s fault”.
In the amateur days, RU was blessed with many wonderful coaches, often ex-players, who gave freely of their time to pass on their knowledge & skills. Today, it seems many of those types of people have walked away.
Those left may be every bit as talented & well-meaning, but with a significant difference. They are protecting their position in a code & country where there are very few professional coaching positions available.
I’m suggesting these coaches are stunting the development both of players & the game, by preserving their own positions. They may not do this deliberately but they do it nevertheless. Afterall, their livelihood depends on remaining in a well paid coaching position.
They stunt player development by removing innovation, enterprise & individuality, forcing players to conform to ‘sameness’ & uniformity. Winning has become the all-important ‘God’. The players oblige for much the same reasons – there aren’t that many professional positions available.
In the amateur days, money wasn’t a problem. But in the professional environment, it causes people to behave very differently. How we solve this issue satisfactorily is for better minds than mine to ponder.
November 2nd 2009 @ 2:02pm
Bruce Ross said | November 2nd 2009 @ 2:02pm | Report comment
If you don’t mind, sheek, I’ll reply in a short while when I get free time. You and I are very much on the same page with this. I am not sure that we have gained much that is worthwhile with the move to professional structures.
November 2nd 2009 @ 8:51pm
sheek said | November 2nd 2009 @ 8:51pm | Report comment
Bruce,
The players have benefitted wonderfully from professionalism. Well, the top 60 to 80 anyway.
I look forward to your thoughts.