What is the real Waratahs playing style?
By Andrew Logan, 5 Mar 2010 Andrew Logan is a Roar Expert
- Tagged:
- Chris Hickey, Rugby Union, Super Rugby, Waratahs
After watching the Waratahs last week, I was forced to check my tea for random hallucinogens that might have drifted in on the wind or something. What the…?
The Tahs were all of a sudden carrying on like genuine title contenders, and although it was a welcome form reversal, the big question remained: can they deliver the same performance two weeks in a row?
They lost against the Bulls, of course, but the game that they laid out was by far their most positive and enterprising for the last dozen or so matches, and one which would have beaten any other team in the competition.
Among the positives was their willingness to play on quickly from both phases and free kicks, as well as their appetite for contact. The Waratah forwards clearly relished the physical exchanges, and surprised the Bulls, who traditionally dominate the breakdown area with a brand of animal confrontation reminiscent of their namesake in a china shop.
The most surprising development was the rebirth of halfback Luke Burgess, who revived the flickering embers of his rapidly fading Wallaby career by taking a few lessons from his usurper. Will Genia’s stock-in-trade is the judicious snipe, combined with the laserish shift from the ruck to 10-plus-one.
Burgess, who was previously reduced to “standing over the ball like an emperor penguin” (to quote another canny columnist), suddenly realised that the action wasn’t in the post/10 channel, but in the 10-12 channel, particularly against the Bulls who salivate over dumb bullocks charging blindly into the close contact.
By shifting the point of contact to the middle of the field, he allowed his runners to bend the line and occasionally get in behind it, forcing the Bulls forwards to turn and chase.
In terms of their recent below-par efforts, it was a staggering and welcome change for the Waratahs and their aggrieved fan base.
However, the pressing question is exaggerated rather than quelled by the turnaround, and that question is “What exactly is the Waratah style?”
This might be paraphrased as “How exactly are they trying to play?”, or even “What is Chris Hickey’s preferred style?”
But no matter, all three questions are equally difficult to answer.
Hickey is the rugby equivalent of John Key*. You know he has an importantish job and he appears in the papers occasionally, but as for what he stands for or where he’s going – one is never quite sure. To the layperson, at least, his philosophy remains clouded and his methods unclear.
Contrast the Waratahs of 09/10 with the Bulls, or the Hurricanes, or the Chiefs.
You know the Bulls will play for territory, and use their forward-dominance to set up for close range tries and field goals. The Hurricanes will punch up the 12 channel and try to break the line, supported by a large and angry back row. The Chiefs love to counter, play wide to their back three, and when the opposition are stretched, get Brendon Leonard to slice them up close in.
And they all do it so well, that even though you roughly know what they’re going to do, it’s still pretty hard to defend against because when they play to their preferred plan, they control the flow of the match.
But with the Waratahs? Who knows?
It would be great if it was last week’s version where they played the Bulls at their own game – a physical, uncompromising brand of rugby, punctuated by flashes of brilliance and only occasionally brittle defence.
But you could perhaps argue that the true Waratahs style is a sort of bastardized Force/Bulls cross, which utilises a lightish forward pack to play field position with a conservative general such as Halangahu or Barnes.
Or is it a tryhard Brumbies model, where the forwards run like backs, but minus the try scoring?
I still can’t put my finger on it and it’s frustrating, because the Waratahs have so much depth.
They have 3 of the top 6 or 7 flyhalves in the country in Daniel Halangahu, Berrick Barnes and Kurtley Beale, and a thousand or so possible backline combinations. Halangahu, Beale, Drew Mitchell and Sosene Anesi could all play fullback, for example. Barnes, Tom Carter, Beale, Josh Holmes and Halangahu could all play 12.
It’s in the second row where the real selection conundrums begin. Imagine sitting down and trying to work out your most effective combination from Dean Mumm, Will Caldwell, Kane Douglas, Dave Dennis, Cam Jowitt, Hendrik Roodt and Chris Thompson.
And then who should go to the blindside flank? Mumm, Dennis, Ben Mowen, Jowitt, Ben Coridas or Chris Alcock?
Too much depth can be confusing, and until the Waratahs can settle on a specialist lineup which works to a distinct game plan, it will continue to lurch from good game, to not-so-good game.
They risk becoming a team of generalists, rather than utilising their depth to develop true specialists in each position. Developing specialists shouldn’t be a problem. After all, it’s not like they’re being forced to utilise players in unfamiliar positions due to lack of depth.
So which comes first? A solid game plan, or a team that can play to it?
There’s not much point in building a you-beaut strategy if you don’t have the players to carry it out. But with the Tahs, you’ve got pretty much got the men to carry out whatever plan you might be able to dream up.
And therein lieth the problem. Are we playing field position? Taking them on in the pigs and then going wide? Counter attacking? Sniping around the fringes? All of the above? Something else? The Waratahs could potentially do any or all or none of it on a given day.
With luck, last week is the beginning of a clear direction.
Recommend this story.
The Turkey 10
The Turkey 10 teams have now been selected, as Wild Turkey Bourbon's sport sponsorship kicks into the next exciting phase.
Choose which side you're going to support and get in the running to win $2,500!
Simply visit Wild Turkey Australia on Facebook for your chance to win.
Find out more.
The Crowd Says (31) | Page 2 of Comments
Have Your Say
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Rugby Union articles
- Reds back in contention, but Waratahs need a cleanout (287)
- What Hansen’s first squad means for the Wallabies (191)
- Will Cooper and Mitchell be back in time for Wallaby selection? (156)
- Who will be in the Wallabies’ backrow? (155)
- ALAN JONES: We have the players, it’s the coaches that are to blame (153)
- CAMPO: Will Deans change the style of the Wallabies play? (128)
- Tahs out. Brumbies win ugly. And Quade’s back! (124)
- Chiefs vs Bulls: Super Rugby live scores, blog (2)
- Rocky Elsom axed from Wallabies (50)
- The burning question: Beale at 15 or 10? (117)
- Hola Argentina, and welcome to the Rugby Championship! (17)
- White welcomes Reds’ rugby battle tactics (81)
- Rebels want fast start against Hurricanes (4)
- Beale firms as Wallabies’ five-eighth (5)
- Chiefs vs Bulls: Super Rugby live scores, blog (2)
- Hola Argentina, and welcome to the Rugby Championship! (17)
- Irish coaches looking to head Western Force (14)
- Dull Super Rugby coaches equal dull rugby (46)
- Coaching, not lack of depth, the issue for Australian rugby (30)
- Super Rugby round 14 preview (8)
- Road to the 2015 World Cup starts in June (19)
- Explore:
- Chris Hickey, Rugby Union, Super Rugby, Waratahs



March 5th 2010 @ 10:13am
Hoy said | March 5th 2010 @ 10:13am | Report comment
To me, Burgess has been overcoached, and now he doesn’t know what is expected of him.
I keep saying, when he played ARC, he was in my mind the best halfback in Aus, bar none. Great, bullet pass, quick service, good runs, more importantly, at good times.
For the last three years, he has been floundering in no mans land, and I can’t help but feel it is because he has been coached too much, and it has filled his head with twaddle.
Good for him to play like he can… finally. Hope he can keep it up.
March 5th 2010 @ 11:19am
Bruce Ross said | March 5th 2010 @ 11:19am | Report comment
Andrew, as you might suspect I wasn’t really taking issue with you, but rather using your comment as a vehicle to get across some basic points about a player who has been unfairly maligned. I think we would all agree, however, that he had really lost his way.
Still, any player’s only as good as his next performance, so I concur with your closing statement: “Let’s see if he can repeat the performance again tomorrow.”
and Even looser’s: “Facts are he did better and the fans want to see more of it.”
and Hoy’s: “Good for him to play like he can… finally. Hope he can keep it up.”
I think that Hoy has made a very good point about him being “overcoached”. He is very much an instinctive player and rugby has too few of them.
March 5th 2010 @ 12:40pm
Whaler said | March 5th 2010 @ 12:40pm | Report comment
Can ayone fill me in on why Beau Robinson was let go overseas ? WIth the lack of number 7′s at the moment, Robinson would have been of great value,,,,,,,,,,,,,,seems strange that when NSW cut him not one of the other franchises picked him up ????
March 5th 2010 @ 12:51pm
Rockin Rod said | March 5th 2010 @ 12:51pm | Report comment
Pocock, Brown,Hogo all good 7s at force
Reds Braid (vc) and they bought tomeki back from France and have some really good young guns
Brumbies have Mr Smith, and 2 really good young 7s in Hooper and the younger brother of the REDS twins. Salvi will replace Smith.
Melbourne Michael lipman
NSW Waughy and NSW A Chris Alcock they rate highly. Also ben Coridas and Hugh Perrett is playing As for them too.
Melb would be his best shot as Lipman could play anywhere in backrow
March 5th 2010 @ 1:39pm
Hawko said | March 5th 2010 @ 1:39pm | Report comment
Lipman will be 31 next year and has had a lot of injuries. I reckon the Rebels would be a natural for Robinson.
Raises the question about the Rebels culture if they do take Lipman.
March 5th 2010 @ 2:27pm
Nashi said | March 5th 2010 @ 2:27pm | Report comment
Hey Andrew, you pose intersting questions.
Hickey has spent too much time dwelling on the strength of the oppoisition. Instead he should be building a single starting 15 that has the capapcity to adjust to the oposition when required. That is choose a team that will give you acendancy early. What I mean is let your attack remain the same but vary the plays using the strengths in each player in each game plan, let the comnibations they have built with the player who is adjacene to them week after week continue to grow.Surely every team wants to start on the front foot.
This happnens when the attacking team fires from the start. This allows the leaders to set the tempo of the game, and if they are good enough, they can make strategic decisions to hold that position if and when the tide turns. When the tide turns and plan A no longer works its time to play plan D for defence, thereore the bench should be a mix of attacking players and defending players,each one thrown on to suit the current game situation. If you are safely ahead and some of your key attackers look stuffed, throw on a defender. If you are behind and the key defensive players are knackered throw on some attack.
Whenit comes to defense stick with that same team an again look for ways that make them complement one another.
The benefit of playing in the same position week after week should not be discounted.
The bench players ought to be chosen for a change of tactic. That is any interchange should tell the rest of the team how the introduction of the sub will impact on the game plan. Sure players are changed for injury but, that should clearly signal that the current game plan should remain.
March 5th 2010 @ 11:49pm
bennalong said | March 5th 2010 @ 11:49pm | Report comment
Andrew,
As a Burgess fan I believe he was trapped by the Tahs game plan and perhaps his wilting confidence. Genia’s 10 (QC)plays much closer to the gain line than Giteau does/did and last season the changes in the Tahs backline meant Burgess was stuck in close recycling forwards for Phil, which literally cramped his style and his running game.
Hanga’s is there because he’s seen as a solid defender allowing Barnes to cover the 10/12 channel .
This of course squeezes out Beale who played well for Deans in the Midweek games and IMO should be given game time to make up for the job done on him by playing him at pivot too early. I believe we owe it to him!
And who would have foreseen Quade Cooper emerging from the “Benji’s headless chook” moves into his current incarnation where he may edge out Gits. Hangers is good inside Barnes but his star has faded whereas Deans clearly wants to see Beale play.