Waratahs deny they’re a kicking side. Are they right?
Columnist By Spiro Zavos, 25 Mar 2010 Spiro Zavos is a Roar Expert
The Waratahs Berrick Barnes kicks the ball against the Sharks during their Super 14 rugby match in Sydney on Saturday, March 7, 2010. The Waratahs defeated the Sharks 25-21. AAP Image/Paul Miller.
The excellent rugby writer for the Sydney Morning Herald, Rupert Guinness, has written an intriguing article arguing that the “the Waratahs have defied the perception they are a team reliant on kicking.”
The article quotes statistics compiled by Fair Play Sports Analysis Systems to show that last year the Waratahs recorded 33 kicks per game during the season, and that this year, it averages only 22 kicks a match.
For the record, the order of kicking sides in the 2010 Super 14 tournament, according to the statistics is: Sharks (32 kicks a game): Stormers (30): Brumbies (28): Cheetahs (27): Bulls (27): Highlanders and Lions (26): Reds (24): Chiefs (24): Force, Crusaders and Hurricanes (23): Waratahs (22): Lions (18).
The statistics place the Waratahs as the second-least kicking side in the tournament.
Guiness states that this statistic should be taken as “fact.” And Chris Hickey, the beleagured coach of the Waratahs, is quoted as saying: “The statistics show that despite the perception of some people we don’t kick the ball a lot.”
I would include myself as among the “some people” category. Do the statistics prove me and the other critics wrong?
It won’t surprise many people that I maintain that we (the “some people” group) are right to assert that the Waratahs tend to kick too much ball away to their opponents.
The first point I would make is that the statistics are averages.
In the case of the Waratahs, the non-kicking statistics are inflated because of the match against the Lions when the the Waratahs hardly kicked the ball at all. They were too busy running in 11 tries.
If the Waratahs had played their usual game of kicking the ball away, their average kicking statistics would be much higher.
There is something else wrong with the methodology used to establish these so-called facts.
The statistics tell us how many times the sides kicked on average in a match. They do not tell us what the percentage of kicks to possession is. And this is the crucial information.
Take the Chiefs, for example.
They kick far too much and, in particular, overplay the chip kick (especially the grossly over-rated Stephen Donald). Yet the Chiefs are recorded as averaging only 24 kicks in a game, well down the kicking list.
In their last two matches, according to their coach, Ian Foster, the Chiefs won only 35 per cent of possession. This means that although the average kicking count is lower than 8 other teams on the list, the Chiefs are ACTUALLY kicking away a very high percentage of their possessions.
The same argument applies to the Highlanders who have deprived their very good backline of ball to run with by incessant kicking by their halfback, Jimmy Cowan. This tactic is the single most important reason why the Highlanders are losing matches they should be winning.
You can’t score tries when the opposition is given the ball all the time.
I don’t have the possession statistics of the Waratahs. But my guess is that the Waratahs are a side that kicks away a high percentage of its possessions.
The essential point in all of this is that rugby teams must kick the ball. The game started as RUGBY FOOTBALL after all. But it is what you do with your kicking that is the crucial thing.
The Bulls, for instance, are a kicking side. But they are a good kicking side.
They generally don’t do chip kicks. The box kicks and high balls are invariably chased and contested. When kicking for territory is done, the kick is invariably long and directed towards touch.
The Waratahs kicking is none of these things.
They are a bad kicking side. The box kicks are rarely chased. The high ball never chased. There are too many chips that are not re-gathered, and have no chance of being re-gathered.
This is dreadful, brain-dead rugby.
Instead of a strong Waratahs side, which is loaded with Wallabies, sweeping aside most oppositions, opponents are kept in the game because of the fetish of kicking the ball away without any systems for getting the ball back.
Of course, it is not only the Waratahs among the Australian teams that are guilty of this kicking nonsense. The Western Force and the ACT Brumbies kick far too much, or put better, kick badly far too much.
Against the Blues last weekend, for example, the Brumbies were leading just after half-time when Josh Valentine, with no great pressure on him around his 22, kicked a high ball.
The Blues snaffled the ball, ran it wide and scored a try. This try gave them the momentum to score two more tries, including one from the ensuing kick-off when Rene Ranger made his startling break.
Valentine’s stupid kick started the scoring spree.
Someone once declared that statistics are like bikinis: “What they reveal is interesting but what they conceal is crucial.”
The kicking statistics quoted by the SMH, therefore, should be treated with some discretion before they are canonised as “facts.”
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.
- Explore:
- Rugby Union, Rupert Guinness, Super Rugby, Sydney Morning Herald, Waratahs
March 25th 2010 @ 11:58am
Hammer said | March 25th 2010 @ 11:58am | Report comment
Wow so the blues don’t kick it at all … now that’s a stat ….
the problem with the tahs is that in fact they’re actually neither a kicking team or a running team … they’re a limbo sort of side trying to have a bob each way and failing at both forms ….
March 25th 2010 @ 12:00pm
Hoy said | March 25th 2010 @ 12:00pm | Report comment
Great point Spiro. Excellent point.
I am always wary of people who throw stats around.
As I was reading the first four paragraphs, I automatically thought it is not how many kicks, but maybe a more telling stat would be how much posession is kicked away by the Tahs?
What percentage of kicks are deemed effective? For instance, by all accounts Halangahu kicked one fantastic ground gainer. Effective. I can almost say any kick by Drew Mitchell = ineffective.
March 25th 2010 @ 5:46pm
Justin said | March 25th 2010 @ 5:46pm | Report comment
Not only as a % of their possession but also where on the field they kick from. Against the Sharks it seemed even from in their attacking half!
March 25th 2010 @ 12:06pm
The Bush said | March 25th 2010 @ 12:06pm | Report comment
Note to all professional rugby players, next time you’re thinking of an up and under, think about the last time this resulted in a try FOR YOUR TEAM. Kicking should serve only the most limited of purposes – to get out of troule in your own 22, as an attacking method in the oppositions 22 (ie grubbers or side to side kicks, maybe, just maybe a small up and under/chip) or when hopelessly isolated – I may be missing one but it certainly isn’t pointless box kicks or up-and-unders that go two metres forward.
Note to Berrick Barnes – when taking the ball from a set peice or ruck on the fifty metre line, an up and under is not how tries are scored.
March 25th 2010 @ 8:52pm
katzilla said | March 25th 2010 @ 8:52pm | Report comment
“Note to all professional rugby players, next time you’re thinking of an up and under, think about the last time this resulted in a try FOR YOUR TEAM”
In all seriousness that last time I ever remember a bomb resulting in a try for any Australian Team the man catching it was Tim Horan. And he was the best there ever was at catching attacking bombs. Its a long time ago.
March 25th 2010 @ 12:16pm
Rugbywits said | March 25th 2010 @ 12:16pm | Report comment
The most important part of the article Spiro wrote is – “kick far too much, or put better, kick badly far too much.”
As far as I can tell there are 3 reasons teams kick in rugby –
1. To releave pressure in defense. (Good reason).
2. As a creative form of attack. (Good reason).
3. You dont know what else to do. (Very, very bad reason).
The Waratahs fall into the third catagory with the majority of their kick, thats just watching the games on TV. Its after 2 forward runs and a simple cut out pass to Tom Carter that Barnes goes, “Oh well, didnt work, lets flog it downfield.”
Adam Ashley-Cooper is one of my favourite players, he has so much talent (probably wasting it at number 15 instead of 13) but he goes the up-and-under because he sometimes doesnt know whats a better option. Probably figuring that the hang time gives his players time to organise. But with him the only one chasing it his team is just getting organised to defend again.
Why not in training just run a drill… 10 phases before you can kick – No matter where you win possession or where you are on the field. When I played rep rugby in western sydney we trained in a 20m wide channel with NO KICKS as a form of game preparation to practise support. You actually werent allowed to run unless you DIDNT have the ball either. And surprise, surprise our team was the first western sydney team to actually win a rep game in many years. Support play…
March 25th 2010 @ 12:48pm
Dave said | March 25th 2010 @ 12:48pm | Report comment
On Fox last night there was a replay of Wallabies V NZ from ’98. One of the fantastic things to watch was the WB’s ability to patiently probe for weaknesses in the AB’s defence. 1 try in the 1st half I lost count after 15 phases.
Larkham, Horan, Herbet and Little were particularly good at probing and if there was nothing on getting past the gain line and setting up another phase.
March 25th 2010 @ 7:30pm
Nashi said | March 25th 2010 @ 7:30pm | Report comment
Good game that one. How good was Larkham’s kicking under pressure, after only 6 games at 10 you could see how his game was developing with the little pass turned back inside. The flat wide ball must have come later. How fat and slow was Kearnsy! Still I would have to say that was one of my favourite Wallabies teams of all time.
March 25th 2010 @ 11:18pm
Short-Blind. said | March 25th 2010 @ 11:18pm | Report comment
Yeah watched it too and how about the alignment nuances from both the AB and WB backlines? Standing in single file behind an attacking scrum to confuse the Defence, changes of angle from jason little – all subtleties lost on most OZ backlines today – WTF. Look at the tapes and sack those backs coaches.
March 25th 2010 @ 12:23pm
Jameswm said | March 25th 2010 @ 12:23pm | Report comment
Rugbywits – what dop ypu mean by you weren’t allowed to run unless you didn’t have the ball? You mean the guy with the ball had to walk once he got it?
March 25th 2010 @ 12:47pm
Rugbywits said | March 25th 2010 @ 12:47pm | Report comment
Yeah mate, thats what I meant.
It was a great practice method. When you had the ball in your hands you werent allowed to run, you could walk as fast as you could though. That meant that when you were about to get into contact you had to have very precise body height/position and you were extremely reliant on the support of the team. Halfbacks had to clear the ball quickly to creat momentum as well.
The field was only 20m wide so that we HAD to rely on ability to offload and break a tackle with body height.
And because the ball runner wasnt at full speed your team got to know the way you hit tackles and go to ground, giving you a real sense of the tendencies of your team mates where onces you got to full speed in a game.
Very effective.
As I said, played in rep for Western Sydney in the Sydney metro comp and we were the first time an aged team (we were under 17s) had beaten ANY side from the other main Sydney regions in a few years.
March 25th 2010 @ 12:49pm
Rugbywits said | March 25th 2010 @ 12:49pm | Report comment
Also to clarify, tries were occansionally scored, maybe once per session. But that wasnt the point. It teaches ball security, support and body height/positioning.
Tries come when you play with purpose as a team.
March 25th 2010 @ 3:31pm
soapit said | March 25th 2010 @ 3:31pm | Report comment
must say rugby wits i’m struggling to visualise how that would all work in practice. i might have to see it done. come to think of it i generally needed to see most drills done before they sunk in.
after the 11 try game i said to people “don’t blow ur stacks just yet, most of those tries wouldnt have been scored against a side that was interested intackling” and sure enough see what happens when they can’t just run over the top of people or rely on a defence not marking up against “hands”
March 25th 2010 @ 5:19pm
Bruce Walkley said | March 25th 2010 @ 5:19pm | Report comment
Who cares? The real game starts at the MCG tonight.
March 25th 2010 @ 5:44pm
Justin said | March 25th 2010 @ 5:44pm | Report comment
P!ss off somewhere else champ… Richmond Carlton? Blockbuster!!!
March 25th 2010 @ 8:44pm
matthew said | March 25th 2010 @ 8:44pm | Report comment
^ I just have to remind Bruce that many people think AFL is extremely gay. Especially away from Australia.
March 25th 2010 @ 11:15pm
bennalong said | March 25th 2010 @ 11:15pm | Report comment
I feel like a lone voice on this blog but I think the constant bagging is a bit misdirected. They haven’t been kicking too much this season and a lot of the kicking has been tactically sound. The game against the Lions legitimately WAS a non kicking game and still counts as testimony to the teams expressed desire to run with the ball. Sure it was easy to do. Likewise it WASN”T easy to do last week. Can we agree the Force muscled up?
The game against the Force was NOT a kickfest, despite the fact that the DH ref did NOT apply the new rules to encourage a running game game. Therefore kicking could have been employed earlier as said by Phil Waugh. Give him a break RK!
I would love the Tahs to play like the Crusaders, and there are signs of it breaking through. They need foreward penetration and hopefully with Cliffy back the loosies will man up with TP who did it by himself last week
I wouldn’t expect the Tahs to play like the Chiefs or the Blues. There’s a cultural gap there that an aboriginal side might bridge.
Like the Wallabies they’re a work in progress. Why not go pick on the Brumbies. They’re the ones who were predicted to take out the title !
March 26th 2010 @ 10:19am
Go_the_Wannabe's said | March 26th 2010 @ 10:19am | Report comment
Hey Spiro,
Can you go back to Fair Play and get them to divide all the kicks into effective and ineffective kicks for each team please?
Then we can have an effective or ineffectve discussion.
March 26th 2010 @ 10:43am
Amateur Hour said | March 26th 2010 @ 10:43am | Report comment
Couldn’t agree more. I’ve read a lot of harsh criticism on this site over the last few weeks about a team that is sitting in the top 4 and looked like toppling the Champions on their home turf in round 3. They’ve also played 3 other games that no matter what, their performance was going to be criticised. It wasn’t going to matter if they beat the Reds by 2 or 20, there was going to be criticism as they were playing what was considered at the time to be an understrength domestic rival (that’s been put to waste since then!!) and ditto for the Force game. As Matt Burke said in his article in the SMH today, the Force were a banana peel waiting to happen for the Tahs. They were expected to beat the Lions by 50 and when they beat them by 60, guess what? I was at the Sharks game and was disappointed by the spectacle but took on board what was said during the following week re the demands that were placed on the team after being on the road for the previous 5 or 6 weeks and just having returned from SA. I think that’s pretty fair comment and they still walked away with the win.
I’ve had this game against the Blues highlighted on the calendar for some time and if the Tahs don’t front up and put on a compelling performance this weekend, then I will be prepared to start listening more to some of the criticism that has been coming from all directions, but up until now I really do think that a lot of it has been misdirected. If they pull of a victory here and hopefully next week as well against the Cheetahs, as you would expect them to (the Cheetahs will have just got off a plane from SA), then this will put the Tahs in great stead for the following two crunch matches agains the Crusaders and Brumbies on either side of the bye. We may then also see some of their critics retreat to their armchairs.
Also – Statistics are like bikinis – love it!!
March 26th 2010 @ 10:44am
Amateur Hour said | March 26th 2010 @ 10:44am | Report comment
Above reply was meant for Bennalong. Sorry.