- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
We had a cracking couple of games to open The Rugby Championship for 2015 last weekend, but like all cracking games, it left us with many questions.
And that’s a good thing, because it just so happens that Diggercane, Harry Jones, and myself are here for that very purpose: to pose and tackle the big questions.
Brett McKay asks: Did the success of Louw-Coetzee-Burger and Hooper-Pocock mark another evolution of the modern rugby pack of forwards? Could more mobile backrows become a thing going forward?
It could well be, but not before November 1. I think both South Africa and Australia were a little surprised at just how well the lose combinations worked, but then again, maybe that was because they were playing each other.
I just wonder if even in the north, where the breakdown is so hotly contested whether we might not start seeing it more. It’s certainly true that most backrowers have the capability to play in most, if not all three of the loose forward spots, so it wouldn’t even really be that much of a stretch.
And most backrowers in the north can jump in lineouts these days, too, so it’s not even as though the set piece would be losing out anywhere. I think it has some serious merit.
Harry: If loose trios speed up again, it will be back to the future. Yes, an openside is the rat up a drainpipe, the blindside is the proverbial rangy bedrock tackling machine, and the No 8 is a linking man.
But their roles overlap on any given play. And think of the speed of these great Bok hunting trios: Ruben Kruger, Andre Venter, and Gary Teichman, or Piet Greyling, Jan Ellis, and Tommy Bedford, or Corné Krige, Joe van Niekerk, and Bobby Skinstad.
Reducing foes’ momentum and creating fast ball for friends is their collective job. Speed is king, so long as they are still strong and big enough for set pieces and ruck cleansing.
Digger: Ummm, yeah, nah. I would argue that backrows are incredibly mobile anyway and versatile with many being able to play two if not all three positions.
At the end of the day, you select the best players you have, either to play the style you want to play, or what is suited to the skill sets you possess. You make the best with what you have and trust that it will provide an effective and cohesive unit.
I may well be wrong but I am still unconvinced by such a loose forward mix, particularly if in adding mobility you are sacrificing physicality. I am a big believer in the set piece at Test level and such a formation could prove detrimental and I see a well-drilled side dominating the middle of the park.
By all means, have your mobility sitting on the bench for injection during a match, but I like to have big men making hard yards and owning the ruck and fringes. Mobility means nothing if you cannot win and hang onto the ball first, although in fairness it will be handy for all of the cover tackles you would need to make.
Diggercane asks: Are we seeing too many of what appears to be ‘pre-meditated’ substitutions in recent times?
I believe so, as evidenced by the much-discussed Bismarck substitution, but I also believe it applies to Agustin Creevy for Argentina. Head-scratchers to say the least and yes, everyone needs game time before the World Cup but in my view such substitutions have been happening for some time that it feels the game situation is hardly taken into account.
Adapt to what is in front of you, surely that is just as important for the coaching team as much as the players themselves? I also get rather frustrated when a player isn’t performing and a potentially better option sits waiting on the bench. I am sure we have all had quiet venting moments in our living rooms wondering why they won’t inject such and such into a match earlier than the anticipated and obligatory 50-65 min mark.
I understand the need for a plan but have several Coaches in rugby union lost the confidence to back the ‘gut’ feel? It appears so.
Harry: Two substitutions, the arrival of David Pocock and the departure of Bismarck du Plessis changed the Brisbane result without any real doubt, and both were premeditated. When you get them right, you look like a genius; when you don’t, you look like a dolt.
I think we have to go back to answering what the Rugby Championship is this year. I said last week it is only a preliminary poker game, and that there will be bluffs, checks, calls, and cards up sleeves. Obviously, Meyer did not want to lose, but he was most interested in honing systems, fine-tuning backup combinations, and developing rotational rhythms.
If you accept that his priorities were not necessarily first, second, and third win-win-win, but more of a “figure out what beats the Wallabies, find backups, play more than one style, and test youngsters” (there were eight Boks on the pitch at the end with less than 10 caps each), this loss is more palatable.
But for me, Test rugby is sacred.
So, to answer Digger’s query, yes. An end to premeditated Gantt project template rugby coaching. Let the players who are going well, if they have the gas, just finish the bloody game. It’s not a bad thing to learn who has 80 minutes in them.
Brett: No doubt we are, and not because of events on the weekend just gone.
I don’t have an issue with a coach taking a loose replacement plan into a game, but it can’t be a hard and fast this-must-happen-at-this-precise-moment plan. Look to replace a guy on the hour, by all means, but if the context of the game means he doesn’t come off until the 67th minute, then so be it.
And never – never! – make forward changes before a set piece! How many times have we seen a team lose all momentum in the set piece just because a hooker or a prop was hooked before a five-metre scrum?
Equally, and Digger mentioned Agustin Creevy in Christchurch, the loose plan also needs scope to be ignored if the player in line to be replaced is the best on the park. Creevy was almost single-handedly dragging Los Pumas back into the contest last weekend, yet was dragged immediately after scoring his second try?
Made no sense to me at all.
Harry Jones asks: Did any fringe player in Round 1 change his coach’s mind, either for better or for worse?
Waisake Naholo must have had Steve Hansen thinking, but then cruelly lost his bid to the big dance. With Cory Jane out, the fringe for the All Blacks back three expanded. Nepo Laulala and Codie Taylor probably did themselves the most good, and I thought Luke Romano staked a claim. TJ Perenara’s dead ringer impression of Aaron Smith in Christchurch, combined with Andy Ellis’ Samoan dud, removed Ellis from the fringe.
For South Africa, livewire utility back Jesse Kriel is making Heyneke Meyer think (fill in obligatory joke), and with Victor Matfield out of commission for a couple of games, Lood de Jager’s play was a boost for his chances of nosing in ahead of versatile Flip van der Merwe or oft-injured Pieter-Steph du Toit. To the extent Schalk Burger was on the fringe, he made it clear he belongs on the Bok squad. He was magnificent.
For Australia, I’d say Matt Giteau raised doubts, as he ran laterally and was not the late game sharpshooter needed for Twickenham. On the other hand, maybe Matt Toomua raised his share price with Michael Cheika.
Scott Sio always staked a claim to a starting jersey. This may be unpopular with some, but Will Skelton may quickly become a potential fringe player if he repeats that sort of performance in Argentina.
I don’t think anyone really dropped a peg for the Pumas, except for No 8 Facundo Isa, who simply could not make a dent with ball in hand. For the main, there’s no disgrace in a loss to the All Blacks on a cold South Island night. On the gainer side, I thought Lucas Gonzalez Amorosino showed great feet and Guido Petti Pagadizabal was powerful in the collisions.
Digger: If I had to nominate one in the positive and one in the negative they would both be from the Boks with Lood de Jager putting his hand up nice and high, while Oupa Mahoje played himself out of contention, at least in my view.
I’m still of the opinion the coaches pretty much know their 31, so rather than any fringe players playing their way in I think many would have taken heart from a few of the performances from often maligned experienced players, in particular Israel Dagg and James Horwill, who looked assured and back in reasonable condition.
Brett: No doubt Israel Dagg saved his bacon with an impressive performance quickly erasing the scratchy showing in Apia that was par for his Super Rugby season. Waisake Naholo’s injury also meant that Steve Hansen could just slot Ben Smith straight in on the wing, whereas for a little while last weekend, he would’ve been having the same ‘Dagg or Smith’ argument that most of Australia has been having about David Pocock and Michael Hooper.
And though he’s hardly a fringe player, I’ll throw Hooper in here too. He wasn’t a first-choice starter for many a Wallabies supporter – and we may never know what the coach thought – but such was his performance against South Africa that I’m sure I’m not the only person trying to find a way to start Hooper and Pocock together.
Hooper’s breakdown presence was not unexpected, and Pocock’s entrance certainly had a big impact in this area, but Hooper was just so good in defence and his carrying that you can’t not pick him. So it becomes a manner of how to best fit them in together, even if that quandary has been delayed for at least another game.
The tips for TRC Round 2
Brett
#RSAvNZL – Despite eight changes this week, South Africa look no stronger to me, and with Vincent Koch on the bench, their second scrum is arguably weaker again. Even with a debutant at flyhalf, I think the All Blacks look too good. New Zealand by 10.
#ARGvAUS – Playing at home will certainly lift Los Pumas, but I’m not sure how much improvement they have in them. And the desperation of a few Wallabies possibly playing for their Rugby World Cup ticket should just get them home. Australia by 5.
Digger
#RSAvNZL – New Zealand. Just because. By 4. Maybe less. Hopefully more.
#ARGvAUS – Pumas are a different beast at home but I feel like the Wallabies have the bit between the teeth. I have no doubt that the last match between the two sides will still be fresh in the mind of many of the current Wallabies, and I think they will pick up the chocolates. Australia by about 10-ish.
Harry
#RSAvNZL – Boklash on the High Veldt – a missed kick by the All Blacks? South Africa by 2.
#ARGvAUS – Pumas in their lair, watch the second shove. Argentina by 2.