The Waratahs Berrick Barnes kicks the ball against the Sharks during their Super 14 rugby match in Sydney on Saturday, March 7, 2010. AAP Image/Paul Miller.
Six weeks into the 2010 Super 14 tournament, the NSW Waratahs are in the top four. But is this elevated position a case of flattering only to deceive?
The other three leading sides are there without any qualms about whether they’ve been promoted above the level of their abilities. Can we say the same about the Waratahs?
The Bulls are the unbeat-a-Bulls at Pretoria. They have won 15 Super 14 matches on the trot at home. New Zealand rugby writers are beginning to wonder whether the team are the new Crusaders, the second Super Rugby dynasty since the tournament started in 1996.
They started the season blowing away South African, Australian and New Zealand sides by taking the ball up hard from first phase play and then setting up their big runners from second phase play.
But against the revitalised Hurricanes they went back to their traditional game of booting up-and-unders or launching driving mauls. These are tactics that the new interpretations have supposedly de-powered this season. But if referees allow kicking teams to take catchers out (in the pretence of playing at the ball) or allowing any number of stoppages for driving mauls until there is no other option but to drop it down, the Bulls will remain unbeatable.
There should be a call now, as well, to referees to be really strict on teams forming the maul at the lineout, something that the hapless Paul Mark actually got right and was (unfairly) disciplined as a consequence. Also, there should be no leeway when the maul stops.
The point here is that the maul goes against the most important principle of rugby in that there should be a continual contest for the ball. There can be no contest if the ball is parked down the back of the maul, with the bound forwards in front of it technically off-side. Defending sides should be rewarded for stopping the maul, which is the only real defence against it.
The issue for the Bulls is whether they can transport their Pretoria game, which is best played at altitude, to Australia and New Zealand. When they play the Western Force in Perth we should get an idea of just how unbeatable the team really is.
This presumes that the Western Force will play as determinedly as they did against the Waratahs. You can’t help thinking, though, watching the Western Force that there are still issues between the majority of the players and the coach.
The team desperately needs a new and Australian coach who will hopefully drop Nathan Sharpe as captain and build a new squad around David Pocock as captain and a number of the younger players.
This brings us to the Waratahs and another team, I believe, that certainly needs a new coach and new captain to replace Phil Waugh (this is sacrilege, I know).
After the match, Waugh said one of the only interesting things I’ve ever heard a player or a coach say in those idiotic on-field interviews. ‘We probably didn’t kick enough in the first half,’ he noted when he was asked about the way the match went and the strong effort put up by the Western Force.
The kicking by Berrick Barnes and others was actually quite good. Generally it was for field position. But you don’t score tries and put pressure on other sides by kicking the ball to them. Gossip has it, though, that Waugh is the leader of the kicking tactics.
It must drive forwards crazy when they fight to win some possession only to have a back boot the ball to the opposition. And under the new interpretations – except for when the South African Jaco Peyser is refereeing – teams can hold on to the ball for long periods of time and mount sustained attacks once they get hold of it.
Peyser ensured a Waratahs victory when he penalised the Western Force several times on the Waratahs tryline when Waugh was blatantly grabbing the ball before the tackled player could play it.
Thankfully, Luke Burgess has rid himself of his kicking habit. But like a smoker who alleviates his cravings with fast food, he now runs excessively across the field before passing. This is almost as bad (but at least the ball is not delivered to the opposition) as kicking the ball away. A number of Waratahs players are carrying injuries and bruises from the hospital passes delivered to them by Burgess.
The Waratahs coach, Chris Hickey, will be under pressure if his side doesn’t make the finals. I always believe that 90 per cent of good coaching lies in accurate selecting. Hickey seems to have got the forwards right. This is a plus for him. The Waratahs pack, especially the loose forwards, have a bit of mongrel and an appetite for the rampage about them.
But the backs are a mess. They did not create or make one line break against the Western Force. Nor did they look like making such a break. Last week I called for the immediate introduction into the starting back line of Josh Holmes, Rob Horne and Kurtley Beale. Surely this has to happen next week.
The halves do not have much energy in engaging the opposition loose forwards, in contrast with Will Genia and Quade Cooper of the Reds.
With Berrick Barnes and Tom Carter in the centres there is not much penetration and too much plod, especially from Carter.
Drew Mitchell is playing splendidly. But he is a one-man band in the back three. There is no guile or real pace from Sosene Anesi. Lachlan Turner is coasting. He had one run out of trouble against the Western Force. But he is too willing to kick the ball away rather than bolt away with it. He does not seem to be involved in any set movements, either.
But then the Waratahs backline does not appear to have many moves in its bag of tricks. They occasionally shovel the ball along the line and appear to hope that something will happen.
This gets us back to the coaching staff. You could say that Michael Foley has done an excellent job with the forwards, that Scott Wisemantel, the skills coach, needs to get the backs playing smarter and more constructive rugby, and Chris Hickey needs to start selecting a side that reflects the best of the talent in his squad.
The obvious answer to all of this, of course, is to say: ‘We can’t be doing too much wrong if we are in the top four.’ Winners are grinners, as the adage says.
But can the Waratahs keep on winning with their present pedestrian style?
On Saturday night against the Blues we will get a better indication of what the answer is to this question. The Blues are an erratic team but against the ACT Brumbies at Eden Park they played more effectively than they have for some time. Rene Ranger proved too much for the Brumbies outside backs to handle.
If Ranger can be kept in check and if the backs play with the pace, efficiency and skill of the forwards, the Waratahs can entrench themselves in their top four placing, a nice position to hold in the run in to the finals.
Will this happen, though?
mudskipper
Guest
I also have to agree. Theyre a good chance of making the 4 and if they come econd will get both games in SA which gives them a better short at the Bulls because of the lack of travel. Additionallly for interest scak, Loftus isn't available for a Bulls final...
Colin N
Guest
Isn't there a rule that states a maul can be collapsed when there is only one defender in the maul? Thus, they are allowed to pull it down I remember Chabal doing it quite often.
Short-Blind.
Guest
Totally agree James - its really schoolboy basics and thats why I wonder what Hickey/Wise are doing. Why aren't the NSW legends being brought in ie Campo, M Ella, Hawker etc to tutor this lot? Maybe politics and old enmities really are ruining NSW rugby.
Short-Blind.
Guest
McKibbin,McKibbin, McKibbin - Holmes is not the answer. Will take guts though and for that reason it wont happen.
Con Kafataris
Guest
NZ TAB 1 Western Force $4.50 2 Bulls $1.18 Good thing you are not a bookie Chris. Do you happen to sell carpet?
Justin
Guest
H - I have backed the Stormers to win. They are more than twice the price of the Bulls and Saders. As they say thats big "overs".
Chris
Guest
This week is it for the three Australian contenders. If they win then things will be a lot easier at the pointy end. If they lose it is more or less curtains for all three (allthough there is always a "mathematical" chance). As a result let us all hope the Brumbies and Reds win and the Tahs get hammered. I usually don't like predicting record because they are records for a reason - but the Bulls could well chalk up 100 this weekend. I'll be going for the Force but I sure won't be putting money on them. The odds aren't out yet but my prediction is $1.01 to $20.00.
Howi
Roar Rookie
The Stormers are the dark horses of 2010. This is by virtue of their superior defence and I will not be suprised if they soon eclipse the Bulls on the table. Because their attack is not so prominent they are less likely to score bonus points because they don't often score 4 tries (and they don't lose very often but score a bonus when they do.) I am an amatuer statistician (my 'amatuer' status is confirmed by my position on the tipping ladder) and judging teams by the ratio of their average scoring points in attack to their average points conceded in defence, the Stormers come out with 2.73. This means they have been scoring about 3 times as many points as they've been conceeding. Other teams come out with: Bulls 1.39 Crusaders 1.57 Reds 1.50 Waratahs 1.29 But winning is the main thing. The Bulls let many tries through, but stopping them scoring more points than you is incredibly difficult. And the Waratahs keep winning whatever it takes, whether by 70 points or by 1 point. Maybe it comes down to how well teams perform overseas, as it usually does. We have yet to see the Bulls and Stormers perform consistently in NZ and Australia. Likewise, the Reds have been the great improvers of 2010, but they are only just about to embark upon the true test - touring South Africa.
Blinky Bill of Bellingen
Guest
No arguments here. I reckon if my Missus hears me say "what the f#$k do these professionals actually practice at training?" one more time as we sit through another 'tooth pulling' exercise, she will hit me with the frying pan. From the slow service, cross field running & harbour bridge passes of 9 to aimless kicking the pill away of 12, total lack of hard running onto the ball, absence of running angles and so on of 13....it's all there as a series of crap habits that needs to be dealt with. Well isn't that what the coaches are there for? Why aren't the coaches kicking butt? If you ask me the coach is way too soft. With Holmes, Horne, Beale and Co sitting on the bench, what's actually stopping Hickey from getting players to play as he wants them to or else? Maybe other Roarers are right. Maybe Hickey actually likes the way they are playing. All I'm seeing is those all important bonus points disappearing into the distance. How predictable. Simply winning ugly is no longer good enough.
brad
Guest
The rolling Maul is ilegal. you can have 14 Players in fron of the ball its American football where the atacking team is allowed to block the runner essentially. It highlights the idiocracy that defines the IRB and rule makers.
Sam
Guest
"Good luck to any employer who changes workplace practices that increase the risk of injury." This is a perfect statement of why I think the IRB would never have allowed mauls to be collapsed if it was as dangerous as people say. They have a duty of care (or the individual unions do) and would have been in massive trouble had injuries increased (legal and otherwise). They have a number of doctors that they consult on matters regarding the safety of the game and I just find it hard to imagine they didn't seriously investigate this before allowing the ELVs to be trialled. Justin is right though, scrums used to be the most dangerous part of the game but now its the tackle ball area.
mattamkII
Guest
I love the maul and my eyes light up when the other team form on...nothing like hanging of until the support show you their ribs! But I have to agree with BennO a but. Over the years I have pretty badly injured both ankles, shoulders, knees, elbows and neck. Most of that came from mauls. Oh I have ruined my back a few times but mostly picking up dirty socks.
el gamba
Guest
Agree Rusty. Don't think that it was a penalty try but in terms of interpretations, the ref changed it in regards mauling from the lineout late in the piece in that game. Waratahs have dodged a couple of bullets and if you include the Reds game, the Tahs would be languishing near the bottom of the table. "Luck" is a funny thing.
sportym
Guest
and lots of games to go...
BennO
Guest
You're right of course, it didn't result in a surge of injuries but it doesn't mean it didn't increase the risk or chances of them occuring. Good luck to any employer who changes workplace practices that increase the risk of injury. In any case it's a moot point because my objection is based on the fact that collapsing a maul is counter to the philosophy of a continual contest for posession.
mitzter
Guest
of course the ball carrier should not be allowed to rejoin at a different point ala neil back style. Penalty straight away! BUT I love the maul and was so glad the collapsing elv didn't pass - it is a beautiful thing that is tough, strong and highly technical but most importantly gets the forwards operating as a pack. I also agree with other comment that you are hypocritical of the maul in relation to the ruck, often the ball sits there (protected by the ref because he has said 'hands off' or 'red's ball' or something) while the forwards set up again for another pointless one off barge that sucks in one defender. Also as has been pointed out before the scrum is similar to the maul contest for the ball is only at the beginning and then it goes to a pushing match with the ball safely at the back - a scrum could technically be pushed 20 meters up field as well and there is nothing the defence can do except PUSH!
scarlet
Guest
The rolling maul is a small part of the game and I can't understand the constant desire to legislate against parts of the forwards game that some people don't agree with in the sake of a perpetual quest for 'better product'. A rolling maul off an attacking five metre lineout is a very useful weapon to create a bit of space elsewhere in the defensive line. I agree with not allowing re-engagement and stop start though. Instead of complaining about that why not complain about a far greater blight on the game such as crooked feeds in to the scrum? I also had the opportunity to watch a game from the '70's between Mosely and a Rugby Writers Invitation XV that was pretty much a Lions XV. That was a game full of running rugby, without endless scrum resets albeit with what now look like strange line outs. A cracking game full of running rugby with the ball in hand and exciting forward play and solid scrummaging and rucking - lovely stuff. Maybe we should look back at what the game was like and see whether we have improved the game by the rule changes?
mudskipper
Guest
So you think its John Mitchell's time to punch the card and get a cab to the airport... I expect his VC is out and about... but he got such a good contract he'll likely say for the cash in 2011 regardless. I don't even think he is talking to the media or the public.... He has gone to ground and is minding his pubic profile... You'll have to wait Burgs... 2012 is year zero for the force... JM might come good in 2011 but he can't recruit and if you can't get player to the West you wont be a contender... Pocock has the right stuff... make him captain this year...
ohtani's jacket
Guest
Who cares about Strategic Finance, what about Carl Hayman?
ohtani's jacket
Guest
With all respect to the Force, I don't see how a game in Perth will determine whether the Bulls are beatable.