What’s changed with the Wallabies?

By Scott Allen / Expert

The Wallabies appear to be going backwards in 2013, having been well and truly outplayed by their opposition in their last four Tests.

After six matches this season I’ve looked at the statistical differences between the team in the last three matches of Robbie Deans’ reign and the first three under Ewen McKenzie.

David Lord almost beat me to the punch with his similar topic yesterday but my analysis looks at things from some different angles.

I track 237 different statistics for matches (201 for the team and 36 for players). Of those, 131 are quantitative (measure quantity) and 106 are qualitative (measure effectiveness). I then prepare additional qualitative statistics for particular areas dependent on what I see in a match or what I’m writing about.

I’ve looked at all the measures I track and selected those that I feel are noteworthy including the statistics I track where there is some meaningful difference as shown in the chart below.

The first thing that stood out is how similar most of the statistics are between the two periods and the reason I didn’t include a larger number of measures in the chart is that there is so little difference between most of them – only 12 of the 237 measures I track show any significant difference.

Let’s look at the areas I’ve included statistics for.

Points scored and conceded
Obviously the big difference here is in the points and tries conceded and I’ll go into a little more detail on that area when I consider defence.

Set piece
The scrum numbers confirm how the Wallabies have been caught out by the new scrum laws. In the Lions series with essentially the same players and the same scrum coach the Wallabies actually won a slightly higher percentage of scrums than the Lions.

The Wallabies winning percentage on their own feed has dropped significantly in The Rugby Championship while the percentage won by the opposition on their feed has increased.

The only other difference in the six matches in the scrum is the absence of Benn Robinson in the last three matches. I still hold the view that he should at least be on the bench for the current Wallaby team but the loosehead side of the scrum isn’t where the Wallabies real problems are so even if he were in the team, I doubt the results would have been much better.

The scrum continues to be a major issue with the fact that the Wallabies are getting belted not only disrupting their ability to build momentum by retaining their ball to attack with but also giving their opponents a mental advantage in other contact areas.

The Wallabies percentage of lineouts won on their throw is down slightly which I think is a result of playing the top two teams in the world who both have very good lineouts. The Wallabies have slightly improved their results on the opposition throw so I don’t see any significant issues with the lineout.

Kicking
Interestingly the percentage of possessions that ended in a kick is very similar over the six matches despite the impression that the Wallabies are trying to run the ball much more in the last three matches – 38% against the Lions compared to 34% in the last three matches.

The percentage of possessions ending in a kick for their opposition was 49% in the Lions series and 47% so far in The Rugby Championship.

The Wallabies kicking numbers in 2013 are well below their opposition which suggests they probably need to change the balance in their game to kick a little more.

Attacking efficiency
There is a significant difference in the percentage of carries where the player is running wide of the ruck – up from 33% to 47%. This has been the most obvious change in the Wallabies game plan as they try to play with more width.

They haven’t seen any payback from this strategy to date with only one additional line break over that in the Lions series and one less try. While they have created one more line break than during the Lions series their opposition in the last three matches has also made significantly more line breaks than the Lions did – up from 10 by the Lions to 19 so far in The Rugby Championship.

The Wallabies defensive woes have certainly not helped in this area.

The efficiency of the Wallabies attack has also decreased. Whereas they averaged 2.50 line breaks for each try scored in the Lions series that measure has increased to 3.67.

The average number of possessions and phases the Wallabies have the ball before they are able to score a try have both increased significantly.

Compare the 55.33 possessions the Wallabies are now averaging before they score a try to the 15.42 for their opposition in The Rugby Championship.

Similarly the Wallabies had the ball an average of 178.67 phases before they scored a try in the last three matches compared to their opposition with an average 42.75.

Turnovers
You may expect one of the reasons the Wallabies are not being efficient in their attack is the number of turnovers of possession with handling errors and ball lost at the breakdown being the two biggest factors.

The Wallabies have turned over 33% of their possessions in the last three matches but that is only slightly up on the 31% against the Lions.

Incredibly the percentage of possession turned over from handling errors has actually fallen slightly, from 14% down to 13% with the same numbers also applying to possession turned over at the breakdown.

The area where the Wallabies have turned over more possession than in the Lions series is from set pieces.

Defence
Clearly the number of tries and points conceded confirms what we all know – the Wallabies defence has not been good enough.

The average number of tackles missed per match is only slightly higher in the last three matches at 19 than it was during the Lions series at 18.

Interestingly the average number of tackles missed by the Wallabies opposition has been higher than the Wallabies with the Lions missing an average of 20 tackles per match and an average of 21 in the last three matches.

Of course the number of tackles missed is not the relevant measure to look at as the more tackles a team has to make the more tackles they will likely miss.

The more relevant measure is the tackle accuracy (or completion) percentage. It is very rare to see any team in international rugby exceed 90% in this measure – the All Blacks are averaging 87% tackle accuracy in The Rugby Championship so far.

While the Wallabies tackle accuracy has dropped from 87% to 82% in the last three matches it is not that far away from the 87% for the Lions and 86% for the opposition in the last three matches.

So how can the Wallabies miss less tackles than their opposition and have a tackle accuracy not far below their opposition and yet still have conceded so many tries and points in their last three matches?

One of the answers is the efficiency of the opposition in attack as discussed earlier. Both the All Blacks and Springboks pounced on any opportunity the Wallabies presented them with – they didn’t keep missing opportunities in attack like the Wallabies did.

I suspect two other reasons that the number of missed tackles by the Wallabies doesn’t reflect in their ability to stop the opposition scoring tries.

The first is that they are not scrambling in defence as well as they have in the last year or so when Deans was in charge.

The second is that the Wallabies defensive structure has been really poor in the last three matches allowing the All Blacks and Springboks to achieve significant overlaps on both sides of the field from which they have scored tries.

With clear space for the player on the end of the overlap the Wallabies haven’t had a player available to attempt a tackle or to miss that attempt. As a result no missed tackle has been recorded on many of those tries.

As I’ve shown you in recent analysis videos the Wallabies have got to fix their defensive structures and work harder to match numbers with the opposition.

The Crowd Says:

2013-09-13T13:53:02+00:00

Grahame

Guest


"From George Smith straight to David Pocock, the Wallabies have essentially had the best pilferer in the world at their disposal for going on a decade." Mmmmmmmm And not to mention the International Player of the Year a record three times.....Richie McCaw.

2013-09-13T10:34:13+00:00

Fox08

Roar Rookie


Think everyone in Aus needs to calm down a bit. What do you want to do? Drop the whole squad? Get rid of EM? It's time for calm not flat out panic. You guys are missing a lot of good players and apart from getting a hiding in one game against the Lions and the bad loss to my Boks you haven't played that badly. The ABs are just bloody good , so stop stabbing each other in the back and look at how you can set a plan in place to improve. I personally don't think Deans was doing such a bad job , but it's impossible and unfair to expect EM to simply come in and wave a wand to correct whatever a lot of people are moaning about. The Wallabies have always been an intelligent team (a few Saffers will disagree) and with some cool heads and confidence will be right back in the mix. I think us Bok fans seem to have forgotten the hidings we got from the Poms and the regular 20point plus margin losses we suffered to the ABs. Just watch how the local mood changes if we lose to the ABs

2013-09-13T02:30:19+00:00

Tarragon Fields

Guest


With respect to how to build a successful team I mean.

2013-09-13T02:29:50+00:00

Tarragon Fields

Guest


This article on Sir Alex Ferguson is interesting: http://www.news.com.au/sport/football/former-manchester-united-manager-sir-alex-ferguson8217s-8-success-tips/story-fndkzvnd-1226718300870

AUTHOR

2013-09-12T22:31:51+00:00

Scott Allen

Expert


I think Sio looks like he could be taught to play tighthead and Ryan is already a tighthead. I don't think Robinson could make the switch successfully. There is a massive difference between TH and LH - a lot of work required on technique and tactics to try and converts someone successfully. Also the body shape of some props doesn't suit TH - Robinson is probably one of those. All credit to those guys who can play both sides well (and there are very few who can really do that). It's also particularly hard to switch sides during a match - you get into a rhythm doing one thing and then have to switch your technique and attitude around almost completely at the next scrum.

AUTHOR

2013-09-12T22:22:11+00:00

Scott Allen

Expert


Mike - there are many problems in this scrum (46:00 on game clock). I'll just talk about the front rows. Slipper has his feet a little too far back before the set so when he does move forward he gets too much of his weight out in front and that causes his upper body to angle down putting him in a weak position. du Plessis binds on Slipper's arm and rolls his shoulder down after the set to get Slipper into a weaker position. du Plessis sets up on an angle before the set to drive across the Wallabies scrum which is what he does once the drive comes on. It's the same tactic the Wallabies tried to use in the second test against the Lions but Craig Joubert was onto them and penalised the Wallabies for driving on the angle. George Clancy is on the opposite side of the scrum and misses all of this. I'm sure du Plessis knows where Clancy is and uses his experience over Slipper - it's part of the tactics of scrummaging. Very hard for a loosehead to counter this drive on the angle because the more you drive the more you end up following the tighthead in and increasing the angled drive. Loosehead and hooker have to work together to try and drive the tighthead back out to straighten him up. Having said all that it should have been a penalty to the Wallabies if the laws were applied properly.

2013-09-12T21:48:45+00:00

Bakkies

Guest


I remember the game in '08 when Smith and Pocock schooled Wales at the breakdown, Pocock also carried and linked in that game. He was working on that in the pre season as he was falling behind players like Hooper and Gill in those aspects. Plus in today's Rugby the 7 has to do more than pilfer. European sides and the saffies tend not to have just one fetcher, the All Blacks have gone down that route after years of Kronfeld and McCheat wreaking havoc. McCheat had to adapt too by becoming more balanced in his general work.

2013-09-12T21:41:40+00:00

Bakkies

Guest


Wearing the wrong studs? Gatland had a dig at Beale after the missed penalty in Brisbane, accusing him of being unprofessional due to poor boot choice. I remember Andrew Walker slipping over a lot on dewy Canberra nights.

2013-09-12T21:39:22+00:00

Bakkies

Guest


He has hardly improved the Scots defence.

2013-09-12T21:37:57+00:00

Bakkies

Guest


Having an under 20s 6 Nations and the same underneath provinces and clubs has improved the European sides. Australia is now falling behind competing against better prepared teams at that level.

2013-09-12T21:35:16+00:00

Bakkies

Guest


It depends on who is ref. Pollock is strict on players contesting so you are better off cleaning out on your own ball or counter rucking when the opposition doesn't have it. If you focus on pilfering to much there is a risk that you will be pinged off the park.

2013-09-12T21:32:20+00:00

Bakkies

Guest


Genia does too much meerkating aka organising static forwards rather than just firing the ball out. His service was fine in the first Lions test aided by joke shop refereeing by Pollock that prevented the Lions from slowing ball down or turning it over.

2013-09-12T21:23:49+00:00

Gavin Melville

Roar Pro


A side has to try to blend the talent it has available, not put square pegs into round holes.Similarly, it would be silly to try to force players to action a game-plan to which they were nor physically equipped. If Australia's talent is lighter weight 12s then play them. No point in putting Lealifano on the weights for a spell then giving him crash ball. The Wallabies produce strong, fast 7s, capable of ruling the pitch. Because some teams (e.g SA or England) have success with bigger, slower open-sides doesn't mean Australia should try to change their style. Wales & NZ do OK with fast, light 7s. And as for: "one trick pony like Pocock has become" - maybe, but what a trick. Pocock is one of Australia's few world class players. A man so feared that the ABs worked their training routines to especially counteract his play. One of the players the Lions were scared of. What a player.

2013-09-12T18:09:45+00:00

Justin3

Guest


That's true but he is a better 12 than Cll who I believe is a ten.

2013-09-12T17:52:15+00:00

Touko

Guest


Scott, I love your articles, always very interesting and thoughtful, and the fact you make time to answer or respond to so many comments (which are sometimes even more interesting than the basic article), is especially appreciated. For myself I've got a couple of questions that you or other folks might be able to help me with. Firstly, is there any way we can make someone into a decent tighthead? Is there anybody out there? Can Sio, or Ryan or even Robbinson switch? Secondly, what chance is there of a coldly analytical look at Cooper? The kind of look the All Blacks would give him behind closed doors. There's so much bloody hysteria about the man but so few people seem to have a sensible opinion about him. Cheers, T.

2013-09-12T16:09:47+00:00

michael gardiner

Guest


One mistake Mc Kenzie is making , I believe,is putting Israel at fullback its a mistake because he is not a ball player, he is a runner a great runner, but he relies on someone to set him up, this was proved in Rugby league and AFL, keep him on the wing and lets face it the way he is playing he would be lucky to keep up with the pace of a Rugby league today. I believe Israel is overrated and over paid. RU needs a fullback who can kick, set up play and know when to join in the attack. good luck against the Pumas michael

2013-09-12T12:20:16+00:00

Mike

Guest


Hi Scott, I wonder if you would have time to look at the second scrum in the second half, at about the 46 minute mark? It is our worst. Our front row almost jack-knifes, with Slipper at the hinge end. I am trying to work out what happened, and its difficult to make sense of it . What's your analysis of how this went wrong and where we gave way?

2013-09-12T10:20:07+00:00

Blert

Guest


I wonder how much of that is due to fitness? Less likely to crouch properly if the legs are burning.

2013-09-12T09:40:37+00:00

Two Cents

Guest


Great analysis and always insightful read. Just wanted to know your thoughts on Sam Cane? Still not convinced that he is the real deal but the poor guy has to fill McCaw shoes.

2013-09-12T07:27:08+00:00

Pick & go..!!

Guest


The midfield is just like the backrow you need a good balance. The AB's have power in the carry, great tactical kicking, also great whole running & (most inportant) are able to identify space to distribute the pill to utilize there outside backs. In DC, Nonu & C. Smith. (You can only archieve this by working as a team not by individual brilliance) It doesn't matter if you have a big 12 or a playmaker 12, so long as these attribute are meet by those in the midfield. Another example was Larkham, Horan, Mortlock/ Herbert. They didn't have the best tactical kicking, but there gameplan was to play running rugby & possession rugby. So having a 2nd playmaker at 12 was essential.

More Comments on The Roar

Read more at The Roar