The Roar
The Roar

Advertisement

Saturday's five major differences between the Tahs and Reds

Tatafu Polota-Nau looks to offload - Karen Watson (Large)
Roar Rookie
3rd March, 2014
25
1357 Reads

What was the difference between Super Rugby’s two east coast Aussie teams on Saturday? Well, it certainly wasn’t the home ground advantage.

The game should have been held at Allianz stadium, the convicts should have played the curtain raiser to celebrate the Madi Gras and turnstiles would have spun a heck of a lot more (dear NSWRU, please hold your post-Olympic handshakes in Paddington).

So let’s take a look at what led to the Waratahs’ dominant performance over the Reds.

1. Defence
Right from the opening hit, the Waratahs defended superbly. As the game went on, it started to look like a scene from The Waterboy – they were actually making ground in defence.

At one stage, successive tackles from Wycliff Palu, Alofa Alofa and Michael Hooper actually drove the Reds 30m up field.

Tactically, the Reds looked like they got it wrong on the night. While Nick Phipps defended in the line, Will Genia perched himself behind it, creating more work for the pillar/post defenders to cover the line.

This left the inside channel wide open and all blue tries were scored under the posts.

An interesting question arises – is rush-up defence taking away the attacking team’s space or does it use up player petrol and leave the defensive line scattered?

Advertisement

2. Focus and aggression
In 2012, with minutes remaining, Tom Carter started verbally gloating on-field about a Tahs victory. Dom Shipperly provided a lesson in manners by scoring a fantastic last second try to win the game for the Reds.

In 2014, the Waratahs stayed more focused than a laser eye surgeon.

The glare Will Skelton gave Liam Gill midway through the second half sent a strong message – “Come and talk to me when you’re 21 and nine months”.

Throughout their brutal hits and physical clean outs, the Tahs remained composed and steadfast.

A John ‘Knuckles’ Connolly game-plan of fisticuffs never looked so outdated. In contrast, Michael Cheika used a far more advanced form of coaching science to bring out player aggression – a cartoon stick figure.

3. Adaptation
In the first half, the Waratahs looked Kiwi-esque, and there is no greater compliment to a rugby team.

When you see forwards passing like backs, and backs hitting rucks like forwards, the number on their jersey becomes just that.

Advertisement

The Tahs pushed every attacking opportunity in the first half, and when the pill turned to soap, the students of Darwinism adjusted course, keeping it close and slowing it down with penalty goals.

Just before the half you could almost hear the ghostly screams of the past – “You’re a man down – take the points!”

“It’s 2014!” replied the in-form Kurtley Beale. “Eat my quick tap and five points.”

4. Game plan
I’m not really sure what Richard Graham’s game plan was, and neither was he. The Waratahs, however, played like they were acting out a script; everyone appearing to follow a somewhat rehearsed trajectory, with the only exception being Adam Ashley-Cooper’s option to kick twice in positive attacking positions.

A constructive criticism here is to simply stop doing it. In rugby circles it’s like drinking with your right hand – it’s just unacceptable.

5. The second five
The second ball-playing option is working wonders for NSW.

When Bernard Foley is on fire, his outside backs are hitting quality angles. If he begins to prepare for his super bowl career, Beale steps in and commands play seamlessly.

Advertisement

Quade Cooper could not have been more alone as a ball player and that was the difference for the Reds.

Take out their best player, and the machine stops functioning. When Israel Falau went to the bin, NSW just kept scoring.

Its 2014. Gen Blue are appearing to have a few points of difference.

close