After a June International series in which more positives were found in supporter rants than anything occurring on an Australian rugby field, our attention now has to turn to what’s left of the Super Rugby season.
Even though we have this strange rugby-free weekend ahead of us in Australia this week, the fact remains that the search for form, fitness, and confidence must happen over two or three weeks in July.
Criticisms thrown the Wallabies’ way over the last month have, mostly, been well directed. They have lacked consistency. They don’t look fit enough. The skill execution and decision-making hasn’t been good enough.
How that can be, after off-seasons and 15 weeks of Super Rugby, beggars belief. If anything, it only further underlines the need for a centralised and closely coordinated strength and conditioning and skills programs. And it’s notable that the Waratahs coach doesn’t disagree with the idea.
So how do we move on? What can the Wallabies get out of these last couple of weeks individually? More importantly, what do they need to get out of these last couple of weeks?
Well, starting up front, the props certainly need to re-find some scrummaging form. That probably applies to the looseheads more than the tightheads, to be fair. Tom Robertson, Scott Sio, and Toby Smith all hit trouble against international opposition of decent quality, but still less than anyone they’ll face during the Rugby Championship. All three battled at different points during the series.
All of them can look to improve their involvements, though, and this certainly includes Allan Alaalatoa and Sekope Kepu. Overall, the number of carries and tackles attempted by the props across the series looks on the low side, and given they’re all generally in that centre corridor of the field, they definitely need to hit more attacking rucks.
Mobility around the ground and scrummaging technique improvements would be the major takeaways for the big blokes, and we can add the hookers into this mix, too.
We only saw Stephen Moore and Tatafu Polota-Nau during the series, and both need to ensure they finish the Super Rugby season on a high note personally. Polota-Nau’s lineout throwing remains a concern, while Moore will probably never get away from the ‘has he still got it?’ question at this point in his career. Moore still remains an on-field leader of immense experience, though, and that will be important during the Rugby Championship.
For the likes of Tolu Latu, along with James Hanson and even Andrew Ready, they need to finish the Super season well too, as all three could be one injury away from a call-up. Respectively, they need to stay out of trouble, stay fit, and find the form to restore a battered 2017 reputation.
Of the locks, it’s become very clear over these Tests that Adam Coleman is the leader of the pack, and almost certainly one of the first players picked. He’s had a quality series, and would be one of the few Wallabies we can genuinely say that about.
Rory Arnold was having a really good Super Rugby, but I’m not sure that carried through to the three Tests. He didn’t seem to carry as strongly as he had been, though it does at least feel like his involvements were on par.
Sam Carter is in the same boat. His tackling rate was about the same when he started the first two Tests, though it’s clear to me that he’s not really bench material. He plays the game at a pretty consistent rate, and there’s not an ability there to knock it up a cog off the bench. He’s a starter or nothing.
Of the backrowers, Michael Hooper was incredible. For all the criticisms of his game, and what he supposedly doesn’t do as a No.7, it was worryingly noticeable how many times he was a lone hand attacking the ball in a ruck situation. So, the rest of them have this to work on over the remaining games: get aggressive over the ball.
I know he came in for criticism, but there’s a huge upside to Ned Hanigan. He’s good in the lineout, he wants to play at levels of physicality that his body isn’t quite ready for, and I especially loved how he worked in tandem with Coleman at the attacking breakdown, particularly in the first two Tests.
Lopeti Timani showed a lot more in his one start than I expected fitness-wise, Scott Higginbotham certainly did drag his Super Rugby form into the Test arena, and Richard Hardwick can now include international footy in his two-game handover with the great Matt Hodgson.
Of the backs, I just hope that this attacking intent that was clearly front and centre follows the players back to Super Rugby. After 15 weeks of pretty lacklustre Super Rugby attack at times, it was wonderful to see Australian players wanting to throw the ball around.
Bernard Foley can always work on his kicking length and accuracy, and so can Dane Haylett-Petty and Karmichael Hunt, just to remind the national coaches that they have the No.10 covered and ignoring them makes no sense.
Henry Speight and ‘Super’ Sefa Naivalu showed some wonderful finishing that we definitely want to see more of – if injuries will allow that. Tevita Kuridrani had a good combination with Hunt, and it’s important that he and Kyle Godwin now work the same way back in a Brumbies jersey.
I’ll facetiously say Rob Horne doesn’t need to do anything in the last two games. Not doing a lot was enough to earn a Test recall, and it’s hard to imagine he won’t be in the frame again for the Rugby Championship. And on the point of not doing much, what does Will Genia do now? Is there any way he plays Super Rugby anywhere in July? And if not, what’s the plan for him?
Finally, if Israel Folau has his mojo back, then that’s great, but I want to see more involvement in the remaining Waratahs games. The smile is back, so is the confidence, and there can be no more excuse for not demanding more of the ball.
He won two Player of the Match watches, but I’ll be honest, at least one of them should have gone to Coleman. And I don’t think his numbers were anywhere near as good as the headlines suggest: he averaged less than 10 carries a game, and made just over 72 metres a game, and certainly wasn’t the dominant metre-maker of the backs. But again, if the confidence is back, that’s half the battle there.
After all was said and done in June, most of it is now best left behind us. The results won’t change, nor will the performances already in the can, so now is the time to chart the course forward and move on.
The Wallabies have a huge task ahead of them for the Rugby Championship, and the hard work has to start now in Super Rugby jerseys.
ForceFan
Guest
Brett You may be interested in the Ruck Involvements (av per 80 mins) by the All Blacks in the 1st Test against the B&I Lions: Cane - 45T - 36A/9D Moody - 44T - 44A/0D Retallick - 41T - 36A/5D Whitelock - 38T - 35A/3D Crocket - 37T - 31A/6D O Franks - 36T - 33A/3D Read - 34T - 25A/9D A Savea - 33T - 31A/2D Faumuina - 23T - 17A/6D Kaino - 21T - 18A/3D Taylor - 19T - 18A/1D Harris - 6T - 3A/3D Total Ruck Involvements - 343T - 300A/43D Yes, they had most of the Possession. But look at the work rates compared to the recent form of the Wallabies. Especially look at the work rates of the Tight 5. The ABs stood off 56% of the very limited Lions' D rucks with another 35% having a single AB involvement. Only 7 rucks had involvement from 2 or more ABs. 46% of D Ruck Involvements were by the Back Row with the remainder very evenly split between the Front Row, Locks & Back player groups. In the past SBW has been a bit of a passenger around the rucks but his involvements were 25T - 24A/1D. The strategy around the rucks was not all that different to that shown by the Wallabies in the June Tests. However, there was a big difference in the work rates. The most by any Wallaby was Hanigan against Scotland - 33T - 29A/4D. (his av 26T - 21A/5D) The best defensive effort was by Hooper against Scotland - 29T - 17A/12D. (his av 23T - 15A/8D) Total Ruck Involvements by the Wallabies: Fiji: 196T - 157A/39D Scotland: 315T - 275A/40D Italy: 175T - 148A/27D The breakdown is all about skills, work rate, involvement and timing - especially timing of support.
Tooly
Roar Rookie
A few points . The demise of George Smith started with Comical Eddie moving him to 6 to accommodate Waugh at 7 . Deans went to the WC with only Pocock who was injured and I think we ended up with McCalmen at 7 . George has also been shifted to 8 and as he explains in his book that there is a difference in the job description and that you can't cover both positions at the same time . Pocock played at 7 once last year and was brilliant , he's not brilliant at 8 . I can't see the benefit in moving your best man from his best position. I am a bit of a masocist so I have watched the Italy game three times and Timani did bugger all , Hanagan is inadequate and Hunt is solid rather than brilliant . The best coach we have had since McQueen has been Connelly by far . Deans tried to teach skills and drained the swamp that was really a pristine lake compared to what we ended up with . McKenzie like Chekko was full of BS but he came good .
ForceFan
Guest
Timbo My stats are for Ruck Involvements without any focus on Pilfers, TOW or Forced Penalties as in most case the TV vision isn't good enough to make a call. I have enough trouble identifying players from FoxSports et al's wide views. But by the end of each game I know each players boot colour, whether socksup or socks down, every bandage on his body, hair colour and head adornments etc etc.. The Refs don't always call the ruck and a collapsed maul doesn't count in my stats. There is also a lot of times when the ruck hasn't formed and any turnover is just from open play. A lot of the standing-off by Wallabies has occurred as the timing of support by the opposition has been just too good for the Wallabies to have any effect. Our support play has been very poor. How often do we see the Wallaby ball carrier trying to bash through a defensive line on his own with his support 2-4m behind. I must admit I probably over-state some of the Attack Ruck Involvements as they come from good support play of the ball carrier. But I'd prefer to reward the good support and identify those who regularly do this (e.g. Rob Simmons, Adam Coleman etc). In the end I gather my stats re early (1st or 2nd from each team) and number every individual's involvement. These provide both individual and team numbers. I also record the stand-off numbers for "D" rucks. My ruck numbers are usually (but not always) very close to the final numbers posted by ESPN. I may make minor adjustments to get the total rucks for each team the same as ESPN. This year I've gathered stats for mostly the WF and OSF only - for Aussie teams only. Last year I did every Aussie game but just too much work. I'm hoping that I have enough time to gather stats for both teams in TRC.
Timbo (L)
Roar Guru
In unrelated future news: Tahs have a cracking 2018 season with new defensive coach David Wessels. With Game plan changes and wins against NZ and SA teams, the NSW team rockets into first place of the Australian conference.
Timbo (L)
Roar Guru
AAAARRRRGGGGHHHHH!!! If you box kick occasionally the opposition allocates a defender or 2 to cover for it. If you tactical kick occasionally the opposition stations a player or 2 in back field to cover for it. The frequency needs to be balanced to ensure those defenders are allocated, because if they aren't they, and half a dozen of their mates, are a sure as eggs going to be rushing your gain line, ruining your crashball game plan. I want a new coach, one that won't make me sick, one that won't make me crash my ball, or make me feel, thick thick thick! "Huey Lewis and the news - I want a new drug - © Chrysalis 1984"
Timbo (L)
Roar Guru
FF, Thanks for taking the time to respond. It probably looked like an assault of questions, it was great to hear your opinions on them. There is enough info here to start an article in it's own right. I found myself nodding in agreement paragraph by paragraph. With the odd chuckle. I played a game yesterday where I was distracted by a mighty fine pair of getaway sticks and let an attacker slip past me. Hey, I am only human, only just. I was pulled up a while back (by TWAS I think) and had to scurry away to read the rules. A pilferer must initiate hands on the ball before the ruck (2 opposing dudes on their feet, bound) is formed. This player is permitted to maintain hands on the ball after a ruck has formed (with the usual caveats). How do you manage this duality? A clear example is Hooper's maul breakout run Vs Scotland. The 2 Scottish backs got a turnover penalty but a ruck had never formed because there was no wallaby support, so, Tackle only. Ruck stat or no Ruck stat for the Scottish Fullback?? This is a loaded question because it defines how we look at stats for "The Pooper". If they are included, it merges collation of pilfer stats with ruck stats and in my book, they are different (both valuable) skill sets and contributions.
Timbo (L)
Roar Guru
Let's say to avoid argument that it is 4, it doesn't change the message. There is a long list of guys that have had inconsistent form in SR series that are on the scrap heap that are being told to shape up. Some have even lost contracts.
piru
Roar Rookie
It appears we don’t practice it, kicking and chasing, as the coach is not a fan. It shows
Ed
Guest
I forgot your suggestions from last Thursday. Did you hear Cheika's comments on Kick and Chase last night about box-kicking and kicking in general. It appears we don't practice it, kicking and chasing, as the coach is not a fan. "When I was at the Tahs, we just banned it (box-kick) completely because we figured there is got to be a better way to get ourselves out of there. Sometimes as the level goes up, the defence goes up, there has to be a place for quality kicking and quality chasing. ... It is a team game kicking. If you are going to kick you've got to chase, so a good chase can turn an average kick into a great kick. That's probably one thing we haven't excelled in that area and why our kicking looks so shabby because I am not a kicking aficiando, we probably dont focus on practicing things like chasing because we want to practice things like playing footy."
Marto
Guest
Truth ^
paul
Guest
JUNE TESTS 2017 Hanigan – 26T – 21A/5D Higginbotham – 25T – 18A/7D Hooper – 23T – 15A/8D Timani – 19T – 15A/4D Imagine how high Higginbothams stats would have been if he hadn't been hooked at the 60 th minute against Scotland and dropped v Italy..
paul
Guest
Timbo , No watches left Folau received two last year ( pom series0 and two this year.. No tinfoil hat required ,you know very well that would be his team if he could get away with it..
paul
Guest
Higgers is not a Waratah.It`s that simple.Michael Cheika needs to go,It`s got to the stage where the Waratah Bias is so in your face, it makes me sick.
ForceFan
Guest
G'day Timbo (L) I assess Impact for each Ruck Involvement. Impact means active engagement: strong physical contact, changed shape of ruck, clean-out, protecting ball etc. (more than hand on someone’s bum or arriving after the hard work has been done or the ball has been moved on). Yes it’s subjective - but as I collect all data at least it’s consistent. However, Impact DOES NOT equate to Effectiveness. I’ve concluded that coming up with an effectiveness measure is just too hard in the time that I have available – but open to suggestions. Effectiveness covers the full range of possibilities but hard to assess by observation only. I can't tell what may be in each players mind when he chooses to enter the ruck. In what way was he trying to be effective? To slow the ball down? Earn a TOW. Force a penalty? Retain possession? By his very presence he may have prevented an opposition player from entering the ruck. Early means 1st or 2nd of player of each team who joins the ruck AFTER the ball carrier has been tackled and brought to ground. Early can include players in support of the ball carrier as he goes into contact, gets tackled and bought to ground, and then very often continue as a cleanout of a defensive player. A Ruck Involvement is not earned by either the ball carrier or the tackler/s. (both are another stat) If a tackler return to his feet and then enters the ruck after giving a clear release it counts as a ruck involvement. I don't include a player who hovers around the ruck, never actually engages in the ruck or appears disinterested or looking at a good looking spectator. When collecting data I watch the game once for enjoyment and then again to collect ruck data (2x if collecting data on both teams). IMO all players should be prepared and skilled enough to have an impact at rucks if/when required. I collect the ruck stats out of interest. IMO the level of ruck involvement is a good measure of work rate - especially for a Forward. I have not attempted to correlate D Rucks and Penalties. However, hard to get penalised if you never get involved in the ruck. Of course it's a balance but to not get engaged in 67% of D rucks as against Italy is probably an inadequate amount of involvement. Although I'm sure the assessment was that Italy wasn't a threat at the ruck. Matt Hodgson, previously considered a penalty magnet has not been penalised in 2017. By contrast Smith is penalised >1 per game. Fainga'a 0.4 per game. Hooper and Alcock 0.2 per game. So it DOES appear that there has been a conscious decision not to get penalised. Of course there MAY be a tactical advantage in NOT getting involved in a particular ruck. However, George Smith has won games for Australia by getting involved at exactly the right time. But any lack of involvement comes at a cost in giving the opposition the opportunity to develop their next attacking move without any level of disruption. Maintaining the defensive line falls down a bit when a team misses 25 tackles as the Wallabies did against Fiji. Pleasing to see that it was only 14 against Scotland and 10 against Italy. Totally agree about the danger of over-commiting at the ruck. It's all about working to a plan and the skills available. It may look spectacular to see a single player getting involved in a D Ruck and earn a TOW (as did Richie Hardwick withing seconds of coming on in his 1st Test - obviously Hodgson has taught him well!) but too often a single involvement means that players such as Pocock, Fardy or Hooper just get thumped by the opposition. Only works until they get broken as we found out with Pocock at the RWC in NZ in 2011. I'd rather see our friont line warriors looked after a bit more by their mates. Cheika has said that he's instructed that Ruck Involvements should only be made by players who are good at it. If that's the case then IMO more Wallabies need to get good at it!
Derek Murray
Roar Rookie
I think he said second in the RC I.e. Rugby Championship, not the RWC
ForceFan
Guest
Ross Haylett- Petty's development as a No 6 was hampered by early injuries to Force Locks. The Force needed him as a Lock - just as they needed to call-in Lewis Carmichael. (For RHP - it was the same situation in 2016) RHP has been one of the more consistent performers for the Force in 2017 and has started in all 13 games this year. He is an 80 minute player and has improved his discipline since his Rnd 3 YC. He is well-skilled for a 23yo (1.97m % 118kg) and will be used more as a ball carrier in the future. More than useful as an option in the Line Out. His av. ruck involvements: 24T - 21A/3D.
ForceFan
Guest
No problems Brett - I must have felt the vibe. Attack ruck stats are down as we had such low Possession - 43% against Fiji & 46% against Italy. Seems that we were happy for them to have the ball and passively wait for them to make a mistake. It strategy nearly backfired against Italy. The concerning aspect was that we were also happy to play these games in our own half - Territory was only 37% & 44% respectively. Yet despite this we still placed little pressure on the opposition rucks. By contrast we lost the game against Scotland despite having 56% Possession & 62% Territory. I reckon the TRC and EOY Tests are going to be a struggle due to no Pocock and not playing Fardy as there doesn't appear to be any desire to disrupt the opponents ball at the breakdown - irregardless of where the ruck is located on the field. The situation isn't helped by Gill and Hodgson no longer available for consideration. We may see more game time from Richie Hardwick (or a recall for George Smith). Colby Fainga'a seems out of favour and Chris Alcock is showing a tendency to be very selective in his ruck involvements (but he's not alone). Av Ruck Involvements for SR 2017 (before June break) as follows: Hodgson - 37T - 29A/8D Hardwick - 29T - 21A/8D Fainga'a - 27T - 15A/12D Smith - 25T - 15A/10D Hooper - 24T - 18A/6D Alcock - 23T - 16A/7D McMahon - 21T - 16A/5D
PeterK
Roar Guru
folau showed good form in his last 4 super rugby games
nickbrisbane
Guest
Nathan Gray leaving Tahs to be full time WBs defence coach - woe is us!
Timbo (L)
Roar Guru
ForceFan, I noticed your stats pop up on G&G R and was curious about the criteria you apply to evaluate affectivity. Also, does taking the ball into contact count as an early ruck involvement? Do you think there is a correlation in the reduction of defensive ruck involvements and the reduction of ruck penalties? Do you think this has changed the Ref's views and corresponding decisions relating to Australia? Have you considered the tactical advantages of not getting involved in a ruck? I see the Kiwis do it quite a bit. 1 or 2 players in the ruck, the opposition committing 3-5 which frees up 2 players to defend against the next phase. I think there is a middle ground. Enough to slow the opposition phases and get a turnover but not too much to get penalized leave the defense weak.