Saturday evenings record-breaking victory over the Crusaders stands as an embodiment of the challenges the Waratahs have faced since their 2014 Championship season.
The team is as Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde as they come, frequently playing up or down to the level of their opponents.
Overall, Saturday’s win, which ended the Crusaders record 19-game unbeaten run, was a massive coup for a team that has been struggling to find form in 2019.
Despite the Crusaders not necessarily looking themselves, and the Waratahs still having issues with the ball in hand, this is a big achievement.
Many aspects of the Waratahs game looked as good as they ever have, most notably, defence and kicking. However, it would be irresponsible for fans to believe they have turned a corner just yet, with many of the ongoing issues plaguing their attack continuing throughout this contest.
The Waratahs defence looked as good as it has in a very long time. With only 43 per cent of possession, the Waratahs had to muscle up and make 178 tackles (their average tackles per game this season is 132.25, a 37 per cent increase) and they did so only missing 22 attempts and consistently denying the Crusaders the gainline.
This is a welcome development for the Waratahs as a solid defence is imperative to consistent winning rugby, and it showed on Saturday. Even when the attack wasn’t working, if you know you can trust your defence you can play with greater confidence and a more varied strategy.
The Waratahs were able to utilise their similarly much-improved kicking game to pin the Crusaders back and trust their defence would hold strong.
This season they have averaged 19 kicks per game for 557 metres (including Saturday’s game). On Saturday, they kicked 29 times for 877 meters, compared to the Crusaders 23 kicks for 511 metres.
This is how the Waratahs were able win the territory battle 64 per cent to 36 per cent, despite having very little possession. Kicking is often seen as a negative aspect of the game, and often times it’s used as an emergency option when players and teams run out of ideas.
When used ineffectively, kicking hands possession to the opposition in a position of advantage. However, when executed right, a strong kicking game is undeniably valuable and often leads to winning rugby.
As we saw in this year’s Six Nations, both England and Wales were most comfortable playing deep in their opponents’ territory through a smart and accurate kicking game, and trusting their defence will apply enough pressure to proffer opportunities.
For the most part, the Waratahs got this right against the Crusaders, forcing them deep into the corners or putting up contestable attacking kicks with a strong chase, defusing counter-attacking opportunities.
What makes a kicking game even more of a weapon is a strong lineout, knowing you can put your opponent under pressure in their own territory and knowing possession can be secured when the ball is kicked back to you.
The Waratahs lineout with Damien Fitzpatrick has been incredibly solid this year, and while there are question marks about the throwing of Tolu Latu, Rob Simmons, Ned Hannigan and Fitzpatrick running the show means the Waratahs seldom lose their own throws, and won all 20 on Saturday, as well as being able to be disruptive on defence, winning two of the Crusaders throws.
(Photo by Mark Kolbe/Getty Images)
The scrum was also vastly improved, winning all eight of their own feeds, and young prop Harry Johnson-Holmes is rapidly developing into a very good super rugby player.
However, to claim this team is a title contender after this victory would be getting ahead of ourselves. Having a strong defence, a good kicking game and a solid set piece is an excellent foundation for a team and can mask a lot of other issues, and there are a lot of other issues.
The Waratahs want to play a wide, expansive game. That much is obvious and understandable. The team is stacked with talent in the backline, and the team has won playing that way before. The difference this time is teams are rushing up on the first and second receivers and putting them under extreme pressure.
Often rather than taking the tackle, Bernard Foley or Kurtley Beale will force a rushed pass out wide, more likely than not going to ground and dribbling behind the intended receiver.
By the time he can recover the ball, he is now under defensive pressure, yet another ten meters behind the gain line. In one phase, the Waratahs have lost 15-20 meters. Often, we hear commentators say you have to earn the right to attack wide, which is an oversimplification, however, it has some merit.
This season the Waratahs have been unable to generate consistent gain line success with the forwards. Too often forwards are stationary when they receive the ball and conceded two or three meters each phase.
Rarely do Waratah forwards run off of the first receiver (a staple of the 2014 team). This one dimensional and passive approach invites a very aggressive rushing defensive strategy from opponents and allows them to put huge pressure on the playmakers.
The space out wide is there, but the Waratahs have been unable to give players possession in advantageous positions because of the defensive pressure. The forwards need to be a threat with the ball in tight and in the 10/12 channel to demand the respect of the defence.
If the defence can no longer rush Foley, he will have a chance to get the ball to Israel Folau, Adam Ashley-Cooper and Alex Newsome with time and space to move.
(Photo: Supplied).
Gone are the days of Jacques Potgieter, Will Skelton, Kane Douglas, Tatafu Polota-Nau and Sekope Kepu barrelling over opposition forwards with Michael Hooper and Stephen Hoiles eating metres in the centres. The team needs Jed Holloway, Jack Dempsey and Hannigan (and a mini-revival from Kepu) to step up in this area.
When you examine where the Waratahs had success scoring against the Crusaders, it becomes obvious how limited their attack is. The first of the Waratahs tries came on the second phase after a scrum. After a relatively rudimentary first phase attack was shut down, Jed Holloway came charging around the corner to receive the pass at the line, giving the Crusaders defenders no chance to dictate the contact area, he slipped two tackles and scored.
The second try was scored on first phase ball, coming from a lineout. Foley put up a perfectly placed mid-field bomb which Folau collected before offloading to Cam Clarke for a run to the corner.
The third try also came off of first phase play, another line out, this time a very successful driving maul, winning advantage which allowed Gordon to unleash a backline attack.
Again Foley put a perfectly weighted bomb in the air, coming down on the tryline for Newsome and Folau to chase. Newsome made it a contest and Folau was able to reap the rewards with his 59th and record equally try.
(Photo by Brook Mitchell/Getty Images)
The point here is that outside of these highly structured and organised attacks off of a strong set piece, the Waratahs really struggled to create opportunities. This isn’t an insignificant issue as the vast majority of possession comes in general play and not off set pieces.
Additionally, decision making has been and was poor on Saturday night. Akin to Foley and Beale forcing poor passes to wide attackers, too often the Waratahs will force an offload or pass to a player in worse position.
It’s a simple rule and should be taught in every junior rugby club in the country. “Never pass the ball to a player in a worse position than yourself.”
Sometimes, you need to take the tackle and let your support secure possession and go again. Too often the Waratahs make a break and we see one offload, then another, then a knock on.
We also see players being driven back in a tackle, throwing the ball away, seemingly afraid to take it to ground, putting the supporting players, who are preparing to compete at the ruck, not catch a ball, under immense pressure to recover possession.
And finally, far too often we see an attack down the wing end in a pass into touch. Folau seems to be a major culprit of this. It leaves fans asking questions, who was he passing to? Why was he passing, what could the receiver have done there other than get tackled into touch? Why the team has such an aversion of consolidating possession after making 25 metres is beyond me.
Worryingly this is a trend that is strongly born out in the statistics. This year the Waratahs are 13th (out of 15) in points scored per game with 22.2. The team is fifth in run meters per game with 650, however, 14th in advantage line percentage at only 57.6 per cent, suggesting they spend as much time making up metres lost while in possession than it does actually going forward, and rarely is all this work rewarded with points.
They sit fourth in handling errors (11.2 per game) and sixth in Turnovers (15 per game). This also supports the eye test, the Waratahs have the ability to play the game but too often it ends in error.
Much of the Waratahs woes stems from poor decision making. Should they tighten this up, get slightly more creative with respect to their forward attacking strategy, given the defence and kicking was no fluke (although Nick Phipps needs to be removed from the kicking rotation), then the ‘Tahs can easily string together a series of wins that might begin to have us believing again.
However, until that time it’s hard to suggest this isn’t just a typical Dr Jekyll (or is it a Mr Hyde) game.
Joseph
Guest
Interesting to read the Aussie press saying the Tahs were "undermanned" in their shock loss to the Sunwolves (missing 2 regular starters). They were not saying the Crusaders were undermanned last week, were they?
Waxhead
Roar Rookie
Well as was proved by last night's loss to Sunwolves and the Crusaders win in Wellington the win last week against Crusaders was a lucky one off. Tahs got Crusaders on a bad night after 19 straight wins and the diversion of the NZ massacre. It won't happen again this yr. Last night the Tahs returned to normal form. Error ridden, predictable and gutless with numerous Wallabies performing poorly again. People are blaming the luckless Mason but Beale, Phipps and Simmons were a lot worse imo.
Paulo
Roar Rookie
Prophetic point about the Jekyl and Hyde nature of the team. Beat the Crusaders, then lose to the Sunwolves...
A.J. Woodgate
Roar Rookie
It will be really interesting to see how selections go for the Rugby Championship. I think the Wallabies need to think long and hard about how they want to play and select players based on team fit. For instance if you pick either Karevi or Hunt at 12, you sort of need to pick a second play maker at 15, especially if TK is at 13. Not many teams have successful attack with one dimensional players, even as big and impactful as Karevi, at 12, 13, 15. Izzy isnt a play maker he is a finisher. And maybe this is solved moving say KB to FB and Izzy to the wing.
Big Dave
Roar Rookie
Reedy Reedy Reedy. You argued that these blokes were automatic picks and were never held accountable for poor performances. I demonstrated that they had actually been held accountable for their poor performances because none of them were being selected every week apart from Folau and Hooper and to a slightly lesser extent Beale and Foley (both of whom did get dropped). Now it turns out you want to play semantics on what being 'dropped' means. I'll tell you as a player that if you're a starter one week and find yourself on the bench the next week then you sure as h3ll feel like you've been dropped. And that happened to each of those players during the season except for Folau and Hooper. Most of the ones you listed barely even got a start last year. You want to keep harping on about past years without any recognition that last year Cheika was much less attached to his Tahs players. Read AJ's post below again because it is reasonable and sensible. Especially calling out your smokescreen about lock selections which doesn't stand up to scrutiny at all.
Big Dave
Roar Rookie
This is an eminently sensible post so expect it to be torn to shreds.
Reedy
Guest
Dave Dave Dave. Oh dear,First i will say the reason why we have been so poor is all those blokes you have listed. You have proved my point champ lol. They are not test quality. Ok now let`s see, being dropped to the bench is not being dropped. Foley have never ever been dropped out of the 23 under Chekko Chekka in his career( you can look that up Dave). " Dropped out of the 23 " is being " dropped ". You get it now? sheesh. Folau automatic selection. LOL .This is why we have been so bad for 3 years as we have a fullback who refuses to tackle cannot kick and cannot ball play. " Chieka has preferenced non Waratahs Locks for most of his tenure " Has he though? Locks ?? Oh this is a doozy. It not just a Reds Problem .Will Skelton was given so many chances at lock under Cheika and failed so many times. Even Clown Cheika finally begrudgingly punted him him for a great talent called Adam Coleman. He also punted James Horwill for the inferior 2014 title winner tah tah Kane Douglas in Aug 2015. Where is this superstar Douglas now ? Dean Mummy was also a reserve lock under Clown. Sam Carter was also dropped never to be seen again. Arnold has been dropped so many times under Cheika it`s hard to track and he is now is going overseas. Clown had no choice to pick these other "non tah locks as the tah tahs had only Simmons Hanigan and Holloway as there locks. Oh wait? he still picks Simmons every test and picks Hanigan as a 6 but he is a lock. Rodda Coleman Arnold Philip Jones RHP and Carter are the best locks in oz and Simmons Hollloway and Hanigan should be nowhere near the test 23.
Oblonsky‘s Other Pun
Roar Guru
I think Kerevi is a better 12 than Hunt, and I personally don't see any reason to think that Hunt would be a better 12 than 13 in attack either. In my eyes, Kerevi is the guy that is better at straightening the attack and getting over the advantage line, whereas Hunt is the guy that is a tad faster and can get it to the outside backs a bit better.
A.J. Woodgate
Roar Rookie
I worry about Kerevi defensivley at 13, on attack he is more than capable. I think Hunt is a better fit at 13 then Kerevi but again he faces the same defensive issues and additionally I think he is so effective at 12 it is a waste to play him out of position.
A.J. Woodgate
Roar Rookie
Chieka has preferenced non Waratahs Locks for most of his tenure. Over the last two years espeically he has turned to Adam Coleman, Rory Arnold and Izack Rodda. There has always been a sizeable anti-waratahs/NSW sentiment within all other areas of the rugby community and sometimes the evidence does seem overwhelming but often it is an issue of correlation not causation. When I think of the Waratahs players who are most likely to be viewed as the beneficiaries of a bias the first question to ask is "who else"? Truly test class players get selected regardless of team. The fringe or "out of form" guys get slammed. Hannigan for instance. As a Waratahs supporter I do not think he is ready for test rugby. But who else can you play at 6. Last year we tried Tui and Samu, neither worked particularly well. Now had they been Waratahs the coaches would be accused of bias. The issue is we do not have a player in the blindside flanker position who has stood up and owned that spot. Foley at 10 is another and more complex example. Foley was outstanding at the world cup but I can agree his form has dropped since, but who else is there we can play at 10? Beale, Toomua, Lealiifano, none of those guys have proven at test level they can play the position any better than Foley. At the end of the day I think Chieka's indecisiveness with selection has a hugely negative impact on the team performance. Changing the team each week to see what sticks rather than building his team around his players is to me one of his biggest errors.
riddler
Roar Rookie
i am lost reedy. what part of my comment is not logical. if you think cheika is intentionally trying to ruin his intl coaching career, good luck to you.
piru
Roar Rookie
Was there an issue with the ball or were conditions just slipperier than they appeared on telly? Both teams seemed to have a lot of trouble holding onto it in contact
Big Dave
Roar Rookie
I'm talking 2018 here because (1) it's the most recent year to judge on so if Cheika has changed then 2018 will show that and (2) I haven't had time to go through all the teams over 2015-17 to sort out the facts from the bluster. But if you like I'll grant you a Tahs bias for those years to save arguing over it. So looking at 2018 and the people you list: Foley - was dropped for 3 games and only started 3 of the last 8 at 10 Folau - should be an automatic selection so shouldn't be on your list Phipps - started 1 game when Genia was injured Hooper - same as Folau Kepu - started 5 of 13 games Latu - started 2 of 13 games TPN - started 4 of 13 games Beale - didn't start the last 2 games AAC - started 1 game Simmons - started 1 game So in reality, your claims boil down to Foley and Beale being selected despite not playing well, to which I would note that we weren't exactly flush with options at 10-13 last year. The rest of your list doesn't stand up to scrutiny.
Reedy
Guest
Dave of course he cannot select all of his 2014 Tah Tahs anymore as most have retired since 2014,but he selected a lot in years 2014 2015 2016 and 2017 Horne Mumm Skelton Douglas when more deserving players should have been picked. Horne on the wing in 2017 was a just a rubbish selection and the constant selection of the hoax Dean Mummy from 2015-2017 was abysmal. I`ll give you a list of blokes from that 2014 team that he still picks now that are not held accountable for there poor performances: Foley Folau Phipps Hooper Kepu Latu TPN Beale and AAC. Now Simmons is locked in as a TAH. You do know Rob hasn't been dropped since being a Tah Tah. Remember when he was a Red in 2016 and dropped 3 times in the Wallaby year ? Slipper Quade Kerevi were also dropped under Cheika as was Sio Arnold from the Brumbies and many others that were not Tah Tahs. Couldn`t do that to his tahs could he ?The clown.
Big Dave
Roar Rookie
You pointed out that a good coach can see good talent in a poorly performing team and I agreed with you. I'm sorry that's offensive. Cheika started 22 players last year who didn't play a single minute for the Waratahs. Not just Rodda and Kerevi (2016 has nothing to do with what I'm talking about btw) but DHP, Pocock, Koroibete, Coleman, Sio, Genia. I can go on listing more if you want. I didn't say the Reds won the comp in 1999, I said they finished top of the ladder. Which they did. Get it? And it had nothing to do with Cheika, I was talking about Macqueen. Anyways, my call for reasonable and balanced conversation has obviously gone unheard, so rant away.
Reedy
Guest
Rodda wow ? One guy Unbelievable. How good is that? Kerevi was dropped by Cheiks in test two v the poms in 2016 .Sorry to burst your narrative ( he was fit not injured ) The Reds didn't win the comp in 1999 Dave, you still don't get it do you. You have to win the comp to be considered by Cheika (2014) He still selects the same underperforming guys from his 2014 premier super team in his Wallabies. Now he throws in more tah tah pretenders in Hanigan Robertson Dempsey and Gordon.
Reedy
Guest
How about a please? Anyway i`ll answer your below question . "do u really think a national coach will shoot himself in the foot on the international stage for the sake of a tah over a qlder? " Yes his name is Michael Cheika. Have you not seen the last 3 years of his over selection of tah tahs ? Reds underachievers yes they were, but still many were selected in McQueens successful Wallabies.I don't know where you are going with this.You just answered your own question and mine.
Big Dave
Roar Rookie
That's true, if the Reds are underachieving then it doesn't mean they don't have any good players and a good coach can find those players. Which is why Rodda was the only player chosen to start every Wallabies game last year. Why Kerevi was picked every time he was fit. It's why Cheika selected 22 different players not from the Waratahs to start games last year, even though none of their teams had winning records. Maybe I'm not making myself clear, I don't know. But all I've been asking for all along is balance in the critique. So I called out Gav for saying that the Wallabies can only be successful if the Waratahs aren't because it's a palpably ridiculous thing to say. Nowhere have I said there should be an army of Waratahs in gold, I'm just asking that people accept that there's more to what's going on than simply 'Cheika bad, Waratahs bad'. By the way, in 1999, the Reds finished top of the ladder in SR. Through that Wallabies golden era from 98-02, the Reds never had a losing record in SR. From 99-02 the Brumbies went 5th, 2nd, 1st, 2nd in SR. Meanwhile the Waratahs only had one winning record in the Macqueen era. So if Macqueen was picking Reds and Brumbies then it kind of makes sense.
riddler
Roar Rookie
reedy, name the 23 of 99 wc team. name the tahs, name the maroons, name the brumbies. tell me who shouldn't of been there in that 23 and who should of. qld from 96 on was famous for being underachievers in super rugby. bad coaching, bad management, egos whatever. nothing to do with an unbiased coach on the international level. do u really think a national coach will shoot himself in the foot on the international stage for the sake of a tah over a qlder?
Reedy
Guest
Dave. You do know you don't have to pick players from a winning Super Rugby team to have a successful Wallabies ?. A good coach and selector can see good talent in a poor performed team and hopeless talent in a good performed team. The Reds were hopeless for years, but Rod Mcqueen still picked quality Reds in his Wallaby team and they won a world cup because of it .More Reds and Brumbies were used than Waratahs in his teams . Only 5 Tah Tahs made the 1999 RWC 23 and only 3 were in the starting 15. See what an unbiased coach looks at and does?. You will get it one day mate.