Only 42 men in world rugby history have more Test caps than Rob Simmons. Yet he is one of the most pilloried players on The Roar. Soft. That’s what they call him. Or lazy.
After running the ruler over Patrick Tuipulotu’s effort in the All Blacks’ first-ever loss to the Pumas, primarily to calibrate the loss of Brodie Retallick in the engine room, I decided to watch Simmons in isolation against the same foe.
The big Queenslander has been seen primarily as a set-piece operator. He boosts any scrum with his ballast and leverage. He is one of the better lineout bosses. But after 105 caps, does he do other things? And how efficiently?
To remind us, I observed Paddy have 43 discrete involvements – specific actions outside scrum or maul, unless directly attributable to him – or 0.61 involvements per minute over his 70-minute stint. I classified each action as positive, neutral, or negative for his team. Almost 20 per cent of Paddy’s involvements, 8 of 43, were negative for the All Blacks.
Simmons was busier against the Pumas than Tuipulotu was: 0.75 involvements per minute; 50 total. He played just over 67 minutes. Remarkably, none of his actions were negative. Nought. Zero.
The closest he came was losing a lineout, but I did not include this, in the fifth chukka, because it was an abysmal throw, at the height of Simmons’ waist; easy pickings for Guido Petti, without a lifter.
Just as with Paddy, I divided Rob’s game into ten-minute chukkas.
Simmons and Tuipulotu both were busiest in the first chukka, including 14 and 11 involvements respectively. But Simmons never disappeared, as Paddy did in the fourth one.
Here is what Rob contributed.
First Chukka (14 involvements)
Positive: two extremely hard cleanouts.
Neutral: two latches, one lineout take, one tackle, four proper ruck attendances, and four decent kick pressures.
He also roamed in three defensive channels.
Second Chukka (8 involvements)
Positive: a big hit, a super pressure on a kick resulting in an eight-metre attacking lineout, and a massive push in a dominant scrum.
Neutral: a good maul steer, a clean lineout take, two rucks, and a tackle.
He was all over the pitch.
Third Chukka (7 involvements)
Positive: a fantastic save of another poor lineout throw.
Neutral: a tackle, a box kick pressure, one ruck attend, and three legal cleanouts.
His side of the scrum was getting a massive shove.
Fourth Chukka (7 involvements)
Positive: a dynamic, hard carry up the right tramline.
Neutral: another carry, a lineout take, a good pass, two rucks, and a kick pressure.
At halftime, he had ten more involvements than Paddy had. He often ran at 75-80 per cent speed, not just a perpetual trot. In the tackle, he powered through the carrier.
Fifth Chukka (7 involvements)
All neutral: he cleaned a couple of times, he made three carries in one series, he shepherded a maul, and completed a pass.
Sixth Chukka (4 involvements)
He directed defensive lines more in this phase.
Positive: a huge ball-and-all tackle which jarred the pill loose and gave the Wallabies a scrum.
Neutral: he attended two rucks, and helped halt a maul.
Seventh Chukka (3 involvements, before being replaced)
Positive: a brutal tackle which caused a Puma knock on; and a very hard cleanout.
Neutral: a tackle.
Watching Simmons is instructive. He is not flashy. At his age, he’s lost a step. But he knows good routes and he pushes hard.
He gave his team far more value than Paddy gave his; no errors, no penalties conceded, no big misses, and consistent power and precision.
Australia will miss Simmons after he’s gone, more than they love him now.
TheSecondRow
Roar Rookie
Many years ago I packed behind one Salesi Ma’afu (former wallabies prop) and I can tell you he made my job in the scrum as a lock much easier…far more than I made his job as a prop easier.. :laughing:
TheSecondRow
Roar Rookie
It would be great to see this applied to Hanigan. Cops so much criticism but he is actually far better than most give him credit for.
AV
Roar Rookie
nailed it!
AV
Roar Rookie
oooh yeah. love to see that! Wilson, to me, could be both a grifting 6 and a cranky 8. and would do it for his mates and the jersey. just what we need!
AV
Roar Rookie
Yeah - this makes a lot of sense. Thanks for sharing! And, perhaps, in this context we are discussing it is heightened? Context (as I define it) is - Aus Rugby does not have enough forwards who have offensive ability in the area/s of: a) bending the line or b) leg drive at contact - to get momentum through either pushing defensive lines back or quickly recycling the ball in a ruck. Simmons is, IMO, poor relatively speaking when compared to other international locks, at both of these. This IS the 10% I look for most games because our piggies lack it generally and we have been losing games for some years. Hanigan lacks it. Skelton DID NOT lack it (for comparison purposes). It's a bit like recruitment in our day jobs - we all want the perfect candidate, but we have to compromise on some capabilities in some way.
Armchair Halfback
Roar Rookie
Like the bouncer analogy! Bakkies Botha fits that mould. Here's a Paul O'Connell pre-game motivational talk. With the line: "I want so see the fear in their (the opponent's) eyes" :laughing: https://youtu.be/Bhgt2pnSywI
Harry Jones
Expert
Yes, a 4 is supposed to be your nightclub bouncer. Rob is more of a guy who buys the team drinks?
MaxP
Roar Rookie
I don’t believe you can tell who is contributing more in a strong scrum. Both prop and second rower must be doing their job well and in unison. Both should take credit. You can tell when one isn’t doing well though. A good sign of a poor second rower is when the scrum goes backwards and their shoulder slips up the buttock of the prop into the small of the back. Or when they split apart from their second row partner. A poor prop either twists outwards, goes to ground or stands up under pressure. I think the best gauge of how good a second rower is, would be how well they perform with different props.
Zak
Roar Rookie
Harry, I think the points you’ve raised about Simmons performance in this one test highlights what could have been if he had of consistently performed these traits in his previous tests. I stand by my comment that he has been “underwhelming” most of his career
stillmissit
Roar Guru
Gary, I did include Arnold and Harrison but I missed Giffin as I thought he was over 25 years ago but his first game was 1996. Great lock btw. The other QLD great was Rod McCall.
Harry Jones
Expert
Nor does rating a centurion without actually breaking down at least one full test.
DaveJ
Roar Rookie
No doubt Max, I was interested to see a few comments implying that people could judge the lock’s work in the scrum while watching the TV coverage, while I imagined it was hard to tell who was contributing what just from the TV vision.
Armchair Halfback
Roar Rookie
Reminds me of 1980's Boks lock Hennie Bekker who was 201cm and 130kgs when most locks at the time where 193cm and 100kgs!
Armchair Halfback
Roar Rookie
Thanks Harry, I wonder if Brad Thorn's readiness to offload him from the Reds a couple of years ago affected his cred a bit? Simmons main asset is his lineout work, he's been our best lineout jumper over the last decade and a good, steady, honest player. Perhaps we like our second rowers to have a bit more mongrel (think Rory Arnold, and the late Dan Vickerman) ?
terrykidd
Roar Pro
Agreed, he is a bit of a quiet achiever.
Gepetto
Roar Rookie
He has great hands too; look at this intercept: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nHtUy0azDGE
Olly
Roar Rookie
Yes Harry..as I said, he is filling the gap while players are not available (LSL) and has been good at filling the role of LO caller.
Harry Jones
Expert
I think Matt P calls the LO
Harry Jones
Expert
Excellent point about presentment and not being turned over easily
Harry Jones
Expert
I suppose his ‘blandness’ is part of the problem in perceptions. We like a character, a wildness, in our stars.