The Reds should have beaten the Crusaders

Good news, Australian rugby fans. I’ve reviewed Saturday night’s Reds versus Crusaders match, and it’s my pleasure to be able to declare that had the Reds played better, they would have comfortably beaten the Crusaders.

When pushed to some more detail, we can actually make the call that if the Reds had played better only in defence, they would have won. Almost without fail the Crusaders tries were conceived by taking advantage of a defence that was not of a high level as well as a defence that could relatively easily have been done right.

So let’s get into it then. The revised Reds versus Crusaders scorecard if the Reds had the defensive intelligence to stop them is as follows.

(Photo by Jono Searle/Getty Images)

First error for try: poor pass from Tate McDermott – opportunity on
Actually, this is an exception. This is simply a poor pass. Tate McDermott had a good game and his passing wasn’t really a problem, but it hurt them hard on this one. A chance is on the outside and he gives up a pass behind his man 20 metres out. Let’s hope that’s the last of those.

Second error for try: a terrible read by Stewart – always protect the offload
Now we get into the defensive side. Hamish Stewart doesn’t come in to cover the man beside contact. With the offload game being so prevalent in New Zealand rugby, the defence has to adopt more of a league-style pattern around the ruck. Once the tackle starts and while the tackle is live you must heavily mark the players around the tackle.

Third error for try: the same again
Lukhan Salakaia-Loto doesn’t react to the man inside him (Stewart) turning in and stands and watches as the support runner streams past him onto the ball. Again, the Reds need to always cover in beside the contact. Players need to keep working back and in. If someone gets drawn into the tackle, the next man has to adjust. That said, it wouldn’t be necessary if it wasn’t for a weak tackle from Bryce Hegarty falling off contact upfield, allowing the player to get to his feet and go again.

It’s now 0-7 to the Crusaders with a Well-worked mail try to Cullen Grace.

Fourth error for try: overread from Suliasi Vunivalu
This starts out with Stewart caught out for pace. Stewart isn’t the fastest No. 12 around, and it showed here. Hunter Paisami at his Wallabies position of No. 12 still seems like the Reds’ best option there. That said, Stewart’s skill set is what it is, and the deficiency could have been covered except for what is a bit of a rookie error from Vunivalu. He gets caught pushing up past the ball and panics, and he goes in instead of moving back towards his man. A better read and the Crusaders would be attacking 20 metres out instead of two.

Fifth error for try: Hegarty needed to slide
If someone is faster, you can’t allow them access to the outside, and Richie Mo’unga is definitely faster than Hegarty, who needed to guard the space outside and let the cover come across to help him as it was there ready for the job

Tate McDermott scores. The score is 7-7.

Sixth error for try: always protect the widest man
This was similar to the previous try in a way. Hegarty didn’t give the Crusaders enough credit for their ability to use space if you give it to them. Hegarty got caught too far infield with his man too far outside him. Ideally the widest man always has to make sure the widest opposition player can’t run around or jump past him without making a play at him. Hegarty lost his opponent there.

(Photo by Albert Perez/Getty Images)

Seventh error for try: James O’Connor lazy on the inside
Mo’unga should have been put down as soon as he went inside. Mo’unga was James O’Connor’s man to cover big Harry Wilson coming up. He moved up and knew his job; he just took way too long and left way too much room on Wilson’s inside. He should have been extra awake to the likelihood that someone like Mo’unga would fancy beating someone like Harry Wilson.

Penalty try, 7-14. Try to Wilson, 14-14. Try to Vunivalu, 21-14.

Eighth error for try: Fraser McReight was too light
Fraser McReight got himself one on one with a Crusader heavyweight and came off second best. Despite the recent highlighting of the upsides of having a lighter No. 7, you can’t help but wonder if a touch more bulk and power would have stopped that try.

Ninth error for try: post goes mum
The first man off the ruck seemingly has the man covered, but it isn’t communicated, and the outside defence came in and got cut out. Communication as a unit was lacking.

Try to Brandon Paenga-Amosa, 28-14. The Reds win the match.

The vast majority of tries came from simple poor structure or positioning. The Reds scrambled defence actually went fairly well, but some common themes developed from the above. Not being awake to defending the offload and the amount of space given to the Crusaders both on the outside for the front line – specifically the outer defenders – and on the inside for the cover defence really didn’t make the Crusaders work hard enough.

The Reds need to address these as a priority. It’s a bit of a shame the offloading in particular hadn’t already been identified.

Now, obviously the practice of ignoring all tries from the opposition simply because your team made an error isn’t a great way to get a reflection of the match and is only ever going to be a heavily rose-tinted ‘could have been’ point of view. Of course it doesn’t take account the Crusaders switching to a plan B and carving up the Reds. However, first priority must be to stop their plan A, and the Reds didn’t seem to have their own plan quite ready for this.

Looking at the scoring this way does, however, allow a little perspective about where things are at. The attacking side of things actually worked reasonably well, and if offered 28 points for him at the start of the game, I’d say coach Brad Thorn would have been pretty tempted to take it.

So it’s looking at what scoring opportunities against them could have been denied if different systems or slight adjustments in thinking were employed. From the above, I’d say there are quite a few.