No one thinks French is rugby boring. Their current team has all the flair of the famous Les Bleus sides with a newfound consistency and resilience. The Wallabies were victims of this dangerous combination on Sunday night. Though in the disappointment of a rampaging Jonathon Danty and Penaud regathering genius attacking kicks to pile the score on, the Wallabies saw what they could be.
The French use their kicking to suffocate opponents and then punish mistakes they make, something the Wallabies are trying to emulate. With cross-field kicks to wingers, grubbers in behind and finally winning some kicking duels, Australia exerted more pressure than they ever had under Jones, but still had weaknesses that brought the plan apart.
When Eddie Jones took the job, he said that “if we kick the ball 70 times and we beat New Zealand, everybody is going to be happy, (If) we kick the ball 10 times and we get beaten 40-10, they’re going to walk out kicking stones”.
The idea was simple: possession rugby is dead, and territory is now king. If they carry powerfully and kick well, then the Wallabies will run over oppositions. A very French model.
Carter Gordon. (Photo by David Rogers/Getty Images)
This plan has not worked yet as Jones has still not won a game since taking the job, although the blueprint has become clearer. While Sunday’s result was disheartening, the French friendly is the best example of how Eddie wants the team to play.
Against South Africa, Eddie had clearly hammered home that kicking was the best option. Australia’s kicked the ball 32 times and their pass per kick rate was a staggering 3.3. There was barely more than a pass from a 10 before Australia kicked the ball. They were positionally obliterated on the night with a near comical 35% of territory.
Clearly there was work to be done. And so, the next week against Argentina they took the opposite approach, kicking only 13 times, pass to kick had more than doubled to 7.8 and the territory only slightly improved to 43%. In Bledisloe One they passed even more before kicking with a pass to kick of 8.6, and while the volume of kicks rose to 21, territory again improved but remained unfavourable at 48%.
Bledisloe Two instead saw the opposite approach, with more success. Australia kicked more and did it well. They kicked 26 times, but it did not feel artificial as it did against South Africa. While they were obviously beaten late, their game showed a huge improvement as they for the first time in Jones’ tenure, won a match’s territory with 51%.
This adoption of the French approach to kicking was striking on Sunday morning as both sides used kicking not just as defensive tool to clear from their half, but as an attacking weapon.
Thibaud Flament is tackled by Richie Arnold and Taniela Tupou. (Photo by David Rogers/Getty Images)
Suliasi Vunivalu showed his particular value, constantly threatening in the air and Carter Gordon worked into the game as Australia increasingly used kicking (28 times) to improve their position and then regain the ball. Australia dominated the game territorially with an incredible 63% and Eddie’s vision has become clear.
However, despite Australia either matching or dominating France in every statistical category, they were outclassed on the scoreboard, highlighting that Australia needs to fix some things to win matches against the best teams in the world.
Despite a relatively quiet game from Antoine Dupont, the cog in France’s kicking machine, the contrast between him and Tate McDermott was stark. Dupont is able to box-kick with both feet past halfway when in his own 22m.
Contrastingly, McDermott often seemed hesitant to box kick in situations where it was the logical option, instead passing back to Gordon or Kellaway who could only clear to the 22m.
Additionally, while McDermott offers attacking spark with his running capability he does not seem as certain around when to snipe and when to pass when on the front foot. His pass let him down on two occasions when inaccuracy stopped positive attacking opportunities from attacking kicks. Dupont conversely is the master of option selection, where he seemingly ensures France take the most clinical option in every break.
Eddie Jones. (Photo by David Rogers/Getty Images)
Further, Australia’s maul is not the weapon it is for much of the world. Australia used it five times but was unable to score directly from it, instead losing the ball or only scoring in the opposite corner. A concern as positive kicking creates opportunities to maul from lineouts in the opposition 22. This is interlinked with Australia’s generally poor ‘redzone’ efficiency (opposition 22) in the past 3 matches.
The Wallabies had 13 22m entries against France but only averaged 1.3 points per entry. Comparatively France had 12 but averaged 2.6 points per entry. A positive differential in 22m entries is enormously positive as this is the first time it occurred in Jones’ tenure and a far cry from the 3 to 20 figure against South Africa. 22m entries is good indicator of strong teams, as better teams create more opportunities close to the line.
Australian players have since alluded that there are set moves reserved for the World Cup which may well improve their red zone attack, but Gordon’s goal-kicking struggles are still a concern, especially compared to the metronomic Thomas Ramos.
On Sunday night, the Wallabies showed more promise than ever before in how Jones wants to dominate games through kicking, but they were also shown by a better team that conception is only as good as the execution.
The Wallabies will only get more comfortable with this play style through the World Cup and with more tricks up Eddie’s sleeve, they may quickly become like France, a team no one wants to play.
Favourable Matchups
Roar Rookie
Hopefully Skelton is the man
ShortBlind
Roar Rookie
" AB have created a better narrative around penalties in their 22". This is an excellent point FM, 'framing' to the ref is crucial. AB are past masters (Ritchie:-) and we need to be better. It's an image makeover for us with refs and it starts with how the captain communicates and how the halfback STFU and stops whining.
Cec
Roar Rookie
Interesting as Brums are the fifth lowest. Perhaps to be considered is what oppositions do with Brums penalties conceded versus what the Brums do with penalties received; and at what part of the field.
Favourable Matchups
Roar Rookie
Sorry not talking about penalty volume I'm talking about how they look in the flow of a game. The Brumbies while they did not concede that many overall, in matches most of the time conceded more than their opponent. There are a few structural reasons why the Brumbies games tended to have fewer penalties all round but my point is more you'd rather a game where you concede 10 penalties and your opponent concedes 15 than one where you concede 8 and they concede 3. Essentially the Brumbies played in low penalty games but had a negative penalty differential.
Cec
Roar Rookie
I have the Brums at 153 penalties for the season. The lowest of the top 4. Chiefs were 176. Do you have a different figure? Only the Canes, Highlanders, Rebs & Moana had less in the mid 140s
Favourable Matchups
Roar Rookie
Overall point is well made but that Brumbies stat is misleading. The Brumbies only conceded few penalties than their opponents in 6/16 games. Much like the Crusaders, the Brumbies often lose penalty counts but feel like they have won them. They have a great set-piece and so often choose to concede penalties rather than have them forced upon them (A perception thing the Wallabies struggle with is that they are always have refs thinking they can't handle pressure).
Favourable Matchups
Roar Rookie
Discipline is always an interesting term because I don't think that you can just tell teams to be more disciplined and improve performance. Rugby is based on physical dominance and so teams don't want to concede physical dominance on any occasion even at the expense of rule following. In international rugby what we consider 'discipline' is essentially the result of accuracy in actions and framing to the referee. Many teams concede penalties, All Blacks chief among them, but have created a better narrative around penalties in their 22. Australia needs to work on the framing as well as the accuracy because referees seem to jump to cynical faster for the Wallabies which is what creates the cards.
Cec
Roar Rookie
SB, your pt1 is huge and I believe our woes & pressure put on ourselves starts from there. Too much change and too complex perhaps, like Gray’s defensive patterns. Interestingly Brums were one of the least penalised teams this season, had a low possession game but were one of the highest try scorers. A look into what worked for Bernie and Lordy would makes sense and I think WB can definitely improve in these areas but for this RWC I’m not sure. I think it’s the Brums kickers & effective chop tackles that brings in the pilfer or slowing the defensive ruck. The pressure goes back on the opposition. We had White, Lonergan, Noah and Wright kicking and they were quite a handy quartet. The return kicks kept going back to Wright and he chewed up the meters to lead the whole comp. Also the Brums scrum & set pieces were on point too as winning rugby kinda starts and ends right there. Definitely all doable for AUS players and that transfers pressure which should also cut down mistakes and penalties.
Favourable Matchups
Roar Rookie
I think thats a good assessment, particularly agree with kick-offs, its another set-piece in the modern game but seems to have so much less clarity in design. I believe our kicking overall is difficult to compare to other countries just because of how little it has been emphasised for a long time.
Favourable Matchups
Roar Rookie
Thanks mate
ShortBlind
Roar Rookie
Agree good article FM keep it up mate :thumbup: Of all the things that have perplexed me about the Wallabies over the last 5 years, how SLOW they are to learn from their continued mistakes and make changes is the worst. Examples: 1. general discipline penalties for (slightly) high shots, incorrect ruck entry etc. Accuracy and discipline have been the mantra of the last 3 coaches but we've seen barely any improvements. They are highly paid pros - WTF my under 10 team learns quicker.... 2. poor kicking in general play, both box and long kicking and missing the touch - as you say it's getting a little better under EJ however the inability (until very recently) to chase box kicks and compete for the ball at kick offs was frustrating. With Suli and Mark N they have weapons that could be better used. 3. exit completion from kick offs - the AB kicked it to Korebeti almost every time during Bled and the outcome was predictable, he ran hard and straight but the next ruck and exit kick were often poor. I think a side's ability to exit cleanly and at good distance is an accurate sign of their chances to win a game. 4. goal kicking - nuff said, why Matt Burke isn't brought in to do some horse whispering I don't know. 5. not listening and reacting to the referee - Foley slow kick vs AB, recent lineout when on attack vs AB, use it now at rucks and don't use it. Team seems not super sharp to focus on what the man in white wants. Hopefully EJ can improve the rate of learning and change/adaption of this young group.
Cec
Roar Rookie
This is another technical and insightful article FM. Keep at it.