The Roar
The Roar

AlsBoyce

Roar Guru

Joined August 2014

39.5k

Views

20

Published

371

Comments

Ex junior coach ex no 10. 63yo retired IT Mngr. Win with tough style in the Michael Cheika fashion is Australian Rugby at its best.

Published

Comments

The defending team could still jump for the ball if lifting was disallowed. The kick still has to be good enough to favour the attacking jumper, who is almost always a single attacker, while the defenders have a number of potential catchers.

Penalising Folau is really rewarding a tactic to stymie the potential aerial superiority of the attacking player. The Irish used it cynically, and used POM without any consideration for his welfare.

Folau suspension: Let's applaud, not sanction, skilful feats

Folau is just an example of a player who has aerial superiority. There are others, like Ben Smith for example.

The point overlooked is that the lifting for restarts can never be properly safe because the attacking player is coming at speed. Totally different to lineouts. In POM’s case, trying to catch the ball after the trajectory had beaten him by bending over backwards so the lifter could no longer support him was really his own fault.

Having Folau penalised was probably the Irish aim, rather than trying to win the ball, which never really looked likely for them in the three restart cases in the frame.

Folau suspension: Let's applaud, not sanction, skilful feats

The Folau problem has occurred primarily because of the legality of lifting at restarts to counteract Folau’s aerial superiority.
Lifting was legalised for lineouts where it is quite safe to do so because there are attacking and defending lineouts each stationary until the lineout commences, and both are lifting their catcher. The lineout is a relatively confined space and the sort of bent over backwards falls by Peter Mahoney can’t occur in a lineout.
In effect, Peter Mahoney has brought about his own problem due to his desperation to attempt to take the kick restarts, even though he found himself in the wrong position to safely catch the ball (forward of the ideal catching point forcing him to bend over backwards in his lift to an unsupportable position). If there was no Folau jumping, it would even then be most unlikely that Stander, his lifter, could have held him.

Lifting for kick restarts, on this evidence alone, needs to be banned because it is inherently dangerous.

In the case of Ireland using this tactic, while it is within the laws of the game, it was a very cynical approach that was putting Mahoney’s safety at risk. Even with the dangerous lifting tactic, Mahoney never really looked likely to defeat Folau.
Unhappily, I believe that the Irish knew that prior to using those tactics as well, and their aim was to put Folau back in his box via extracting penalties, or yellow or red cards. Mahoney was simply cannon fodder.

Essentially, the Irish have used the dangerous lifting tactic in a manner that is against the spirit of the game, which in this case has penalised the superior athlete and rewarded the inferior ones.

Folau suspension: Let's applaud, not sanction, skilful feats

I also think transport to the SFS in Sydney, ticket pricing and generally underwhelming ground catering options are a bit of a turn off for watching the Waratahs.
There was a better crowd at Brookvale Oval last round than those previously held at the SFS this year. I think Newcastle would be absolutely perfect to stage Waratahs home matches on occasions .. maybe twice a year, and Wollongong as well. It appears that there is very little real thinking going on in terms of attracting a matchday crowd. There are payment incentives I believe from the SCG Trust (who manage the SFS as well as the SCG) for playing at the SFS, but if the filthy lucre comes at the expense of the long-term health of the game, then the administrators are derelict in their duties to the game and the bigger picture.

Can Super Rugby get tribal too?

Excellent idea! I have always thought that would do some good. At least it is logical and least confusing for supporters and potential supporters particularly.

Can Super Rugby get tribal too?

Your blood pressure seems to be rising, Julius.
Maybe you’ve misread the irony in the comments that you’re griping about.

Can Super Rugby get tribal too?

Who asked NZ to help?
We just want a competition that’s interesting, and the SR original 1996 format was really good.

Can Super Rugby get tribal too?

That ties in with my suggestion that the original SR format and rules (re bonus points) was the best. It worked well, but the formats involving conferences just haven’t.
But the SR comp could still work with the Rebels IF there was all home and away and NO local derbies.

Can Super Rugby get tribal too?

I said that the local derbies format favoured the stronger NZ conference because their teams play the best teams (themselves mostly) more often.

I also said that the NZ teams have an advantage because they are the same teams that started the Super Rugby competition in 1996. No adding or removing teams in NZ. This means that their conference and support hasn’t been disjointed by the changed SR formats.
Aus Rugby was in total meltdown last year over the Force dumping, and the SA loss of two teams to the Northern Hemisphere caused them grief too.

Can Super Rugby get tribal too?

The comment was tongue-in-cheek Iain.

Can Super Rugby get tribal too?

Absolutely on the money there. Well done!

Can Super Rugby get tribal too?

Just because there is an interpretation that local derbies were somehow going to help the weaker teams doesn’t make that prognosis correct. It isn’t. Local derbies are boring as well. Playing the same team about 3 weeks later seems ridiculous.
But if NZ want to dump Australia and team up with SA and Argentina for another new competition. Whoopee! , good luck to them.
I have to say that would be pretty good Julius.
Maybe in Australia we could just have NRC up in a longer format on free-to-air TV as well as club rugby. Or maybe just club rugby and tests.

Can Super Rugby get tribal too?

I think a lack of confidence plays a big part in reducing skill execution quality. But it is also likely that poor execution is a learned response, so continual poor play leads to further poor play. Team leaders have to stand up and lead the team on-field strategy and execution.
Obviously Phipps was an idiot, but I can forgive him one offence on his buck’s night. He’s smart enough to not do it again.
For the Waratahs, Beale, Hooper and Folau stand out as at least doing their part. Foley seems to be missing in action too often, but with Phipps back at the 60 minute mark last week against the Blues, the team did look more assured. I’m a fan of Jake Gordon, but Phipps needs to start against the Crusaders.
Foley is the one who has to take control for both the Wallabies and Waratahs.

Pocock is smart, and makes a huge difference to the Brumbies, but they need more than him unfortunately. Their 9 and 10 just aren’t good enough.

Can Super Rugby get tribal too?

Maybe it is an admission. But an admission is not a cop out.
We certainly don’t want to hand any advantages to NZ.
The instigation of the Warriors in the NRL has also played a part in bringing the current NRL attack and defense tricks to a NZ TV audience, giving NZ the opportunity to get a source of information that was previously much less accessable. That’s not going to change, but the local derbies are both boring and assist NZ more than Australia or South Africa.
Australia used to win by guts, skills and cleverness. We can still do the guts, but we’re struggling on the skills and particularly the cleverness. This isn’t the fault of anyone but Australian Rugby itself, and are pressing issues that must be addressed before the Wallabies and Super Rugby teams show any consistent success. But providing formats for NZ to gain further advantage is not helping.

Can Super Rugby get tribal too?

I agree 100% with that. Rebels certainly should have been dropped instead.

Can Super Rugby get tribal too?

The Wallabies started poorly in mid-year off the back of a terrible Super Rugby season for all Australian teams, and a reported underlying lack of fitness. They got fit enough to play their 1st Rugby Championship match against NZ only to be blown away in the 1st half. NZ notably had had a warm-up match locally beforehand, so they were pumped and ready to go.
The 2nd half of Bled 1, Bled 2 (fell off at the end but kept fighting back to regain the lead in the 2nd half .. ok should have really won it, but still pretty good), and Bled 3 showed the Wallabies scoring more points than NZ. The one moment which for me showed the murmurings of a phsychological turnaround in the players belief was their try by Folau just before half-time. The Wallabies did to NZ what NZ so often do to their opponents – deliver a crushing blow when thoughts had drifted to oranges. And, it wasn’t just the scoring of the try, but the manner of the scoring that was most impressive. Fast ball, a Hooper major gain-line dent, fast ball and Beale creating defensive havoc to deliver to Folau in space 2-on-1 and on the angle to the corner. Naholo bamboozled.
The Wallabies dropped back in Perth after Bled 2 against the Boks, but put in a stirring performance to draw in South Africa in the return match. Up-and-down form but the ups are starting to look promising.
Ireland are a terrific team and maybe deserve a 3 ranking, but I like the Wallaby momentum at the moment when they have their major players playing. Depth is critical because players get injured, and the Wallabies can get exposed in that area as we have seen.
After Bled 3 it was flat to downhill for the Wallabies, with an ok performance against Wales, but not so good against England and terrible against Scotland. Up until the 71st minute they endured magnificently against England, but they still did not play that well.

Wallabies' 2017 report card

You’ve misunderstood my point, Waxhead.
The lack of courage comment works both ways. Sticking with players too long and not selecting potential replacements are two sides of the same coin.
I was nevertheless really directing the comment toward the backs in this instance, and particularly about a fascination MK has with the “big” 12 crash-ball option, but also with his propensity to move players from positions where they had been performing well (e.g. Beale at 12) to shore up other positions where they could possibly play (e.g. Beale replacing Folau at 15). I think doing that is doubly disruptive, and Hunt should have played 15, leaving Beale at 12.
With Folau missing, Beale became the major focus of the defence attacking from 15, but with him still at 12, who knows what is going to happen? Will he run, will he grubber to Korabeti, will he offload to Hunt/Hodge/Korabeti/Kuradrani or to Foley on the wraparound. Both Beale and Foley feature more deceptively in that combination, giving opportunities to the ball-runners, and creating more for the defence to attempt to cover.

Wallabies' 2017 report card

I wasn’t claiming the official ranking of 3 for the Wallabies, but saying that they had a strong claim on being 3rd best due to the Brisbane win over NZ.

Wallabies' 2017 report card

I was really trying to put across the idea that the 2 ball-players (Foley 10 and Beale 12) were the better option for the fluidity, spontaneity and directness of the back-line attack, and the crash-ball option (Kerevi) was not.
Kerevi versus TK as the “big” centre option is tough for Kerevi on defensive comparisons, particularly at outside-centre if it was one or the other.
Hunt at fullback has shown good highball capability in 2017 and there was a chance to give him more game-time there.
Obviously also, Haylett-Petty was injured, and I’d have him at 15 as the option if Folau was unavailable.

Wallabies' 2017 report card

Good point about Simmons positive contribution capabilities.
I actually think he is a good buy for the Waratahs, as he’s very reliable at set-piece particularly. It’s always been his ball-carries and defense as weaknesses, but these are intermittent. 2018 could see him improving quite a lot too.
I put him on the list for a rest as a part of the way to inject that freshness and energy in the pack that the Wallabies really needed.

Wallabies' 2017 report card

It seems that some things don’t seem to change, though the players and coaches must be well aware of them.
1. Will Genia can’t box kick. Oppositions know his technique is ripe for a chargedown, and at least 1 will happen every match, so they keep having a go until they succeed. When they do it’s 50-50 whether they get a try out of or not. Powell has a better pass and can box-kick. Jake Gordon is a real attack threat. Nick Phipps is by far the most robust and best defender. We’ve seen NP and WG, Time to give the other two a half each.
2. The Wallabies cannot maintain their effort over 80 minutes. Is it on-field leadership? Or is it individual frailties? Or Both? Or poor coaching? Or all three?
3. The Wallabies started the match in 2nd gear. Foley and Genia took poor clearing kick options and the breakdown was inefficient. Better to not kick at all. Genia’s early grubber was a shocker. Poor skills. Gave away possession in own half. Very damaging.

When the flow of possession is slow, the backs have no space and look poor. The Wallaby forwards have to get a mindset that they have to throw everything including the kitchen sink at the breakdown and gain-line, and the backs have to back them up by throwing themselves into the melees as well when they are needed or can make a difference. It’s a mindset.

The Wallabies really do look outside the top 5 international teams at the moment, perhaps hardly surprising given the poor Super Rugby form. No confidence, no combinations, no ticker appears to be the picture. Can they turn it around? Probably not soon. A new defense coach would be a start, but the players really have to man up and put in. Chris Alcock looks tough and strong over the ball, and Hanigan looks young and boyish – not man-hard. His time can come later. Now we can use Higginbothom for lineout takes as often as Q’land use him. We need some mongrel, not boys.

So new halfback, new no. 6, and start looking for a new defense coach.

Roar Forum: What changes should the Wallabies make for Italy?

“Dying” might be over-the-top, but “going downhill since about the time of Eddie Jones taking over the Wallabies” is definitely true.
Nevertheless, there are many things wrong with Rugby Union, and this article mentions a few.
One of the main reason fans are not identifying with RU is definitely a lack of success for the Wallabies v NZ, as the author states, but it is not the only cause for concern.
Free-to-air TV hasn’t died after all, and Rugby desperately needs it. A share deal with Fox as per NRL is essential. The NRC needs to be on FTA as well. But, could a FTA/Fox deal get enough money?
I thought the NRC product was terrific.
But Super Rugby? Not so terrific. The conference system is a complicated failure. 16 teams with every team playing each other once is the only way forward. A SA team has to go plus either Melbourne Rebels or the Sunwolves. Rugby in Perth actually has a chance to take hold with SA and English immigration there, and a market not so AFL crazy as Melbourne.
On the Club Rugby front, the fact that Sydney’s Eastwood Club says it “has to” sell its grounds to “survive” indicates that it probably has a player budget problem. But that level of competition should be totally amateur. Why isn’t it?
Killing a club’s history and tradition is not going to help Eastwood in the medium to long term, but maybe seriously damage it.
The Olympic 7s leverage is the only hope for a grassroots/schools/junior rugby player development. To have spectators at senior matches, there has to be enough ex-players and parents of players to have a base of interest. No kids, no parents, few spectators. That affects TV as well, even though people can be drawn by winning teams – i.e. Wallabies beating NZ, and Super Rugby success.
The NRC product is superior in my view to NRL and AFL, so a FTA arrangement might be a masterstroke at the tail-end of the season. Soccer has benefited by aligning with the Northern Hemisphere, so having AFL and NRL finished allows the NRC clean air.
I hope Rugby can pull itself together. While I’m a rusted on fan, I’ve been watching cricket lately in preference, finding out the scores in Super Rugby, and not bothering to watch the recorded match, or just flicking through. For me, the conference system killed it.

Time to pull heads out of the sand and admit Australian rugby is dying

I thought it interesting that Lealiifano said in an interview after the match that the Brumbies didn’t get as much as they should have out of their rolling maul (Carter penalties killed promising positions and rolling maul attempts), but overall thought they had the right strategy and that was their best plan of attack in the coming matches.
He’s basically saying that the game would have been entirely different (i.e. Brumbies likely winners) had the rolling maul not been penalised repeatedly. If the Brumbies had instead scored one or possibly even two more tries from those penalised rolling mauls, than he may well have been correct, but there are a lot of ifs in that, and teams who counter those tactics well have a walk up start.
Also, Kuridrani put in a pretty bad missed tackle on Fekitoa to offer up a try which was probably the major cause of the loss in the end, notwithstanding the missed rolling maul opportunities.
Lealiifano has disclosed Brumby tactics, but are those tactics good enough? To me, the Brumbies attack seems to lack backline guile and creativity, and now finishers without Tomane or Speight. Nick White and Jesse Mogg were major losses I think, particularly in terms of finishing from the 22, where Mogg could use his speed and elusiveness to do something decisive. Robbie Coleman only really got involved closer to the action when the game was already lost late in the game, yet he is that type of elusive player who can create something.
I think Robbie Coleman needs to channel his inner Willie La Roux and get into 1st or 2nd receiver from early on in a match, not when it’s too late.
I also thought it interesting as others have commented, that Toomua was being subbed off early and not playing the full 80 minutes. He doesn’t seem to be adding much to the attack at all.
If the Brumbies really are relying too much on their rolling maul to win them matches, then their chances of making the semis are not good.

#BoldandtheBrumbies saga ends: No more excuses on the field

I made the comment previously ..

We accept that referees will make errors but often the TMO can change the referee’s opinion even though the referee can see the replay footage on the screen just as the TMO sees it. Wayne Barnes the English referee is a shining light, I think, on how the TMO should be mostly treated – as a replay technician with no input to on-field decision-making. Barnes makes the call himself after seeing the replay, so backs his own judgement.
The TMO is wonderful theatre, though, but it can get overdone and perhaps too often in recent times.

.. in a the article http://www.theroar.com.au/2015/05/20/referee-errors-are-just-part-of-the-fun-in-rugby/

The TMO is still a problem.

Brumbies cop a pie from the Peyper

Good point dabiged, about the heat, though this year is particularly hot so far. Maybe a bit later in the season when it’s cooler that wouldn’t be a problem. Maybe only some games as well could be played on Sunday afternoon. I did suggest 7.30pm AEDT (or AEST when daylight saving stops) as well as 5.30pm as possibilities, so in the early part of the season perhaps 7.30 AEDT would be the earliest. Later still could work as well, because the point that I wanted to get across was to separate the WF product from the normal Fri/Sat 5.30pm/7.30pm two-match offerings, so the WF would be more likely to be viewed and so followed. 8pm AEDT/AEST is 6pm in Perth, which could work.

Your salary cap proposals seem reasonable to me as well.

The Western Force should play out of Parramatta