• Welcome to the Green and Gold Rugby forums. As you can see we've upgraded the forums to new software. Your old logon details should work, just click the 'Login' button in the top right.

England v Australia

Status
Not open for further replies.

Cardiffblue

Jim Lenehan (48)
Interesting article in Times. Mostly referring to Wales in last 15 minutes but interesting re Nh in general methinks.

Our coaches have analysed metres run per minute and have come up with some interesting stats and explanations why we lose games in the final 10/15 minutes.

John Westerby
Last updated at 12:01AM, November 27 2014
When is a game of rugby won and lost? No two matches are the same, clearly, but when a northern-hemisphere team meet one of the southern-hemisphere heavyweights, the final quarter increasingly seems to be the time when New Zealand, South Africa or Australia are able to press home an advantage.
Sam Warburton, the Wales captain, was unequivocal in the aftermath of his team’s defeat by New Zealand last weekend. “The most important part of a Test match is the last ten minutes,” Warburton said. “That’s where we need to improve.”
Time and again the big three from the southern hemisphere prove their ability to make match-winning plays in the dying moments. Think Ryan Crotty’s try for the All Blacks against Ireland this time last year, or Conrad Smith’s late score against England in Auckland. Wales have been ahead after 68 minutes in their most recent games against South Africa, Australia and New Zealand, but lost all three. In the endurance race of international rugby, more often than not it is the southern-hemisphere team who last the distance.
The ability to conjure late scores is so often put down to character, heart or spirit. The numbers now being provided by GPS technology, though, are offering a more scientific explanation: southern-hemisphere teams perform better in the last ten minutes because they are more accustomed to the pace at which an international game is played.
The GPS statistics gathered by Wales’ coaches show that during a match involving New Zealand, South Africa or Australia, players will typically cover about 80 metres per minute. The step up from European domestic rugby is clear: in the Guinness Pro12, an average distance would be 50 to 55 metres per minute, the Aviva Premiership is rather higher, while in the European Champions Cup, an average would be 65 to 70 metres per minute.
The most startling figure, though, is that players in the Super 15 will cover 85 metres per minute. The effect on lungs and legs is obvious, but the minds of Super 15 players are used to making decisions under the levels of fatigue experienced in the closing stages of an international match.
As Rob Howley, the Wales assistant coach, said this month: “It’s very difficult for our players to step up over 25 metres per minute. What this means is that in the final minutes of a game against one of those three teams, fatigue sets in, mental and physical, decision-making under pressure suffers and crucial mistakes are made.”
Those figures, provided by the devices sewn into the back of the players’ shirts, are an average calculation across a whole team for a typical game. The front-five forwards, evidently, will not cover as much ground as the back three. The scrum half and inside centre will often cover the greatest distances. For Wales’s international against Australia this month, one player covered 94 metres per minute.
The statistics will, of course, vary from game to game, depending on the weather, the quality of the pitch and the tactics employed by both teams. They do, however, demonstrate the scale of the challenge for the likes of Stuart Lancaster and Warren Gatland, whether they choose to match their southern-hemisphere opponents for pace or endurance, or coerce them into playing a slower game based more around the set-piece.
Gatland, the Wales head coach, has set his mind on closing this gap before the World Cup next year. The first two weeks that Wales spent in camp this autumn featured an extra training session each day in an attempt to boost his players’ endurance. After an intensive session on Wattbikes in an altitude chamber, they would undergo decision-making exercises in a fatigued state. “Warren has manufactured that intensity in training and what we face this month is different to when you play northern-hemisphere sides,” Howley said.
Eyebrows were raised when this intensive regime continued into the week of the Australia game, but Gatland was unapologetic, asking to be judged on results at the World Cup, not the autumn internationals. Few coaches are granted the luxury of being judged over the long term, but Gatland’s record with Wales has earned him the right. With a full summer of preparation next year, Gatland, Lancaster and all their coaching rivals will be trying to build their players towards an athletic peak for the World Cup.
For southern-hemisphere players, the requirement to cover 85 metres per minute does not suit everyone. Richard Cockerill, the Leicester director of rugby, observes that players whose game is based on power rather than pace may gravitate towards the northern hemisphere. “Brad Thorn [the former New Zealand lock, now at Leicester Tigers] is a good example, he’s 39 now and probably a bit slow for the Super 15, but the Premiership suits his game,” Cockerill said. “The southern-hemisphere players who settle best in the Premiership are often considered not quite athletic enough to be considered top-end in their country.”
Finding the right balance of power and pace — in terms of personnel, in terms of game plan — remains the coach’s constant conundrum.
Come the last ten minutes of an international, though, they want players whose minds remain clear enough to spot the opportunity for that match-winning try. The World Cup could depend on it.
 

fatprop

George Gregan (70)
Staff member
He makes the others around him look good.
Beale in S15 was sublime in his first year at 12.
Phipps having his best year ever.
1 try on the weekend and 2 try assists.

This is the challenge for some with him, he is the facilitator type 10, enough threat ball in hand to plant the inside defenders and unselfish enough to move the ball on and then support. He is more Dan Carter than Carlos Spencer

He works hard off the ball. In that wonderful team try to Phipps he touched the ball 3 times moving the ball on to someone in a better position.
 

wamberal

Phil Kearns (64)
Skelton going to be an 80 min lock at the RWC? Tell him he's dreaming.


Maybe he means that Skelton will manage a total of 80 minutes on the field during the whole tournament?

If we manage to play 5 games, that would mean an average of 16 minutes a game -- that's better than he is doing now.
 

Scrubber2050

Mark Ella (57)
Skelton is a good rugby player and SHOULD get better. He is being given fantastic opportunity and as yet is a long way from achieving his "potential".

Will he get there? Fuck knows ATM.
 

fatprop

George Gregan (70)
Staff member
Skelton is a good rugby player and SHOULD get better. He is being given fantastic opportunity and as yet is a long way from achieving his "potential".

Will he get there? Fuck knows ATM.


To me he is still a compromise lock (like Timani), he has to become a shit load better at his strengths while building his obvious weaknesses before he deserves the 80 minutes
 

Scrubber2050

Mark Ella (57)
To me he is still a compromise lock (like Timani), he has to become a shit load better at his strengths while building his obvious weaknesses before he deserves the 80 minutes

There is only one reason he cannot be. HIM - putting in the work on and off the field and learning. He seems to have trouble with the latter
 

Braveheart81

Will Genia (78)
Staff member
In all this ridiculous argument about Cooper not getting a go, didn't he start the game against the Barbarians?

Now people have made the argument that he needs to get a chance alongside Phipps who is our best halfback at the moment, but it's hardly a compelling argument. Many of the same people are also arguing that given time, Genia will be our starting halfback again. If that's the case, it's somewhat ridiculous to claim that Cooper's chances are being ruined by having to play with Genia. If Cooper had put together a better performance in that Barbarians game, he may have got a start at the end of the tour. As it stood, he looked like he was short of a run.

As it stands he's been getting minutes from the bench in each game. Realistically, I think he created an excellent try against France but hasn't done a huge amount else.

Cooper's case for starting is more along the lines of suggesting Foley should be dropped rather than Cooper promoted. In a tour where the coach is new and trying to implement a different structure to what the team were used to previously, it's always going to be more likely that he's going to opt for stability over shaking things up each match.

In general, Australia seems to have an unholy fascination with heaping blame on the 10 every time we lose, regardless of the situation of the match. It applied when Cooper was the 10. It applied to the couple of tests Beale was 10 and is now being applied to Foley at 10. We've become better at heaping praise on the forwards when they do well, but seemingly when they don't and we lose, it's mostly the 10's fault.
 

Brumby Runner

David Wilson (68)
In all this ridiculous argument about Cooper not getting a go, didn't he start the game against the Barbarians?

Now people have made the argument that he needs to get a chance alongside Phipps who is our best halfback at the moment, but it's hardly a compelling argument. Many of the same people are also arguing that given time, Genia will be our starting halfback again. If that's the case, it's somewhat ridiculous to claim that Cooper's chances are being ruined by having to play with Genia. If Cooper had put together a better performance in that Barbarians game, he may have got a start at the end of the tour. As it stood, he looked like he was short of a run.

As it stands he's been getting minutes from the bench in each game. Realistically, I think he created an excellent try against France but hasn't done a huge amount else.

Cooper's case for starting is more along the lines of suggesting Foley should be dropped rather than Cooper promoted. In a tour where the coach is new and trying to implement a different structure to what the team were used to previously, it's always going to be more likely that he's going to opt for stability over shaking things up each match.

In general, Australia seems to have an unholy fascination with heaping blame on the 10 every time we lose, regardless of the situation of the match. It applied when Cooper was the 10. It applied to the couple of tests Beale was 10 and is now being applied to Foley at 10. We've become better at heaping praise on the forwards when they do well, but seemingly when they don't and we lose, it's mostly the 10's fault.

Yeah, well... in Bledisloes 1 and 2 it was. And in Bledisloe 3 it was the missed tackle by the No 10 that let the winning try in. With a recent test record of 5 losses in 6 tests, I for one think that a change at No 10 just might relight the Wallabies' winning ways. Still, hope Foley can raise the bar against England.
 

Inside Shoulder

Nathan Sharpe (72)
In general, Australia seems to have an unholy fascination with heaping blame on the 10 every time we lose, regardless of the situation of the match. It applied when Cooper was the 10. It applied to the couple of tests Beale was 10 and is now being applied to Foley at 10. We've become better at heaping praise on the forwards when they do well, but seemingly when they don't and we lose, it's mostly the 10's fault.

This very true.
It has another aspect, I reckon.
Cooper is like Carlos Spencer: on his day he's a world beater on other days he can be terrible. The ratio between the extremes has varied over his career.
When he has a shocker or if he is out of form everyone clamours for a 10 like Foley.
When Foley's general reliability begins to bore the whizzbangery of Cooper becomes very attractive - whether Foley's less flamboyant style is the cause or not.
But when/if Cooper makes it back and he has one of his less than stellar games guess what the cry will be?
 

vidiot

John Solomon (38)
In all this ridiculous argument about Cooper not getting a go...


+1.

Frankly the Cooper/Foley thing has become tiresome. It's not a travesty of justice. It's just a perfectly understandable selection decision.

I'll freely admit to being a Cooper tragic but he has been given opportunity and and been.... ok. If he had (during the game time he has had) taken games by the scruff of the neck and steered the wallabies to victory, great. But he has not.

Part of that is no doubt the crumbling structure around him in the last 10-20, the lack of work of the ball, the new combinations, the fact our bench is populated with honest triers and project players.

But even if he is surpassed by Cooper or player X in the future, Foley is a good choice now, for a whole heap of reasons.
 

Sully

Tim Horan (67)
Staff member
It was interesting that people were calling for Foley for his kicking. Now he's had a 'mare with the boot there are other reasons. Some going back to march.
 

wamberal

Phil Kearns (64)
To me he is still a compromise lock (like Timani), he has to become a shit load better at his strengths while building his obvious weaknesses before he deserves the 80 minutes

And we see locks like Etsebeth and Retallick who were the finished product at his age, and cringe. At least, I do.

Skelton has a massive frame, good hands, and that's about it at the moment,
 

BDA

Peter Johnson (47)
I thought Skelton was much better last week. He was very aggressive with ball in hand. made a few half breaks. More of the same needed this week. I note that they moved him to the LH Lock position when he comes on. Smart decision. They are obviously well aware that his technique in the scrum is poor.

I really think 2015 will be a big year for Skelton. With Kane Douglas going and with the world cup in the back of Cheika's mind I could see Skelton starting the majority of games. This will have a major impact on his development. This year he's been used predominantly off the bench at all levels. The role is really one of impact, similar to an NRL bench forward. Come on, hit the ball up as many times as possible, make some big hits in defence, get involved and burn all the fuel in the tank. Starting requires a lot of more nous, intelligence, fitness, etc.

I could see Skelton's development coming on in leaps and bounds, not just fitness but his decision making and his set piece play. If you're playing the first 50 minutes, as opposed to the last 20-30 minutes it means you will have to deal with a lot more scrums and line-out and with that comes technique.

One of the benefits of having Cheika as coach of both sides is that I think we will see him using the Super Season to help Skelton mature as a player.

It will also be interesting to see whether we see Skelton being used in the Backrow (6 or 8) for the tahs at any time. I wouldn't rule it out. If Cheika can get Skelton familiar with those positions it becomes another option.
 

Braveheart81

Will Genia (78)
Staff member
And we see locks like Etsebeth and Retallick who were the finished product at his age, and cringe. At least, I do.

Skelton has a massive frame, good hands, and that's about it at the moment,

I reckon it took Rob Simmons 30 tests to become a reasonable scrummager and around 40 tests to really lock himself in as our first choice lock. He still makes plenty of silly mistakes (mostly around giving away penalties).

Lock is clearly an area of weakness for us, particularly in the physicality they show. That would seem to be the major reason Skelton is getting a look in.

It's perfectly correct to say that Skelton is far from the finished product and has plenty of flaws to his game.

It's also crystal clear that we haven't been getting adequate returns from Simmons, Carter and Horwill as a group through the test season. All of them need to improve and we need to discover a balance that works.
 

Strewthcobber

Mark Ella (57)
I thought Skelton was much better last week. He was very aggressive with ball in hand. made a few half breaks. More of the same needed this week. I note that they moved him to the LH Lock position when he comes on. Smart decision. They are obviously well aware that his technique in the scrum is poor.

I really think 2015 will be a big year for Skelton. With Kane Douglas going and with the world cup in the back of Cheika's mind I could see Skelton starting the majority of games. This will have a major impact on his development. This year he's been used predominantly off the bench at all levels. The role is really one of impact, similar to an NRL bench forward. Come on, hit the ball up as many times as possible, make some big hits in defence, get involved and burn all the fuel in the tank. Starting requires a lot of more nous, intelligence, fitness, etc.

I could see Skelton's development coming on in leaps and bounds, not just fitness but his decision making and his set piece play. If you're playing the first 50 minutes, as opposed to the last 20-30 minutes it means you will have to deal with a lot more scrums and line-out and with that comes technique.

One of the benefits of having Cheika as coach of both sides is that I think we will see him using the Super Season to help Skelton mature as a player.

It will also be interesting to see whether we see Skelton being used in the Backrow (6 or 8) for the tahs at any time. I wouldn't rule it out. If Cheika can get Skelton familiar with those positions it becomes another option.
Just reflecting on that great article cardiffblue posted earlier, you really have to wonder if a guy as big as Skelton can be carried in today's game.

Sure he'll make an impact when he gets the ball or hits a ruck but there's no way he can do the running and cover the ground that guys 20kg lighter than him are doing. If you believe the article, that's what makes the difference
 

chasmac

Dave Cowper (27)
Just reflecting on that great article cardiffblue posted earlier, you really have to wonder if a guy as big as Skelton can be carried in today's game.

Sure he'll make an impact when he gets the ball or hits a ruck but there's no way he can do the running and cover the ground that guys 20kg lighter than him are doing. If you believe the article, that's what makes the difference
I suspect that he and Carter did achieve a combined 85m / minute for the full 80 minutes.
Problem was that Carter played about 70 minutes.
Also the Paddies did a good job of slowing the game with fake injuries.
On the Irish game thread, Forcefan did some good analysis of ruck involvements per 10 mins. The Carter/Skelton total involvements points to high workrate.
Can Skelton stretch himself to 20 minutes of high workrate (whilst remaining high impact).
 

fatprop

George Gregan (70)
Staff member
I reckon it took Rob Simmons 30 tests to become a reasonable scrummager and around 40 tests to really lock himself in as our first choice lock. He still makes plenty of silly mistakes (mostly around giving away penalties).

Lock is clearly an area of weakness for us, particularly in the physicality they show. That would seem to be the major reason Skelton is getting a look in.

It's perfectly correct to say that Skelton is far from the finished product and has plenty of flaws to his game.

It's also crystal clear that we haven't been getting adequate returns from Simmons, Carter and Horwill as a group through the test season. All of them need to improve and we need to discover a balance that works.


It does highlight our lack of lock depth that we have players learning their "trade" in test rugby
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top