• 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.

Reds 2017

Status
Not open for further replies.

dru

Tim Horan (67)
There is no doubt that Quade needs to look at his defence. Leaves a problem for the Reds that we just didnt need to add to Slipper.

I'm trying hard to an open mind about Jake. Lets hope he pulls it off in Argentina.
 

Dan54

Tim Horan (67)
Yellow cards don't impact your judiciary record.

The last suspension was in 2012 for a high tackle on Berrick Barnes.

Yep Braveh, and didn't he get a suspension for a tip tackle at some stage? Just think he needs to work on his tackles, and if I recall none seem premeditated, just reaction thing, which is perhaps a sign of a bit of panic in defence?
 

Sully

Tim Horan (67)
Staff member
I actually think they only took his super rugby record into account. Because his test record isn't great either.

Sent from my D5833 using Tapatalk
 

Braveheart81

Will Genia (78)
Staff member
I actually think they only took his super rugby record into account. Because his test record isn't great either.

Sent from my D5833 using Tapatalk


Are there any other suspensions besides the 2010 lifting tackle and 2012 high tackle?
 

Simon.

Bob Loudon (25)
Courier Mail says he's the most yellow carded Wallaby in history with 6 (equal with Hooper) and 5 of the 6 are for bad tackles.

Most of those would be red under the current interpretations so Cooper is a real liability going forward unless he drastically modifies his technique. If he was in top form you might justify the risk but he hasn't really shown much so far this season anyway.
 

Tangawizi

Peter Fenwicke (45)
Changing topics away from Quade, I had doubts we were getting enough go forward from our pack so I had a look at the stats on the SMH/Fairfax network.

So picture of the summary attached below since I can't work out how to embed a table properly... Pretty clear to see why Rodda was elevated above Douglas.

But is it time for Houston to get a shot to see if he can provide a lift? Possibly on a 6 man forward bench against the Pumas.

Caleb Timu will also come into calculations pretty soon.

From NZ Herald website stats section, we are 14th in Metres for the season ahead of Rebels, Brumbies, Bulls & Force but 3 of them have had byes so we aren't comparing very favourably in this department. http://www.nzherald.co.nz/rugby/statscentre.cfm
 

Attachments

  • Super Rugby - Metres by Team.png
    Super Rugby - Metres by Team.png
    75.9 KB · Views: 212
  • Reds Forward Metres Gained.png
    Reds Forward Metres Gained.png
    24.5 KB · Views: 200

Simon.

Bob Loudon (25)
Yeah, it's the standard problem the Reds have had since about 2014 - no real go-forward in forwards or backs. As with last year most of the tries have been either from line breaks off set plays or Kerevi crashing over from close range, there is very little of what we see with other teams where they continually make small gains phase after phase and apply pressure. Part of that is just because they can't retain the ball for enough phases without either coughing it up or kicking it away - nearly every time they started to get some go-forward against the Lions they inexplicably kicked it, as even the SA commentators pointed out.

I'm not sure that Houston is the answer as he has slimmed down a lot compared to his NH bulk, and in the minutes he has played he hasn't shown the powerful runs he was famous for in the NH. But at this stage it's probably worth a try.

In the Lions game last week, at one stage the Lions got a penalty within their own 22 and instead of kicking it, they took a quick tap and ran. Three phases later and they were in the Reds 22 with about half a dozen tackle busts in between. That really struck home for me - you would never see the Reds try that, ever. If the Reds had tried that they'd have hammered away for five or six phases making no ground and then turned over the ball, and probably conceded a try. And the Reds know that which is why they keep kicking it away. Unfortunately their kicking game is nowhere near good enough, you need the Highlanders' kicking game to make that work.
 

Sully

Tim Horan (67)
Staff member
The problem with bringing Houston in is he would be a replacement for either of our forwards with the most run meters. We need more meters from the front and second row not the back row.
 

upthereds#!

Ken Catchpole (46)
We are still missing an in tight enforcer. Higs and Tui are better off in the wider channels. We all know how much of a weapon Higs can be out there, compared to the wallabies usage of Fardy there.

I agree it's our tight 5 that are struggling in dominating the contact zone. We are missing a physical enforcer that you say.."here, have the ball, go make a dent", or "see that forward runner? go crush him". Often that position goes to a lock and/or a no.8. However we have 1 lock who is a 'set piece specialist", aka, useless everywhere else in Simmons, and our 6 and 8 (Tui and Higs) are coal face warriors, they are one on one champs out wide where they can keep up with backs and get the offloads off.

I thought Timu could be this, but he seems to be more H.Tui then W.Palu. I'm thinking against forward grinder teams, it needs to be Higs 6, Houston 8 with Tui giving real bench impact

But this shouldn't reallllly be an issue if you had an enforcer lock like (yes fine) Skelton or Rettalick, Etzebeth, Coleman, Tuipolotu etc. Teams like the Canes, Landers and Lions don't really have an enforcer, but man for man they possess fantastic combinations of strength and speed, and as a team, such a clear picture of their job as a squad.

Maybe our tight 5 aren't been given the chance with 'earning the right to go wide', a concept that the team seems to keep forgetting. Far too many one out, 3-5m passes to a stationary ball runner. Yes it may be a 3 man pod, but without momentum, the opposition has the advantage as they can build force as the ball is being passed and by the time they go into contact, the momentum is on teh defenders side. What we don't have is pick and drives and rapid 'same way' in tight ball runners which Genia used who direct very well. Giving the ball to forwards a couple times, does NOT equate to earning the right to go wide. You actually need to go FORWARD, draw in defenders, allow your backs to receive on the front foot, and maybe put some outside backs offside whilst you're at it.
 

amirite

Chilla Wilson (44)
Yeah, it's the standard problem the Reds have had since about 2014 - no real go-forward in forwards or backs. As with last year most of the tries have been either from line breaks off set plays or Kerevi crashing over from close range, there is very little of what we see with other teams where they continually make small gains phase after phase and apply pressure. Part of that is just because they can't retain the ball for enough phases without either coughing it up or kicking it away - nearly every time they started to get some go-forward against the Lions they inexplicably kicked it, as even the SA commentators pointed out.
This is conventional wisdom, but it's a little bit of a fallacy.

Where rugby is right now is very few teams, Kiwi teams included, score after 4 or 5 phases. There's a number of reasons for this. Professional coaches are data-driven, they know this and they coach with it in mind. There's very few teams the score tries off pure phases unless they're picking and driving (which we see a lot of teams do when they're 15m or less out), and even then that's not how most tries are scored. More often than not the outcome of this strategy is teams get a kick-at-goal or a lineout/scrum (which are far more likely to lead to a try).

This is also why we see the 3-5th phase box kick strategy, it's teams saying "Fuck it, nothing is happening, and we're unlikely to score. So, lets roost it, apply some pressure, and see what happens".

Basically, I think the issue with the Red's attack is an overall effectiveness issue, and not their inability to play British rugby and grind out phases for incremental gains.

Not shitting on your viewpoint, it's valid and is conventional wisdom, but the game has moved past that thinking.
 

Serge

Larry Dwyer (12)
For mine the primary difference between the leading teams and the rest is the ability to offload (and supporting players expecting the offload). The best teams are now doing this as the first option when going into contact, with the last option being to set up phase play. This creates a mentality where the support players are also preparing themselves for an expected offload and doing so at pace. I think most Australian teams mentality is still with the first option being phase play and the second option being offload. The Kiwi teams are particularly good at offloading - and not just the backs but all players. It is clearly being coached into them and I suspect through skills training focusing on the ability to give and receive offloads at pace in traffic. When you next watch a match have a look at it from this perspective and see if you agree. Offloads of course create major difficulty for defensive patterns and result in many metres being gained and/or tries.
 

Strewthcobber

Mark Ella (57)
Often that position goes to a lock and/or a no.8. However we have 1 lock who is a 'set piece specialist", aka, useless everywhere else in Simmons, and our 6 and 8 (Tui and Higs) are coal face warriors, they are one on one champs out wide where they can keep up with backs and get the offloads off.

Douglas has been massively disappointing. Starting to look like that one good season with the Tahs is the exception and not what should be expected from him.
 

Tangawizi

Peter Fenwicke (45)
I'm wondering how long until Rodda & Tui get trialled as our starting lock combo. I originally though Simmo would be safe all season but now I'm not sure about that.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk
 

Simon.

Bob Loudon (25)
This is conventional wisdom, but it's a little bit of a fallacy.

Where rugby is right now is very few teams, Kiwi teams included, score after 4 or 5 phases. There's a number of reasons for this. Professional coaches are data-driven, they know this and they coach with it in mind. There's very few teams the score tries off pure phases unless they're picking and driving (which we see a lot of teams do when they're 15m or less out), and even then that's not how most tries are scored. More often than not the outcome of this strategy is teams get a kick-at-goal or a lineout/scrum (which are far more likely to lead to a try).

This is also why we see the 3-5th phase box kick strategy, it's teams saying "Fuck it, nothing is happening, and we're unlikely to score. So, lets roost it, apply some pressure, and see what happens".

Basically, I think the issue with the Red's attack is an overall effectiveness issue, and not their inability to play British rugby and grind out phases for incremental gains.

Not shitting on your viewpoint, it's valid and is conventional wisdom, but the game has moved past that thinking.

I don't think we're really at odds here as I was talking more about having that impact in the first 5 or so phases rather than British-style 12+ phase grinding out 1 metre over the gain line each time.

It's putting that pressure on for a few phases that tends to get the defence scrambling which then sets up for the line break or offload. I agree that if you're going nowhere after ~7 phases it's usually time to kick it.

But the difference I see between the Reds and a lot of the top teams is that in those first 5 phases, the Reds go nowhere or even go backwards whereas the Lions on the weekend were often getting over the gain line and breaking tackles or at least requiring 2 or 3 defenders to bring them down, which creates a snowball effect where each subsequent phase is harder and harder for the defenders to contain, until eventually something gives way and you get a linebreak.
 

amirite

Chilla Wilson (44)
I don't think we're really at odds here as I was talking more about having that impact in the first 5 or so phases rather than British-style 12+ phase grinding out 1 metre over the gain line each time.

It's putting that pressure on for a few phases that tends to get the defence scrambling which then sets up for the line break or offload. I agree that if you're going nowhere after ~7 phases it's usually time to kick it.

But the difference I see between the Reds and a lot of the top teams is that in those first 5 phases, the Reds go nowhere or even go backwards whereas the Lions on the weekend were often getting over the gain line and breaking tackles or at least requiring 2 or 3 defenders to bring them down, which creates a snowball effect where each subsequent phase is harder and harder for the defenders to contain, until eventually something gives way and you get a linebreak.

Yeah, when I see the Reds play it's hugely frustrating because they have all the pieces and they're trying the right things but it's not working. I think it'll come.
 

Simon.

Bob Loudon (25)
Yeah, I think it'll come slowly too. Same story with the offloads and late, flat passes. They have the right idea there, the passes just aren't going to hand or they're going forward. The few times they have stuck the Reds have been able to break the line so I do hold out hope one game soon it will click and they'll beat a team by 20.

Not sure who that will be though. Even the Kings are looking vastly improved this season.
 

upthereds#!

Ken Catchpole (46)
I think teh Reds could really use Genia because the one thing he did reallllly well, and the one thing we are reaaaallly missing, is forwards direction. That guy, regardless of flaws, knew when and where to send the forwards as he balanced that with talking to quade to suss out when and where he wants it.

Hunt/Kerevi talk to Quade about what he is seeing, Quade answers that he has a plan. Quade says to Genia, keep pushing the forwards same way blind side, then I'll want it. Genia pushes forwards blind side. Quade calls, Genia delivers and Hunt/Kerevi etc execute their routes. That is an essential part of general play (set plays not produced from set pieces), forwards having a clear plan and direction about where they are needed and what they are needed for, whilst the backs sort their shit out. Right now, it looks like our forwards know where they need to be and what they need to do, it's just the wrong thing..in the wrong place. Then every back move seems like a set piece as the forwards have lost momentum and might as well be a scrum, so when the back move finishes and god forbid, not with a try scored!, then the whole team is like...sooo..we didn't score...box kick?
 

Luvmyrugby

Allen Oxlade (6)
In the little bit of time Jake had at the end of the Sharks game I thought he seemed a lot quicker and played much flatter than he did last year. He even did a loop!



All this chit chat abut McIntyre, Tuttle, DP etc. They are all kids who play like kids. None have been hardened or learned their trade in tough mature club rugby. All have come through some kind of "pathway" identified by some High performance unit (another name for poor performance unit); sheltered, cossetted and told that they are stars. They spend years never playing much footy, and then every now and then get thrown in the deep end and either get injured or go out the back door. Lets start a list
Fakosilea (never that great just big,went off to the Brumbies and now dropped)
Placid (never that great but believed all his own press, went off to the Rebels, ended up on the bench and now injured)
Jack Tuttle (went off to Broncos 20s, came back as the next big thing and got thrown into the fire. where is he now?)
etc etc
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top