Wallabies 2019 Thread

[Brumby Runner]

Well you'd want to know how the opposition lined up so you could call to where they are not, or where they are weak.

But the opposition just reforms to take account of the way the team in possession lines up. This argument is a bit of nonsense imo.

 

[Strewthcobber]

But the opposition just reforms to take account of the way the team in possession lines up. This argument is a bit of nonsense imo.

It's not an argument BR. It's what is happening when teams walk up to a lineout

 

[barbarian]

But the opposition just reforms to take account of the way the team in possession lines up. This argument is a bit of nonsense imo.

I disagree. A team can't just 'reform' their lineout. If their best jumper is standing at 6 he can't just run up to 2. There is scope for a few minor shifts but nothing substantial.
.

 

[Strewthcobber]

Without necessarily agreeing or disagreeing, just how does that present a problem?
.

It's not a problem. But it does mean he is going to lose out on selection at times.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

 

[Brumby Runner]

Let's put the lineout issue to bed.

There are too many options these days for a lineout caller to have the final (or even the major) say in which play to adopt in most circumstances.

Will the throw be to the front, the middle or the back, or even over the back? Will the jumper being moving backwards or forwards or standing still at the target point? Will the catcher tip the ball back to the half (or acting half) or to the hooker running around the back? Or will he catch it in both hands and than pass or bring it to ground? Will the catcher immediately be brought to ground or will he be held in the air for a second or two to try to win a penalty? If he brings the ball to ground, will a maul be formed or will he pass to a prop or hooker running around from the back? If he tips to the acting half or passes to the acting half, will it lead to a maul initiated by the acting half or will it be passed to the backline for play? If the catcher tips or passes to the hooker running around the back, will it then lead to a maul or will he act as distributor to the backline or just form a pod with other forwards and attack the gain line? If it is a throw to the front of the lineout, will it go back to the hooker for a run down the line? If the ball (on rare occasions) goes to the backline, will there be a hit up in the 12 channel or will it go wide?

There are simply too many options and decisions to be made to have it all contained within a code as called by the lineout caller. These are strategic type decisions that seem to me are sorted out in a collegiate fashion in the forwards get together before each lineout. The call on the play to be adopted must be made by team leaders, and in the case of the Wallabies, I would say those players are Coleman and Pocock, not the so called lineout general. Once the play has been decided, the prop simply conveys the necessary info to the hooker so that he knows where to lob the throw.

A team that relies on the traditional caller model in lineouts will be denying itself so many potential plays. I just cannot see lineouts still being run as they might have been in the pre-professional era when the caller was king.

The huddle before a lineout imo is to decide and organise the resulting play from the lineout rather than to have a sneaky look at how the opposition is lined up.

 

[fatprop]

Yeah nah, you are playing against another lineout, it isn't an unopposed practice, you have to react and adjust

 

[Brumby Runner]

Yeah nah, you are playing against another lineout, it isn't an unopposed practice, you have to react and adjust

Agreed, but most of that adjustment will come after the ball is thrown in. It will not be dictated by the lineout call.

 

[Up the Guts]

It's a bit of a moot point because neither provide the utility of Hodge off the bench. If we go for a 5-3 split i'd much rather see Rona on there. That provides us with theoretical cover for every position in the backline, with DHP moving to fullback if Folau gets injured.

Maximum utility off the bench.

I don’t see the need for Hodge and Rona. Hodge can play 13 if TK goes down, in fact Hodge can play any position in the backline so I don’t think it matters too much who he is paired with. I think the time has come where we have sufficient depth and player quality that we can start introducing rookies one at a time to expose them to test rugby.

 

[Derpus]

Agreed, but most of that adjustment will come after the ball is thrown in. It will not be dictated by the lineout call.

This doesn't make any sense. The play is called before the throw and what play is decided upon will depend on what's happened earlier in the match, field position, perceived strengths and weaknesses etc.

If you've thrown two to the front and both and been lost, the caller would be wise to call it elsewhere next time. After the throw there is nothing to do but execute. No time for anything else.

 

[Derpus]

I don’t see the need for Hodge and Rona. Hodge can play 13 if TK goes down, in fact Hodge can play any position in the backline so I don’t think it matters too much who he is paired with. I think the time has come where we have sufficient depth and player quality that we can start introducing rookies one at a time to expose them to test rugby.

Hodge can't play 13 or 15 beyond mediocre. His best is 12 and wing. 10 in an emergency. I'd rather have Rona who can actually play and defend 13. Plus Rona is a rookie, essentially.

 

[Braveheart81]

Let's put the lineout issue to bed.

There are too many options these days for a lineout caller to have the final (or even the major) say in which play to adopt in most circumstances.

This all seems to be a convoluted argument to try and suggest that Simmons shouldn't be selected and Arnold should.

Given the importance coaches place in selecting their lineout callers it would appear that they disagree with you both on how lineout calling is done and how easy it is to upskill someone else to take over the job.



Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[fatprop]

Agreed, but most of that adjustment will come after the ball is thrown in. It will not be dictated by the lineout call.

rubbish

 

[Slim 293]

Arnold is excellent in the lineout - he’s got great height/reach, and for his size still manages to get up quickly and he’s tough to pick off (although the Chiefs got an early steal on the weekend).

He’s been the Brumbies primary target, and is the Australian leader in lineouts taken this year.

Buuuuuuut he doesn’t run the Brumbies lineout, and he won’t be doing it for the Wobs - it’s not part of his skillset.

That’s an area for Coleman to work on, and having Simmons around can hopefully impart some of that wisdom.

We used to have quite a number of lineout savvy locks that lacked a physical presence around the ground, and now we’re going the other way.

 

[Rock Lobster]

I think some of you blokes are missing the point Brumby Runner is making. First of all he is 100% correct that the team in possession dictates the numbers and set up of the lineout. How many players the defending team has standing there waiting for them is totally irrelevant. Any adjustments made are by the defending team, not the team throwing it in. And how often these days do you see both sides form the lineout and then have someone call out their specific code for the thrower? Not often. As BR has tried to explain, most lineout formations and calls these days are made in a huddle before the prop whispers the call behind his hand to the hooker getting ready to throw it in. Now of course that decision may ultimately rest with your chief lineout caller, whoever that may be but the role has certainly changed in the last few years. Your lineout tactician could be anyone in the forward pack with half a brain, not necessarily a lock.

 

[Strewthcobber]

I think some of you blokes are missing the point Brumby Runner is making. First of all he is 100% correct that the team in possession dictates the numbers and set up of the lineout. How many players the defending team has standing there waiting for them is totally irrelevant. Any adjustments made are by the defending team, not the team throwing it in. And how often these days do you see both sides form the lineout and then have someone call out their specific code for the thrower? Not often. As BR has tried to explain, most lineout formations and calls these days are made in a huddle before the prop whispers the call behind his hand to the hooker getting ready to throw it in. Now of course that decision may ultimately rest with your chief lineout caller, whoever that may be but the role has certainly changed in the last few years. Your lineout tactician could be anyone in the forward pack with half a brain, not necessarily a lock.

I understand the position - it's just wrong.

The attacking team absolutely does adjust how they set up and where the ball is thrown in depending on how the defensive lineout has set up. They absolutely do adjust calls on the way from the huddle and in the lineout itself.

The lineout caller also runs things defensively as well - which is where the very best can make such a difference.

And the reason that it's usually a lock is because it's them that's done it for 100s of games for their entire rugby career. They have built up the required experience

 

[Slim 293]

Just to add to my above rant - a promising statistic is that Coleman is Australia’s top lineout thief this year...........

 

[TSR]

I disagree Rock Lobster. The defensive team sets the formation of the lineout first, because they set up first. The attacking team then calls and sets up in response with the foremost aim being to win the ball. Plenty of teams have talked about there specific defensive strategies employed to push attacking line outs to either throwing or avoiding certain areas.

The caller doesn’t have to be a lock. Ben Mowen was considered a very good caller. But it will always be a jumper, as they are integral to the lineout operation, and are trained and experienced in the nuances.

In defence being able to read the other side, react to their set up and movement and mobilise the troops quickly is vital.

Like most parts of rugby that are more intuitive, some people are very good at it and some people struggle with it. Not saying people can’t learn, but there are always some people who read play better than others - even at the highest level where margins for error are smallest.

Although you and Brumby Runner may not consider it to be an essential trait, there is plenty of evidence that at a higher level the consensus is that it is. It is worth noting that earlier this season it was reported that Rob Simmons was voted players player in a match, specifically on the impact he had had on the teams line out.

 

[cyclopath]

Just to add to my above rant - a promising statistic is that Coleman is Australia’s top lineout thief this year.....

Indeed. He's a bloody good operator. Very important player for Aus in so many ways.

 

[Brumby Runner]

This doesn't make any sense. The play is called before the throw and what play is decided upon will depend on what's happened earlier in the match, field position, perceived strengths and weaknesses etc.

If you've thrown two to the front and both and been lost, the caller would be wise to call it elsewhere next time. After the throw there is nothing to do but execute. No time for anything else.

We're really on the same page Derpus, just that you are putting the credit for all that pre-planning (which you seem to call adjustment) down to the caller. I am saying it is a collegiate decision taken by the forwards as a bunch but directed by the strategic leaders (imo Coleman and Pocock) who will also take account of all those preceding aspects of the game. The traditional caller (say Simmons) would have input into the construction of the lineout to best serve the tactical/strategic decision led by the strategic leaders. It just doesn't stand to reason that one player (who is often coming in off the bench and has little feel for the nuances of the game to that point) would be solely, or even mostly, responsible for the call in the game plays.

I had interpreted your comment on the need for adjustments to be following the throw if something went amiss. Hence my reply earlier.

 

[Brumby Runner]

I think some of you blokes are missing the point Brumby Runner is making. First of all he is 100% correct that the team in possession dictates the numbers and set up of the lineout. How many players the defending team has standing there waiting for them is totally irrelevant. Any adjustments made are by the defending team, not the team throwing it in. And how often these days do you see both sides form the lineout and then have someone call out their specific code for the thrower? Not often. As BR has tried to explain, most lineout formations and calls these days are made in a huddle before the prop whispers the call behind his hand to the hooker getting ready to throw it in. Now of course that decision may ultimately rest with your chief lineout caller, whoever that may be but the role has certainly changed in the last few years. Your lineout tactician could be anyone in the forward pack with half a brain, not necessarily a lock.

Thank you RL. You have seen through the smoke and mirrors of those arguing some sort of mystical power in calling lineouts that only the fabulous Rob Simmons pssesses in Aus rugby.

How anyone on here, or elsewhere (including coaches), could think that the lineout caller is solely or largely responsible for deciding which plays will follow the lineout is way beyond my realms of believability. As you say, lineout calls are fast becoming a thing of the past and where tried are usually disrupted by the antics of the opposition or the crowd noise. It is just not conceivable that in the huddle to decide what play will be attempted, the pack leader/team leader is not the primary driver of that decision, including where to throw, how the ball is to be secured and how the play will then progress. The wjhole pack, minus the hooker, will be involved in that decision process and the so-called caller will have input into how best to set up the lineout and who is nominated as the catcher, the lifters and who will feign to jump at the front if appropriate.

You know it makes sense.