Wallabies v USA Eagles, 5th September, Soldier Field, Chicago

[saulih]

That Eagles try did show the obvious benefit of having an out and out speedster - someone who if given any space is a sure bet to score.

The USA has a predilection for this strategy - worked wonders in Sevens when they had Carlin Isles. Stems from NFL and it's extreme specialization in playing roles.

 

[BarneySF]

The USA has a predilection for this strategy - worked wonders in Sevens when they had Carlin Isles. Stems from NFL and it's extreme specialization in playing roles.

Yeah IIRC he smoked Habana (probably the most consistent outright speed merchant of late?) at least once at the last RWC? Trying to recall our last genuine pace man - on paper at least, Turner?

(running out of descriptors for these rapidity demons)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[A mutterer]

I've had some time to think and agree Foley had a good game, especially with Sanchez on.

This has lead me to a diagnosis of why our 10's play so deep. It's to have a better chance to run back and recover one of Phipps passes.

 

[Train Without a Station]

This has lead me to a diagnosis of why our 10's play so deep. It's to have a better chance to run back and recover one of Phipps passes.

No. Our 10's play deep when we are getting slow ball, because if they play flat they will be tackled immediately upon catching the ball. They play deeper to allow time to catch and distribute.

 

[Pfitzy]

And to run onto the ball as well - no good if the halfback is pinging it straight at you.

 

[Pfitzy]

Cheikaball relies (as does the strategy of every rugby nation) on forwards penetrating and as such Palu is still best 8 option with Mumm & Simmons

I think McCalman is equally as good as Palu at the gain line creation these days.

Problem is, without the tight five working their arses off, chances for the back row are limited. And because Simmons was short of a gallop, and Holmes isn't very mobile, the balance was a little iffy.

 

[BDA]

I do think that Genia looked very good when he came on, although the opposition faded badly in the second half so it was a bit of an armchair ride.

The decision of Phipps v Genia moving forward is a difficult one. Phipps certainly gives quicker service, whilst Genia's passing game is more accurate.

Also I noticed that Genia has joined the 60 cap club and will be available for tests next year if needed.

 

[Pfitzy]

Someone said it earlier, but all our bench halfbacks looked better than the starters in our Tests this year.

Genia started well, then started his two-steps-backwards thing as the game wore on. Again, short of a gallop, but really he should be flinging those from the deck.

 

[cyclopath]

Genia certainly upped the pace, and created some doubt / hesitation in the defence taking a couple of steps with ball in hand.
BUT - do that against a better organised defence around the breakdown and he would have been smashed like Phipps. The protection for Phipps was non-existent at times and I'm sure Cheika, Ledesma and Grey would not have been happy with that. Not diminishing Genia's time on the field, he was a step up without doubt, but it's never easy comparing starters to finishers when the pattern of the game has changed. Cheika's task is to tailor the finishers to exploit the opportunities that might be presented when the opposition structure changes.
With the rush defence being utilised by the Eagles, I was again disappointed with the Wallabies' apparent lack of much in the way of options to counter it. Foley did one good chip kick that bounced away from him, but was put into a good space behind their defence. Other than that, not much. They need to work on this - I'm sure it won't be the last time we see a rush defence against the Wallabies over the next couple of months!

 

[fatprop]

I do think that Genia looked very good when he came on, although the opposition faded badly in the second half so it was a bit of an armchair ride.

The decision of Phipps v Genia moving forward is a difficult one. Phipps certainly gives quicker service, whilst Genia's passing game is more accurate.

Also I noticed that Genia has joined the 60 cap club and will be available for tests next year if needed.

Cheika said afterwards that Genia's performance was helped by the pigs getting off their arses in the second half (and USA running out of puff) they (the US) were allowed to stream through too often in the first half without being duly smited

But Genia did make good use of the better ball

 

[Beefcake]

I suspect that if we are well behind after 50 mins in a knockout game you may well see Cheika go for the doctor and put Kurtley at 12 to finish. He is easily the best creative 12 we have and works very well with Folau. That's why he will be in the 23 jumper. But we'll start with either Giteau or To'omua.

KB (Kurtley Beale) perhaps works well when the limits are well defined and his role allows for maximum expression, perhaps QC (Quade Cooper) has also assumed this role - best for the later half as you have indicated.

It was a curious sight to see, Foley, KB (Kurtley Beale) & QC (Quade Cooper) all on the park, throw in Izzy and a rocketed TK could have an interesting formula of uncalculated play

 

[Brumby Runner]

Beale ran across in cover, rather than being outside Tomane initially, and got stepped by the Eagles player easily turning inside making Beale overrun the play.
Hard to blame one player here - there was a 1-2 player overlap for the Eagles to start with, and our defensive alignment on that side was very passive against the Eagles sudden breakout - no defender was going in the right direction really. Paul was outmatched by the fastest Eagles player (and in fact the ball was passed wide of him before he even got anywhere near the defensive line), Tomane was going backwards and had to turn, and Beale was going almost flat out laterally making it too easy to be stepped. The Eagles exploited it very well.
Watch the GIF posted above.

Would like to see somebody who might be close to Nathan Gray and who can put these video clips together do an analysis of the defensive patterns adopted by the Tahs and Wallabies under Gray's management. Perhaps it would explain why we often have overlaps coming at the last man in the defensive line, as occurred in the action in question and as happened with regularity in last year's EOYT. Is it a deliberate ploy to try to run the attack into or over the sideline? Or is it just that the structure falls down from time to time? And then, how should that situation be best handled and who is most capable of handling it? Is it a problem area caused by the poorer defenders inside and having to cover for them?

 

[USARugger]

The USA has a predilection for this strategy - worked wonders in Sevens when they had Carlin Isles. Stems from NFL and it's extreme specialization in playing roles.

Works wonders in 7s for every nation - our fast blokes just tend to be a step quicker than other teams' fast blokes up to this point. The USA 7s as it is now is really showing the quality of athlete left in the NFL/MLB/NBA/Olympics overflow and amongst the USA Rugby domestic pool but it's exaggerated in effectiveness by the open and less strategic nature of 7s. It'll be a while I think before we start to catch up in 15s where athleticism only gets you so far and the impact of the right kind of coaching, skills, thinking, and execution really shines through over 80 minutes.

Still working wonders with Isles and now especially so with Baker, who is a pretty complete 7s player.

Glad to see Ngwenya hitting some form though as he was really hot-cold over the last 24~ months or so. Easily our best out-and-out winger that we've had in a very long time.

 

[Beefcake]

I think McCalman is equally as good as Palu at the gain line creation these days.

Problem is, without the tight five working their arses off, chances for the back row are limited. And because Simmons was short of a gallop, and Holmes isn't very mobile, the balance was a little iffy.

Perhaps. I do think Mumm and Simmons (best lock pairing) play better (aggressively) with Palu at 8, particularly renown for his heavy handedness in attack n D. Although Palu is a slow starter, history shows we should see his performances on the ascent. Or not.

TPN (and his contribution) is another player that is critical to the fortunes of the Wobs forward play. I liked his example of crash ball, hard and low. Mix this up with Poey/Hooper and tip-ons to Palu and Mumm (similar to those employed by the darkness) off the ruck, tight five may be jostling for the ball. Thought TPN had and needed a solid showing.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Genia certainly upped the pace, and created some doubt / hesitation in the defence taking a couple of steps with ball in hand.
BUT - do that against a better organised defence around the breakdown and he would have been smashed like Phipps. The protection for Phipps was non-existent at times and I'm sure Cheika, Ledesma and Grey would not have been happy with that. Not diminishing Genia's time on the field, he was a step up without doubt, but it's never easy comparing starters to finishers when the pattern of the game has changed. Cheika's task is to tailor the finishers to exploit the opportunities that might be presented when the opposition structure changes.
With the rush defence being utilised by the Eagles, I was again disappointed with the Wallabies' apparent lack of much in the way of options to counter it. Foley did one good chip kick that bounced away from him, but was put into a good space behind their defence. Other than that, not much. They need to work on this - I'm sure it won't be the last time we see a rush defence against the Wallabies over the next couple of months!

Genia had a hard time too with that. I'm the first to criticize Will be he actually did some good things. At one point we lost the ball due poor work at the breakdown and Will actually ripped the ball straight back from the Yank as he got up, and put in a very good box kick to defend against a line out inside their 22.

 

[Brumby Runner]

Well, I was watching the GIF posted above to work out why it all went pear-shaped, and I also noticed #11 standing on the right wing. Dunno why they had swapped, but they had.
But yeah, it would have helped if we didn't give the ball back to them to start with!

I noticed on one occasion when Horne found himself on the RHS after an attacking move, he was waving and pointing towards the other side of the field. I took that as an indication to Joe to get to the other side to cover the space then on the left wing.

Anyone who watched the Brumbies closely in SuperXV would have seen that it was a fairly regular occurrence for the wingers to swap sides. I assume it was for similar situations to this one.

 

[Braveheart81]

I find it interesting that Palu has been roundly slated again for his performance and McCalman is picking up some MOTM votes (mostly 1 point from people who have voted for him). My take on it was that their contributions were fairly equal when both were on the field.

 

[Brumby Runner]

I think McCalman is equally as good as Palu at the gain line creation these days.

Problem is, without the tight five working their arses off, chances for the back row are limited. And because Simmons was short of a gallop, and Holmes isn't very mobile, the balance was a little iffy.

Don't think the question of either Palu or McCalman bending the line will come up in the big RWC games. Both Hooper and Pocock will (or should) start and both are better at bending and breaking the line than either of Cliff or Ben.

 

[Brumby Runner]

Genia certainly upped the pace, and created some doubt / hesitation in the defence taking a couple of steps with ball in hand.
BUT - do that against a better organised defence around the breakdown and he would have been smashed like Phipps. The protection for Phipps was non-existent at times and I'm sure Cheika, Ledesma and Grey would not have been happy with that. Not diminishing Genia's time on the field, he was a step up without doubt, but it's never easy comparing starters to finishers when the pattern of the game has changed. Cheika's task is to tailor the finishers to exploit the opportunities that might be presented when the opposition structure changes.
With the rush defence being utilised by the Eagles, I was again disappointed with the Wallabies' apparent lack of much in the way of options to counter it. Foley did one good chip kick that bounced away from him, but was put into a good space behind their defence. Other than that, not much. They need to work on this - I'm sure it won't be the last time we see a rush defence against the Wallabies over the next couple of months!

My impression is that the structure of the game changed with the introduction of Genia, not that Genia came on after the structure had changed. And it was the Wallabies who then changed their structure rather than the Eagles. Until Will came on, none of the outside backs saw the ball at all in attack. I think it was his affect on the game that slowed the Eagles' rush defense, by his inclination to snipe and offer variety at the scrum and ruck base.

It is not coincidental that 5 tries were scored in the second half, and I think all were scored after Will came on, and the outside backs were much more involved in the game in that last 20 minutes as well.

Foley's chip kick not only bounced the wrong way, but it was a few meters too long as well. Probably wasn't going to retrieve it regardless of the bounce. So I'd not regard it as a good kick, but emblematic of the problems the Wallabies have with field kicking in general.

The Wallabies certainly do need to work on ways to counter a rush defense. They didn't handle it at all well in Saturday's game. The first XV will no doubt do a better job.

 

[barbarian]

The one thing Genia needs to work on is his trademark box kick after a turnover. In the early years it worked a treat, rolling the ball into the corner with precision.

But now it's so predictable that wingers drop back, completely aware of what is coming next. You can see him move into position 10 seconds before it happens, and even at home you know what's coming next.

He had one such moment on Saturday, where we got a turnover, he went for the box kick and though he executed it well enough, the US winger had already dropped back and it went right down his throat. Maybe time to shelve that tactic.
.