• 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.

What is wrong with our attack?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Cutter

Nicholas Shehadie (39)
Since starting this I see Scott has done a video analysis of our attack against Scotland which covers some of the same points. But, for what its worth...

I've said I think its Gits fault. As the leader of the backs and of our attack, the responsibility for organising and, to a degree executing it is down to Gits. However, its a midfield problem and by that I mean 10, 12, 13 and 15. Its also a quick ball problem in that the opposition backrow is slowing the ball down. I don't think that is necessarily a Wallaby specific problem but its hurting us more because our attack is so confused.

I've only seen each of the tour games once, but the problems I can see, focussing mostly on the Scotland game, are as follows:

1. Our attack is predictable;
2. Outside players have no space in which to work;
3. There is little variation of the lines of attack or the depth of attack;
4. There is no support to capitalise on half breaks;
5. Kicking when we should run.

Gits only plays seem to be drifting across field and looking for runners or drifting across field and then stepping back inside. Occasionally he throws an attacking kick into the mix. When he is kicking defensively, he stands far too deep so as to broadcast his intentions. Even when we are attacking, he is standing very deep. If he wasnt standing so deep, he wouldnt have as much time to drift.

If Gits drifts across field, there need to be runners angling back in to hold up the defence. Currently, only Ioane does this although he didn't do it as much against Ireland as against England. Cross doesn't do it. AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) doesnt do it from fullback (though he does at 13) and Cooper has only done it a couple of times. In any event, he isnt big enough to play a crash ball role. On the weekend, Cooper and Cross were both drifting with Gits meaning that they had no space to work in out wide. Even when AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) joined the backline, there was plenty of defence and any switches were obvious because there was no room outside. As such, they ran right into a solid defensive line.

When Moore was held up, Gits was running across field, drew two defenders and Moore ran the gap. However, the defence wised up to this somewhat and continued to drift but with plenty of cover on the inside if Gits did step back inside. There was another example where Cooper ran a straight line but the defence picked it. However they were two of very few straight runners outside Gits.

Players running straight or switching early, even with dummy switches, will cause the defence to hesitate or slow their drift which creates space out wide.

The try that Elsom scored against Ireland and the Mitchell try that was disallowed against Scotland were both scored from phase play when Cooper came from depth creating an extra man. However, that isn't happening often enough.

We haven't seen any evidence of either Gits or Cooper taking the ball to the line and throwing a wide pass to either 13 or 15 in space. The first try Australia scored against Ireland was as a result of an error in ROG trying to find BOD outside Diggers. ie exactly the move Larkham used thousands of times with firstly Herbert and then Mortlock at 13. Notwithstanding the Irish error, its a good move. Why havent we seen that?

Giteau is actually one of the best players in the world at beating a man one on one. However, he isnt choosing his targets. Note to Gits: try going around Nathan Hines (as Britney did for his break) not Jonny Wilkinson. QC (Quade Cooper) is also capable of this but is intent on either kicking the ball or throwing cut out passes. He did this a few times on the weekend and killed overlaps. We have to stop the defence drifting. A relatively simple set piece move which stops the drift and creates space would be (assuming same positions as Ireland game) QC (Quade Cooper) to switch with Digby. Digby switches with Gits looping around who then has QC (Quade Cooper), AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) and a winger outside him. Ideally, the Diggers switch will have drawn both the 10 and 12 meaning our 4 will be up against their 3 (13, 14 and 15) plus any cover defence.

Barnes is usually quite good at stopping Giteau's drift because he holds his line better. This gives more space out wide. Barnes is also a good support player and often links with, for example, AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) when he makes breaks. AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) is a line breaker but is rarely a support player in the same way Latham was. In his defence, Latham was able to run off Mortlock whereas AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) doesnt have much to run off at the moment. The blindside winger needs to work harder in support as do the backrowers.

So, breaking down each position:

10. Gits - lack of confidence? No runners outside? Maybe all of the above. But if its the runners, why doesnt he get them doing it? What do they train? He needs to straighten more often because it gives him the option of using inside runners (either the blind winger or forwards) and will stop the drift. Off phase ball, the Wallabies are often using 2 or 3 forwards standing very flat as dummy runners off the halfback which allows Gits, who stands much deeper, more space. However, this means that its congested inside and it takes away inside ball options. I can see why they are doing it, and maybe they only do it from slow ball, but it does limit what Gits can do and, possibly, subconciously makes him drift to get away from the congestion.

12. QC (Quade Cooper) - doesnt have the discipline to stop himself running across field and isnt a gap runner. Aaron Mauger was a classic NZ second five but he often ran a straight or angled line off Carter et al. He often made breaks running that line too. QC (Quade Cooper) isnt doing that.

13. I'm not surprised Cross is drifting because that is his game. I wouldnt have picked him for this tour because he can't beat good defences unless he gets outside his man. That being his strength, you would think Gits would be using the wide ball to Cross running that line but its not happening. Cross needs to start running at gaps, running angles and getting outside his man so Gits can hit him wide.

15. I'm reluctant to criticise AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) because he is our best back at the moment and you know he gives everything. However, he plays fullback like a centre, doesn't vary his angle enough (though this is probably partly because he is cramped for room out wide), doesnt vary his point of entry enough and doesnt support inside breaks well (again, possibly because he is always being pushed wide). If Cross is trying to get outside his man and the 13 follows him, AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) should run inside Cross. If the 12 covers AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper), it will open up space for Cooper.

I don't pretend that this is rocket surgery. Any schoolboy knows this stuff. I know all the Wallabies know it. I know Robbie Deans knows it, Richard Graham knows it, Jim Williams (ex winger) knows it. Hell, even Noriega probably knows it. The question is, why arent they executing these basic skills? Maybe Eddie Jones, who is a very smart rugby thinker, is right when he says Deans is trying to get them playing a game they don't understand.

Edit: added the wallaby icon.
 
R

rugbywhisperer

Guest
Good report Cutter.
I am not too sure when it started but when Gits started to do his cross field running - our attack started to stall.
Your comments re not enough room are very apt as he had developed his cross field running to the point where an attack has easy pickings on any player carrying the ball, their tracking lines are enhanced incredibly and because we actually make far less forward motion we now see that our backs are incapable of crossing the gain line at all.
I have been screaming for ages for it to stop, surely a coach somewhere has seen the damage this crossfield running is doing and now we have an attack that has no answers.
I am not even sure putting 12 on his back is the answer.
If Gits is to be in the team, then I agree 15 may be a go as this will give him some options, it will allow a new 10/12 combo to get sorted and straighten out the attack.
Our predictability is of course a problem and that stems from Jones. We have no spontanaety at all however a new 10/12 may be a solution.
The third problem I see is the increasing first option to kick.
This now is becomming a blight not only on our game but I think the Welsh actually kicked more than us last weekend - and with as little effect.
Basically a midfield kick has three goals - to gain ground (touch), to put the defender under pressure and a subsequent gain in ground or to provide an attack. NONE, NONE of there are coming off. There is absolutely no thought at all on our kicks and it has become a cheap cowards way out of avoiding doing some actual backline work. Bob Dwyer and McQueen must be shaking their heads to see our once worlds best backline attack be reduced to garbage like this. If I were a tight forward (what am I saying - I am a tight forward) and I continually saw my hard won ball being so casually wasted time after time only to see the opposition return it with interest, I would be having a quiet word with that back in camera.
 

Scotty

David Codey (61)
As I was reading this I was thinking about when our backline has looked the best this year, and I believe it was in the last 20 minutes vs the South Africans in Perth, and perhaps also in Brisbane.

In the last 20 minutes in Perth QC (Quade Cooper) had come into the 10 role, while Giteau pushed out. The key was he didn't just push out to 12, he pushed right out to a deep 13 or even a roving fullback type role. This allowed us to have two lines of attack, and QC (Quade Cooper) had the option of passing short to the 12 who was straightening, or long to Giteau in behind who was taking the outside line at pace. It looked fantastic and the speed of it had the Boks struggling (ignoring the fact they had already won the game).

If Deans wants to keep the same XV, I wouldn't mind if he had Giteau at either 13 or fullback, with Cross at 12 and QC (Quade Cooper) at 10. Giteau as a wide runner gives the inside men more options, because he can run good lines. Deans also needs to instruct AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) to go looking for the ball at every opportunity.
 

Scarfman

Knitter of the Scarf
Does anyone remember all the way back to the June tests? We were ecstatic at the way Giteau was taking the ball running forward and kicking to the corners. SOme of us were havig to admit that we'd got it wrong - Gits was a 10 after all. Then they played better sides and Gits went to absolute shit.
 

Aussie D

Dick Tooth (41)
Why has our attack gone to shit?
1. As others have stated poor to zero support play.
2. Our attack is too flat (no depth).
3. Our backs can't pass properly i.e. in front of the player running onto the ball (this may come back to point two).
4. Our kicking game lacks imagination or common sense - kicking should be done with one purpose - to enable a contest for possession (hopefully in your sides favour) with a gain in ground. We need to contest lineouts in defence to achieve this aim.
5. As others have stated their doesn't seem to be too much imagination going into our plays.
6. Too much league influence in the way our players are trying to play the game, hence all the crabbing across field. All our players seem to be going for the outside break. The 10 should be running at his opposites inside shoulder (with the blind winger running an angle on his inside ala Joe Roff - to put doubt into the mind of the defending openside and HB who would be coming across as cover); The 12 & 13 should be straightening to the gaps inside their opposites' (try to stop the defence from drifting) shoulder, the fullback starting behind and slightly inside his own 13 (they are gay backs after all :huxley ) and run a line outside the opposition 13 and look to draw the opposing winger (if flat) to set his own winger free or, if deep, look to link with inside supports (presuming he gets the ball). This is done off a set piece of course.
 

disco

Chilla Wilson (44)
Quote from Eddie Jones.

Justifiably after last weekend's debacle against Scotland, former Australian coach Eddie Jones described their attack as ''not too flash'' and he feels the reason is because the New Zealand style of attack coached by Robbie Deans does not suit Australian players.

''I think we've lost that instinctive way we play, and we stand wide and we're lateral and we play like a New Zealand side,'' Jones told Sky Sports Radio. ''Robbie has a way of coaching, and I think he's a very successful coach, but I don't think his style of attack suits the Australian players and that's something he's going to learn over the next period of time.

''You've got to learn instinct. Whilst some players are born naturally with it - the Giteaus and the Carters - the others, you've got to coach into it and it's the structure you put around them to allow them to play.

''It's about the way the game is at the moment. Most sides play rugby league defence, that's quite obvious, and you can't play an old-style rugby union attack where you stand deep and you stand wide and you expect to beat them on the outside. You just don't beat defences on the outside. You've got to work the defence, take the ball to the line, ask questions of the defence, and that's where I think we've really lost it in terms of our attack. You can see with Australia how many times players get run into the sideline.

''I think [Deans is] a very good coach; he does need to change his methods a little bit, the Australian players are different to New Zealand players. New Zealand players have generally been the best in world rugby because they have been physically stronger and faster than anyone else.

''Australian sides traditionally, while physically we go OK, our point of difference has been that we've been tactically and strategically a little better than other teams.

I personally think Eddie is a bit of a tosser but I do agree with what he's saying. It makes me think of a comment from a Kiwi commentator during Bledisloe 2 in Wellington year 2000.

The All Blacks 2nd try scored by Cullen where it was the sweetest set piece move of all time & the commentator said "we've out aussied the aussies" & it was true we are the past masters of set backline moves.

Brumbies 2004 was easily the most entertaining team to watch the usually played with about 40% possesion scored plenty of tries from turnover & set piece.
 

Aussie D

Dick Tooth (41)
I disagree with Eddie's assertion that "you can't beat players on the outside playing traditional rugby" (to paraphrase) as traditionally there was plenty of running off the ball and defence confused but these days it is all about the individual.
 

Thomond78

Colin Windon (37)
Aussie D said:
I disagree with Eddie's assertion that "you can't beat players on the outside playing traditional rugby" (to paraphrase) as traditionally there was plenty of running off the ball and defence confused but these days it is all about the individual.

I'd also disagree with it; France, Ireland and others have managed successfully to do just that, as on occasions did SA in the Lions game and as did Wales at times in 2008 (their creativity has gone markedly backwards, btw).

The big thing for me is teams that can do that all seem to have a full-back who's dangerous coming into the line and who can hold the midfield up as the outside man drifts out, or even slot in their themselves. Comments?
 

Cutter

Nicholas Shehadie (39)
Thomond78 said:
Aussie D said:
I disagree with Eddie's assertion that "you can't beat players on the outside playing traditional rugby" (to paraphrase) as traditionally there was plenty of running off the ball and defence confused but these days it is all about the individual.

I'd also disagree with it; France, Ireland and others have managed successfully to do just that, as on occasions did SA in the Lions game and as did Wales at times in 2008 (their creativity has gone markedly backwards, btw).

The big thing for me is teams that can do that all seem to have a full-back who's dangerous coming into the line and who can hold the midfield up as the outside man drifts out, or even slot in their themselves. Comments?

Agreed. That's what ROG was trying to do with the first play of the Ire v Aus test when BOD spilled the ball.
 

Gagger

Nick Farr-Jones (63)
Staff member
Also not sure I go with Eddie's assessment of how the Kiwis are scoring their tries.

"Simple" catch pass that draws the man and takes the space with the inside offload seems to be the recipe at the moment. Cowans try started by Sivi against the poms was a pretty good example.
 

Scotty

David Codey (61)
''You've got to learn instinct. Whilst some players are born naturally with it - the Giteaus and the Carters - the others, you've got to coach into it and it's the structure you put around them to allow them to play.

I wonder if he has any idea of how stupid this sounds.

From dictionary.com, the definition of instinct:

1. an inborn pattern of activity or tendency to action common to a given biological species.
2. a natural or innate impulse, inclination, or tendency.
3. a natural aptitude or gift: an instinct for making money.
4. natural intuitive power.
 

fatprop

George Gregan (70)
Staff member
I think the Attack is OK (we do need more effort off the ball), our finishing is the issue.

How many times have we been held up over the line or dropped the ball with the line open this season?
 
S

Spook

Guest
Beale show them how to do it. 2 blokes coming for him but he was already sliding towards the try line.
 

HG

Jimmy Flynn (14)
Another woeful comment by Eggie Jones.
The guy is full of it. The players never understood what he was saying nor do I in this case.
More sour grapes.
The Kiwis have been the benchmark for years apart form their 4 yearly choke.
 

Viking

Mark Ella (57)
I think a major problem is that most of our players are playing out of position. They are still learning their position when instead they should be specialising in it. Giteau has only played 10 for about 2 years in his lifetime, He is not a natural 10. He have stayed at 12. Berrick i believe has always been a 10 but now he's moved to 12 same with QC (Quade Cooper). JOC (James O'Connor) i think has played 12 most of his career n is now forced to play 15. AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) i think has been a winger for most of his career n is now a fullback. They are all still learning their positions which is wrong. Leave gits at 12, QC (Quade Cooper) at 10, Berrick at 10, JOC (James O'Connor) at 12, AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) at 13, Diggers at 13, Let them all fight it out for their positions. The losers then can be moved until we find better specialsed players.
 

mark_s

Chilla Wilson (44)
I agree Seb V, Imagine if Deans announced a forward pack of:

1. Robinson
2. Pocock
3. Alexander
4. Palu
5. Elsom
6. Chisholm
7. Moore
8. Horwill

Its a little bit bullshit
.
 
R

rugbywhisperer

Guest
Gees, this is starting to bring back memories of Greg Smith.
 

MajorlyRagerly

Trevor Allan (34)
I think Eddie's got a point, but but if point is correct, it would then be that Aussie rugby will never catch up to thre more structured game.

The instinct and skill of great wallaby teams has been undoubtedly what has set them apart from their peers. Coaching has of course been a factor, but the players were the one's who showed the nouse. Players such as Ella, Horan, Farr-Jones, Lynagh, Eales - I doubt that any coach would have done much for them. They were such instinctive players with incredible natural rugby games. the wallaby side of 99-02 had Larkham, Gregan, Burke doing their own thing, whilst McQueen ran the shop. In a normal course of business, he would have been the COO of the team. Making sure all the donkey work is done whilst the geniuses do their thing.

That, in my opinon, made the aussie game beautiful to watch and a benchmark in certain facets of the game.

The current game of structure, structure, structure and then a little bit more structure thrown in for good measure, just simply doesn't suit the current players. Deans is coaching the way which he knows how, which is once again structure, structure and more structure. Because that is Rugby in 2009. What to do to fix? Farked if I know to be honest... but I don't think Deans is your man.
 
R

rugbywhisperer

Guest
As with coaching any great athlete - a coach can only do so much.
of all the great athletes, their succuees is 90-95% ability and 5-10% coach.
A coach can only mould what he/or she has.
You cannot make a silk purse from a sow's ear.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top