• 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.

Rebels v Waratahs Round 2 - 2012R02 - Dunlop Shield III

Status
Not open for further replies.
D

daz

Guest
i haven't seen king in the locks, but i wouldn't think, at first blush, that we lose much. campbell is solid, but probably not a full gamer. king aside, jones can play lock and even chamberlain.

agree re phipps. he looked off. don't think danny's form helped him though.

Chamberlain is a long way off Super Rugby ability at the moment.

Phipps just quite simply had a shocker. Don't worry too much about it just yet; everyone has one at some point and I suspect Phipps had played the game in his head a bit too much leading in. Once the game went away from his preconceived ideas he just didn't know how to come back.

If he has 2 or three in a row, then you have an issue.

On Cipriani, one thing I did notice at the game was his lack of "bossing" about the lines. He should have been the most vocal guy on the park, directing traffic. I did not see much evidence of that. In fact, it was Inman and Pyle who did all the chatting.
 

Dumbledore

Dick Tooth (41)
Just on the late penalties the Rebels took. At first I was absolutely filthy with Delve, but after a couple of minutes I completely saw where he was coming from. He was actually showing a lot of confidence in the boys, without being completely unrealistic about things. At the time the Rebels were what... 20 points down? Would have needed three tries to get in front. There were 20 minutes to go, and the Rebels were just starting to pick up some momentum. Take the points, get the ball back, take it forward and do it again. Rather than just blazing away against a defence which had held firm all night, he took the percentage approach and it actually worked quite well. Against a worse team than the Tahs it might even have paid bigger dividends.
 
D

daz

Guest
Against a worse team than the Tahs it might even have paid bigger dividends.

Against a worse team than the Tahs and the Rebs would not have been 20 points down.

Still, I think the option for goal was a poor one. I would have preferred the guys to back themselves and have a crack. The crowd sure wanted them to.

Yes, it might get messy, but the alternative is the option Delve took, which was clearly a communication to his team that said "damage control, lads, otherwise we are going to get slaughtered".
 
  • Like
Reactions: BPC

Dumbledore

Dick Tooth (41)
Chamberlain is a long way off Super Rugby ability at the moment.

Phipps just quite simply had a shocker. Don't worry too much about it just yet; everyone has one at some point and I suspect Phipps had played the game in his head a bit too much leading in. Once the game went away from his preconceived ideas he just didn't know how to come back.

If he has 2 or three in a row, then you have an issue.

On Cipriani, one thing I did notice at the game was his lack of "bossing" about the lines. He should have been the most vocal guy on the park, directing traffic. I did not see much evidence of that. In fact, it was Inman and Pyle who did all the chatting.

All of this. Stu, I actually think Phipps didn't help Cips either. He was flinging the ball out everywhere, it was just as often going over his head, or barely getting to his toes than it was out in front of his hands. I'm not excusing Cips who was terrible in his own right, but Phipps was shocking.
 

Dumbledore

Dick Tooth (41)
Against a worse team than the Tahs and the Rebs would not have been 20 points down.

Still, I think the option for goal was a poor one. I would have preferred the guys to back themselves and have a crack. The crowd sure wanted them to.

Yes, it might get messy, but the alternative is the option Delve took, which was clearly a communication to his team that said "damage control, lads, otherwise we are going to get slaughtered".

daz, I guess where I disagree with you is on the message Delve was giving to the team. I reckon he was just saying, come on boys, there's still heaps of time left, let's just keep the scoreboard ticking over. Note that when it ticked down to less than 15 to go we started kicking for the corners. And when we did we had momentum on our side, which I've no doubt helped the maul. I've honestly not got a problem with the decision.

Just as an aside, how good was the crowd when the maul got going? That's what I remember from last year.
 
D

daz

Guest
daz, I guess where I disagree with you is on the message Delve was giving to the team. I reckon he was just saying, come on boys, there's still heaps of time left, let's just keep the scoreboard ticking over.
.

Well, let's ask him next week and see what he says. ;)

Just as an aside, how good was the crowd when the maul got going? That's what I remember from last year.

Yup, gotta love a Melbourne crowd in full voice.
 

Dumbledore

Dick Tooth (41)
Haha no doubt, and if he agrees with me, I'm claiming King of the Thread and Armchair Pundit of the Week titles.

With the crowd, it's the AFL influence coming through. People down here aren't used to singing/chanting/etc but they do know how to make an absolute racket - especially if things get close.
 

James Buchanan

Trevor Allan (34)
I absolutely agree with Dumbledore's interpretation of the penalty goals. It got the scoreboard ticking and got the Rebels back in the game somewhat. Bet big, win big is fundamentally a loser's mantra, especially with an kicker with JOC (James O'Connor)'s accuracy on the park. Unless you're under 10 minutes to go, taking the points is always the percentage play; that is true whether you're in front or behind. This idea that penalty goals are anathema is quite contrary to winning games. I pointed out to a friend at the time that in about 5 minutes, the Rebels scored 6 points. It is almost certain that they could not have scored 2 tries in that time, so the net result is markedly similar to if they had pulled off one try. How you get the points doesn't matter, unless you are going for bonus points and I'd prefer that in that position the Rebels focus on winning first.

I was very impressed with the Rebels set piece however. It had definitely improved a lot. However, their forward play in the loose was not up to scratch and I lay much of the blame for that at Tom Chamberlain's feet, fairly or not. As the team's 7, he should be front and centre at as many rucks as he can be, and to me he seemed quite anonymous except when he was dropping the ball. Ultimately, I think the team will be much stronger when either Lipman or Saffy is back on the park and providing the workrate that they did last year. I was rather impressed with Luke Jones though, he seemed to get through a fair bit of work - albeit, not enough at the breakdown.
 
P

philsale

Guest
in about 5 minutes, the Rebels scored 6 points. It is almost certain that they could not have scored 2 tries in that time

So true. I love to see someone bouncing over the line as much as the next guy, but we were spending so little time close to their line (apart from THAT maul, which was fantastic) that JOC (James O'Connor) and his thankfully safe boot were going to be the best option for making some changes on the scoreboard. The booing was embarrassing. We're not Tah members...
 

fatprop

George Gregan (70)
Staff member
I like the incremental approach, take the points on offer and keep working unless the captain sees an opportunity.

Too often teams kick to the corner and screw it up, take the 3 points lads.
 

FiveStarStu

Bill McLean (32)
daz, I guess where I disagree with you is on the message Delve was giving to the team. I reckon he was just saying, come on boys, there's still heaps of time left, let's just keep the scoreboard ticking over. Note that when it ticked down to less than 15 to go we started kicking for the corners. And when we did we had momentum on our side, which I've no doubt helped the maul. I've honestly not got a problem with the decision.

Just as an aside, how good was the crowd when the maul got going? That's what I remember from last year.

That's just it, I think Gaz saw how well the team was playing and wanted to give them the opportunity to repeat that when getting the ball back, which they did, three times.

I was as frustrated as anyone when they kept going for it, mainly because you could feel that momentum swinging, but in retrospect it's actually quite a good move, if only to give the guys confidence for future games.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top