Tactics against big 3 SH teams

First topic message reminder :

The SH teams will shortly embark on the November tour. The NH coaches will have watched the RC and thought about the best way to counter these teams. Is it right though to judge the teams on what the coaches have seen?

Looking at the games played in the middle of the tournament will most likely mirror the conditions in Europe. It's all very well to look at the Ellis Park match or the Dunedin match last Saturday and judge the team on that. Wales has the stadium that closes its roof but the condition of the pitch is invariably poor. Add in rain or dew from the cold and we are likely to see more games played in trying conditions.

That may be welcome news because SA and Australia showed that NZ is not the only team comfortable at playing a high tempo game that opens up. Yet playing that way will ensure defences open up and points are easy to come by.

If you play an attritional game, you close those gaps as defensive lines are harder to break. That has suited teams like Scotland and Ireland have proved adept at playing this game but is that the best chance of success. SA are opponents who have discovered a more varied attack but they have proven comfortable in arm wrestling games. Australia might be seen as the best hope of engaging in a set piece contest but they have proven in the past that they are useful at minimizing their weaknesses. NZ are uncomfortable when you flood the breakdown and close out the space in midfield but going in with a defensive mindset only bears fruit a couple of times out of about 20.

So is variety the way to go or lumping your eggs into one basket? The poor showing against SH sides in general can be attributed to the former or the latter. Australia seem the likely candidate this year as the target win. But will Schmidt or Lancaster be thinking defence or attack or both will win out against NZ?

If the conditions are trying I think it's tempting to say do the basics right, minimize errors and try to force mistakes from the opposition. But is this being too defensively minded? Is saying we'll make fewer errors the same as we'll do more things right? I'd love to be a fly on the wall in the team meetings or training sessions to know what the plan of attack is.

What do you think the best tactics are for playing Australia, SA and NZ respectively this autumn?

TJ wrote:

Comfort wrote:Thats without mentioning the South African Elephant we've not dealt with in half a century.....


I'd buy a win to be honest  

Having an elephant in your side is most definitely against the rules

Up until 2011 we did have a beast, a battle cruiser and a pick up truck (Mtawarira, Bismarck & Bakkies respectively), are they legal??? .  In the 90s we even had an Adolf!!! But I don't think we should go there.

For England what we must do vs all 3 is to run it from absolutely everywhere and never kick. We kick poorly anyway

Triangulation wrote:

For England what we must do vs all 3 is to run it from absolutely everywhere and never kick. We kick poorly anyway

Do that against NZ and they will destroy you. It will be turnover after turnover after turnover.

Usually teams kick for a very good reason... they have no more numbers/skills to a) take the ball in and b) secure possession.

Do you want to give the opposition the ball 50 metres away or a penalty where you are right now.

fa0019 wrote:

Triangulation wrote:

For England what we must do vs all 3 is to run it from absolutely everywhere and never kick. We kick poorly anyway

Do that against NZ and they will destroy you. It will be turnover after turnover after turnover.

Usually teams kick for a very good reason... they have no more numbers/skills to a) take the ball in and b) secure possession.

Do you want to give the opposition the ball 50 metres away or a penalty where you are right now.

No. Nz are not allowed the ball. They are not even allowed near the ball. We will run in packs, shoulder to shoulder. No hail mary passes. Short passes. Fast hard clear outs past the ball. Mini mauls. Bigger mauls.

They're not allowed to even see the ball. We do that for as much of the 80 as possible while racking up some points of our own. Frustrate them to hell and back, let them give us the penalties.

I am with you on that Triangulation. Starve them of the ball and they cannot score

Triangulation wrote:

fa0019 wrote:

Triangulation wrote:

For England what we must do vs all 3 is to run it from absolutely everywhere and never kick. We kick poorly anyway

Do that against NZ and they will destroy you. It will be turnover after turnover after turnover.

Usually teams kick for a very good reason... they have no more numbers/skills to a) take the ball in and b) secure possession.

Do you want to give the opposition the ball 50 metres away or a penalty where you are right now.

No. Nz are not allowed the ball. They are not even allowed near the ball. We will run in packs, shoulder to shoulder. No hail mary passes. Short passes. Fast hard clear outs past the ball. Mini mauls. Bigger mauls.

They're not allowed to even see the ball. We do that for as much of the 80 as possible while racking up some points of our own. Frustrate them to hell and back, let them give us the penalties.

That was the type of rugby England played under Jonno and Steve Borthwick. England don't have the skills to keep the ball for 10+ phases every round of possession.

Question - why do you think teams generally don't run the ball out of their own 22? Why do they kick?

These are teams which spend millions on sports science, breaking down the benefits of each play, the pros the cons etc... yet after 17 years of pro rugby the standard procedure is that possession and territory need to be taken hand in hand. Having possession in your own half is just as likely to gift the opposition an attacking scrum, lineout, penalty, free-kick as it is for your side to get a line break.

Take NZ for example. What are their strengths? They retain possession very well, they operate well at rucks without committing too many men giving them more options in the subsequent attack, offload well and pounce on any sudden turnover.

How many times this season have I seen NZ score a try from the opposition getting turnover suddenly and being unable to organise their defensive line quick enough? It happened 3 times for tries in the Ellis Park match alone. 3 tries scored by SA literally handing possession over due to a bad kick, knock-on, turnover etc.

fa0019 wrote:

Triangulation wrote:

fa0019 wrote:

Triangulation wrote:

For England what we must do vs all 3 is to run it from absolutely everywhere and never kick. We kick poorly anyway

Do that against NZ and they will destroy you. It will be turnover after turnover after turnover.

Usually teams kick for a very good reason... they have no more numbers/skills to a) take the ball in and b) secure possession.

Do you want to give the opposition the ball 50 metres away or a penalty where you are right now.

No. Nz are not allowed the ball. They are not even allowed near the ball. We will run in packs, shoulder to shoulder. No hail mary passes. Short passes. Fast hard clear outs past the ball. Mini mauls. Bigger mauls.

They're not allowed to even see the ball. We do that for as much of the 80 as possible while racking up some points of our own. Frustrate them to hell and back, let them give us the penalties.

That was the type of rugby England played under Jonno and Steve Borthwick. England don't have the skills to keep the ball for 10+ phases every round of possession.

Question - why do you think teams generally don't run the ball out of their own 22? Why do they kick?

These are teams which spend millions on sports science, breaking down the benefits of each play, the pros the cons etc... yet after 17 years of pro rugby the standard procedure is that possession and territory need to be taken hand in hand. Having possession in your own half is just as likely to gift the opposition an attacking scrum, lineout, penalty, free-kick as it is for your side to get a line break.

Take NZ for example. What are their strengths? They retain possession very well, they operate well at rucks without committing too many men giving them more options in the subsequent attack, offload well and pounce on any sudden turnover.

How many times this season have I seen NZ score a try from the opposition getting turnover suddenly and being unable to organise their defensive line quick enough? It happened 3 times for tries in the Ellis Park match alone. 3 tries scored by SA literally handing possession over due to a bad kick, knock-on, turnover etc.

I wish ! ha ha

Ok then i will concede - to mix it up occasionally kick the ball long and out. It must go out though. Otherwise this is the way to best these sides esp NZ.

you are right though Tri - nothing worse then a bad kick. If you're going to do it, hit your markers. An extra 5m isn't worth it... not when the consequences of missing is dire.

fa0019 wrote:you are right though Tri - nothing worse then a bad kick. If you're going to do it, hit your markers. An extra 5m isn't worth it... not when the consequences of missing is dire.

fa0019

Yes, unfortunately i have seen us cough up too many soft tries like this either with rubbish kicks or no/poor chase or both.

One example that springs to mind without me even having to try is the Cummins try for the wallabies against us at Twickenham in the AIs last year.

It was a rubbish kick no chase on it really, a catch and pass to Cummins for a run in.

We already had a lot of previous before this too so it nearly finished me off.

God spare us if we do this again

Soft rubbish school boy stuff. Completely disheartening for the piggies too which is almost as bad as the score itself.

No. Kicks go out or theyre up and unders with a good chase. Otherwise ..............NO KICKING

By the look of it though Mike Brown will be fullback given Goode and Foden have been released to their clubs. He has a good boot on him so any kicks should be sent back with interest.

fa0019 wrote:By the look of it though Mike Brown will be fullback given Goode and Foden have been released to their clubs. He has a good boot on him so any kicks should be sent back with interest.

In theory we should be ok with kicking.

Youngs, Farrell - Twelvetrees can kick like a very long kick and as you point out so can Brown.

Also Brown is left footed which opens up the angles and the space all over the pitch.

All great. Except i dont want us kicking unless it is on OUR TERMS.

That cummins try was one of the softest tries i have ever seen.

Made me puke all overmyself.

"By the look of it though Mike Brown will be fullback"


YES!!!

about time..

mystiroakey wrote:"By the look of it though Mike Brown will be fullback"


YES!!!

about time..

watched him play the other day and he really looked very good indeed. some nice counter-attacks as well

I suggest we take a leaf out of corporal Hones book

The All Blacks this year are a different animal to this,injuries this year has mean`t that
a lot of new faces have appeared.These on the whole have added considerable depth
to there squad.
Last year they had 4 bad matches,two of which for various reasons they didn't/couldn`t
prepare properly.
They should have lost the 2nd Ireland game,the Home Bok game,3rd Aus game and the
game they lost.
This year the obvious area to attack is number 13 channel BUT the AllBlacks will know
that too.
The Scrum is the same for all and depends on the REF you get for it Nigel Owens an ex scrum half.picks it better than most.
Trying to bash the All Blacks won`t work Boks tried it against 13/14 men at times without
great success.
The Brumbies style kicking game Australia tried it not very successfully,maul them to death
your kidding that's been tried by experts.
Keep it in hand if you can for about 85 minutes you have a chance but don`t flag or get
turned over.
Deny them the ball in the first half 3rd Bledisloe they had 35% territory/possession but
still had a lot of points on the board.
This year they face a Nz side on there second not fourth game the AB`s may actually
on paper less Conrad Smith.Have there first choice side for about first time this year
if all are fit.Owen Franks/McCaw,/Carter/Romano all starting whether that`s a plus is debatable.
Certainly they will be looking to avenge last years results can`t wait.

TJ wrote:

Comfort wrote:Thats without mentioning the South African Elephant we've not dealt with in half a century.....


I'd buy a win to be honest  

Having an elephant in your side is most definitely against the rules

That's just speciest. How come its not alright to have an elephant playing when you can play as many donkeys as you like?

Donkies are native to everywhere. Elephants can only be picked for south Africa.

Or is that racist? Maybe we should allow our zoo animals the chance.

India has elephants too.

Maybe they need to get off their asses and start playing rugby then?

All those wasted elephants...

They're too busy in the outfield, throwing balls back for Sachin to hit.

We have elephants in NZ. Theyre called rugby fans. We never forget and mourn our losses.

I can see teams targeting NZ in the scrum. Many have pointed out the front row as culprits or Sam Cane at the back. I will be interested to see the return of Luke Romano. As much as I've been impressed with Retallick - that pass last week was sublime or his grunt work with Messam at Ellis Park - he's not as big a unit as Romano. I wonder how much he and Whitelock give away at scrum time. To me Romano is the perfect player to start a test, absorb the scrum pressure and then bring on Retallick in the second half when the stung is take out.

I'm curious as to how we slipped so much at scrum time and Romano could be the missing link rather than the front row.

Kia, think Retallick is actually bigger than Romano. Been impressed with Retallick as well. Are you saying he doesn't have mongrel? Actually, if anything, Romano was the surprise for me. Thought he was a journeyman before he became an AB but he stepped up and didn't look out of place.

No way ebop. Romano has a lot more bulk about him than Retallick. Retallick has been superb in the clean outs and taking the ball back and though Romano has great hands for a big guy, Retallick's linking play has been superb. He certainly doesn't lack mongrel but he may lack bulk and that might be the reason our scrum has been a bit shaky.

What about Tic-Tacs against the big three. Do you think they'd be useful?

Me thinks they need more than tic tacs.

Fresh breath is great in the contact situation, but attitude and belief will be more useful.

GloriousEmpire wrote:What about Tic-Tacs against the big three. Do you think they'd be useful?

Nah, if we're talking sweeties it has to be Tooty Frooties

Be a big help also if Mealamu tried hooking the ball.

tigerleghorn wrote:

GloriousEmpire wrote:What about Tic-Tacs against the big three. Do you think they'd be useful?

Nah, if we're talking sweeties it has to be Tooty Frooties

                            what's Gareth Thomas got to do with it .