"....the Autumn has become like a pre-season for us," Gatland rues

First topic message reminder :

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/sport/rugby/rugby-news/warren-gatland-insists-regional-rugby-6288953

Warren Gatland admitted his Wales players were once again caught cold by the intensity of combat with South Africa, insisting that the standard of domestic rugby doesn’t prepare them well enough. Asked to consider the seemingly ever-present gulf between his side and the big southern hemisphere three after yet another November reverse, Gatland said: “South Africa and the other southern hemisphere players get to play at that intensity all the time. “Whether it is in the Rugby Championship or Super Rugby. We get maybe four or five chances and it is not the fitness or physicality, it’s the chance to play at a tempo in which speed of thought is key. It takes us a little bit of time to re-adjust and get used to it. For me that is the big difference, that is the advantage they have over us. Talk to our players about coming out of club and regional rugby (into Test rugby) and they will tell you it’s like chalk and cheese

I prefer the argument that Welsh players are not up to speed to the idea that they are just intinisically incapable of matching teams from the south.

Gatland doesn't, however, go into why he thinks Welsh players start the season slowly and can't get a lift-off from regional rugby.

Griff wrote:LP; so Gatland was incorrect/exaggerating when he said that he needed to do remedial work with the players to get them up to the level he needs them to be at?  I believe him on this occasion.  I don't think the regions get them to where they need to be physically, so it takes the Wales management a few weeks.  They can't hit the ground running.  

We didn't lose because of a lack of fitness, but you could say that we lost because of a lack of physicality (or ability to cope with it), which is sort of the same thing, i.e. conditioning.

I believe Gatland when he says the players need extra conditioning / fitness work when they arrive at the Vale. I don't believe that was why we lost on Saturday.

...but it might be why we take longer to get going in the AIs? I.e. being at Gwent Dragons fitness levels compared to being at the required levels for SA? Is that not an indirect cause?

If it doesn't have a bearing on the results, then we don't need it when they arrive at the Vale!

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

Griff wrote:LP; so Gatland was incorrect/exaggerating when he said that he needed to do remedial work with the players to get them up to the level he needs them to be at?  I believe him on this occasion.  I don't think the regions get them to where they need to be physically, so it takes the Wales management a few weeks.  They can't hit the ground running.  

We didn't lose because of a lack of fitness, but you could say that we lost because of a lack of physicality (or ability to cope with it), which is sort of the same thing, i.e. conditioning.

I believe Gatland when he says the players need extra conditioning / fitness work when they arrive at the Vale. I don't believe that was why we lost on Saturday.

Wales have been strong now since at least the 2009 Lions tour. You could even go back to Gatland's debut where Wales won a Grand Slam and then beat Australia in the following Autum Internationals.

Either it has taken Gatland four or five years to realize that his players start slowly, or he has known for some time and yet still hasn't addressed the issue. Not addressing the issue would be a reasonable approach if all the emphasis was on the Six Nations. Surely, however, the sights should have been set higher some time ago.

Rugby Fan,

If the 'issue' is that the players are not conditioned appropriately when he gets them (which is what Gatland is saying) then how is he able to address that? The international window and participation agreement means he only gets them a week or two before. Gatland is saying it takes him longer to get them up to peak.

If by taking longer to get going, you (and he) are referring to the early couple of tries we conceded, then fair enough, there's inevitably a leap from regional to international (especially when it's the Boks). But the fact that we came back into things and weren't rolled over towards the end suggests that our fitness wasn't a problem.

Anyway, I should probably stop talking now. I'm just tired of watching us play one brand of rugby and not seeing it develop barely at all. On Saturday, we'd make half-breaks, draw in defenders, and then next phase, it goes to a lock standing in midfield who WITHOUT LOOKING just takes it into contact, drawing hardly any defenders and allowing their defensive line to reset. Clueless. We don't deserve to beat the big three if we keep asking them the same one question over and over, when they keep giving us the answer, which is 'that won't work.'

Griff wrote:Rugby Fan,

If the 'issue' is that the players are not conditioned appropriately when he gets them (which is what Gatland is saying) then how is he able to address that?

He could have demanded better standards from the clubs and WRU - his standing within the game is high enough to twist some arms. Failing that, he could have approached players directly and made it their personal responsibility to turn up in better shape or else risk non-selection.

To be honest Griff, I don't know what the issue can be because I'm fairly sure Gatland is smart enough to have throught of those two options, so I don't know why he didn't go down either route.

The Welsh players are the fittest probably going. Its surely not a conditioning thing.

Personally I find it amazing anyone who has been in a job for 5 years could say such a thing.
So what if you only had your players for 6 days prior... you've had your players well established for years. Gatland will have profiles for individuals, fitness regimes and targets to be maintained... when they are with the national team, with their clubs and on holiday.

Saying they are no match fit is saying they or he is unprofessional. Its simply chaff.

It does seem to an outsider that all he does is blame other issues.

Every team has the same time to build up and Scotland has worst teams, yet I do not hear so many excuses and blame being passed around to everthing else. It is a little disrespectful imo

Because the regions are separate entities with their own conditioning teams and, lets be honest, not a very good relationship with the WRU. Why would Gatland mention it at all if everything was hunky dory with the players when he gets them, that they have been conditioned well when they arrive. By highlighting it now and talking of the feeling of being at pre-season with them tells me that everything is not well - he's pinpointing part of the problem.

Griff wrote:Because the regions are separate entities with their own conditioning teams and, lets be honest, not a very good relationship with the WRU.  Why would Gatland mention it at all if everything was hunky dory with the players when he gets them, that they have been conditioned well when they arrive.  By highlighting it now and talking of the feeling of being at pre-season with them tells me that everything is not well - he's pinpointing part of the problem.

or he is passing the buck to other people for his inability to get a game plan to beat SH teams..

Riskysports wrote:It does seem to an outsider that all he does is blame other issues.

Every team has the same time to build up and Scotland has worst teams, yet I hear so many excuses and blame being passed around to everthing else. It is a little disrespectful imo

Why can no-one try to pinpoint reasons in order to highlight issues and hope to make change, without it being called 'blaming'. Part of analysis is pointing the finger - and he's pointing it internally (rather than blaming the opposition). He's highlighting things within our own control, which is lesson no.1 in the coaching manual. I see nothing wrong with that. Show me any coach, world wide, who does not try to pinpoint a reason for a loss and try to do something about that. You'd get the sack pretty quick if you tried nothing.

Riskysports wrote:

Griff wrote:Because the regions are separate entities with their own conditioning teams and, lets be honest, not a very good relationship with the WRU.  Why would Gatland mention it at all if everything was hunky dory with the players when he gets them, that they have been conditioned well when they arrive.  By highlighting it now and talking of the feeling of being at pre-season with them tells me that everything is not well - he's pinpointing part of the problem.

or he is passing the buck to other people for his inability to get a game plan to beat SH teams..

Or trying to use what little influence he has got to make changes in an area he has no control over.  He can't change what the regional sides do with their conditioning.  He's not in the same boat as Ireland or Scotland.  Perhaps he's trying to put a bit of pressure on them so they do something about it, and I think he's got a point.

Griff wrote:Because the regions are separate entities with their own conditioning teams and, lets be honest, not a very good relationship with the WRU.  Why would Gatland mention it at all if everything was hunky dory with the players when he gets them, that they have been conditioned well when they arrive.  By highlighting it now and talking of the feeling of being at pre-season with them tells me that everything is not well - he's pinpointing part of the problem.

So the players can't take responsibility for their own conditioning?? I remember at uni we had our training regime and then our own individual targets to meet and fill dependent on position and current fitness levels which we were responsible for and were tested on etc... and that was univerisity. This was during term time, exam time and the holidays. Not even elite amateur, not even professional clubs let alone the national side.

I for one didn't see fitness problems on the Welsh side. They weren't rusty like England knocking the ball on against AUS for instance, they weren't getting their wires crossed between players on moves and looking confused...but I saw a lot of other problems mind and all of them are placed at the door of the coaching staff i.e. team selection and a predictable strategy which SA have for 100 years been simply superior to nearly everyone.

In that case the coach isn't exactly going to say... my strategy is limited, my game play is limited. He'll blame everything else i.e. fitness.

Fa, the problem is with the clubs and the league itself not preparing us physically for the big SH teams come the autumn. That step up in intensity and brutality is what we can't compete with. We are not able to replicate it in our league, for whatever reason. It's different from fitness conditioning. You can't replicate it that well in training. A bit like match fitness. Now, people will say that Scotland and Ireland should be in the same boat then (same league) - well, I think they are. Yes they've had a couple of SH scalps over the years but the record is still woefully poor (but not as bad as Wales' record admittedly).

So Gatland feels that when he gets the players they've not been physically prepared the way he would like because they haven't been in that sort of match intensity during the season. England play in a much more physical league (according to most) which might explain them doing better against the SH. France similarly. I don't think that's a blame game - just watch a Rabo Pro 12 league game and you'll see that, on the whole, the intensity is not international standard. A friends's Kiwi cousin came to a Dragons home game and felt it was like a division 3 game in New Zealand (only one opinion, but still). Gatland is quoted as saying that the Super 15 is like international standard/intensity, and so that's where the disparity is.

Aerobic fitness is not what we're taking about here.

Strange that a team like Cardiff then can beat Toulon (the champions of Europe) in the HC (which is at the same level as SR... as in I would argue the top 4 sides in the HC such as Claremont, Toulon, Leinster and say (Saracens??) are equally as strong as the Chiefs, Brumbies, Sharks and Crusaders)

but then the same players can say they are not ready for test rugby?

Are you honestly saying that the welsh regions are decent in the Heineken Cup? We get smashed every year, time after time. If you watched that Toulon game you'd know that it was almost a joke how the Blues managed to win it - read back over the match report on here. They even had a prop lifted up in the air like a rag doll at scrum time (he came on for Adam Jones against you boys the other day but only lasted a short time before getting injured). They were completely outplayed but managed to pull it off somehow. Kudos to them. The Welsh teams do not even get out of the group stages (or very rarely). We are completely steamrollered In Europe by the big boys every year, time after time.

Didn't the scarlets beat Harlequins & Cardiff beat Toulon a couple of weeks ago??? and they aren't even your best sides.

Fa, that's like picking Wales' win over Oz a few years back and saying that we consistently challenge the SH! The welsh regions have been absolutely atrocious in Europe. I mean really, really bad. Picking a couple of solitary wins does not mean that we are able to compete consistently. Just look at the records. There for all to see. But I expect you know that...

Griff wrote:...Now, people will say that Scotland and Ireland should be in the same boat then (same league) - well, I think they are. Yes they've had a couple of SH scalps over the years but the record is still woefully poor (but not as bad as Wales' record admittedly)...

Not nearly as bad as Wales.

For instance, when Ireland were growing their team, based around the talent of POC, BOD etc, they beat South Africa three times in a row at home (2004, 2006, 2009). In the middle of that run, Ireland had a disastrous World Cup, so no-one would say they were consistent. They did claim a Southern Hemisphere scalp at the next World Cup, however, which eluded Wales. Meanwhile, Scotland currently have back-to-back home and away wins against Australia.

I genuinely think Wales have to start looking at some of the reasons others are giving here. I hadn't thought about the pitch at the Millennium before as a factor but perhaps that's something the WRU has to consider. Do Wales lose the tactical battle against the southern Big3? Does Gatland show them too much respect - i.e. plays too defensively - and that nervousness communicates itself to his players?

I dearly want Wales to get a win. The Six Nations champions are always seen - not fairly - as the standard bearers of the north so every time they lose, it's another chance for the south to dismiss the standard of rugby up here.

Surely I'm the one looking at the current status and you're the one looking at a historical outlook?

Poor form over history didn't make this team unprepared.

Many of your players have been playing in Europe i.e. North, Lydiate, Phillips etc (the so called better leagues).
Those who haven't i.e. Williams, Davies, Warburton etc have played in big matches vs. the very best in Europe and come away with good scalps.

Is that really unprepared compared to their English & French counterparts?

Rugby Fan wrote:

Griff wrote:...Now, people will say that Scotland and Ireland should be in the same boat then (same league) - well, I think they are. Yes they've had a couple of SH scalps over the years but the record is still woefully poor (but not as bad as Wales' record admittedly)...

Not nearly as bad as Wales.

For instance, when Ireland were growing their team, based around the talent of POC, BOD etc, they beat South Africa three times in a row at home (2004, 2006, 2009). In the middle of that run, Ireland had a disastrous World Cup, so no-one would say they were consistent. They did claim a Southern Hemisphere scalp at the next World Cup, however, which eluded Wales. Meanwhile, Scotland currently have back-to-back home and away wins against Australia.

I genuinely think Wales have to start looking at some of the reasons others are giving here. I hadn't thought about the pitch at the Millennium before as a factor but perhaps that's something the WRU has to consider. Do Wales lose the tactical battle against the southern Big3? Does Gatland show them too much respect - i.e. plays too defensively - and that nervousness communicates itself to his players?

I dearly want Wales to get a win. The Six Nations champions are always seen - not fairly - as the standard bearers of the north so every time they lose, it's another chance for the south to dismiss the standard of rugby up here.

Rugby fan, I don't know how you can suggest that Wales need to stop blaming factors like the intensity of the league vs international, but then say that we need to blame factors such as the pitch. Ridiculous. If a welsh fan had said that the reason we lost was the pitch then this site would have gone into meltdown. The pitch was bad for both teams. How did SA score 3 tries if the pitch was such a hindrance?

fa0019 wrote:Surely I'm the one looking at the current status and you're the one looking at a historical outlook?

Poor form over history didn't make this team unprepared.

Many of your players have been playing in Europe i.e. North, Lydiate, Phillips etc (the so called better leagues).
Those who haven't i.e. Williams, Davies, Warburton etc have played in big matches vs. the very best in Europe and come away with good scalps.

Is that really unprepared compared to their English & French counterparts?

I see what you're saying, but then we're not looking at just this year are we? You're talking about why historically Wales struggle in the AIs when the expectation is for them to be better. Historically, even when we've been 'kings of Europe' our clubs have also been pretty much knocked put of Europe by the time of the AIs. The team containing most of our current internationals is pretty much knocked out after 2 games. So we always struggle in the autumn and we always struggle in Europe.

Griff wrote:...Rugby fan, I don't know how you can suggest that Wales need to stop blaming factors like the intensity of the league vs international, but then say that we need to blame factors such as the pitch. Ridiculous. If a welsh fan had said that the reason we lost was the pitch then this site would have gone into meltdown...

Putting one loss down to the pitch would rigthly attract brickbats but suggesting it's been a factor in underperformance for five seasons starts looking more reasonable.

I actually want to look for reasons, because Wales are clearly better than their results. I just don't think Gatland's recent observations hold up as major factors when you look at the record. If Gatland isn't right about the fitness and conditioning being the difference, then I want to consider what else might be important.

I don't accept that Wales are "just not good enough".

I don't know, mate. I hope I'm not coming across like someone trying to rub salt in open wounds because I've got enormous respect for Welsh rugby players. I'm also sure that I can't want Wales to claim a Southern scalp any more than a loyal Welsh fan.

Not at all rugby fan. You seem very decent. I too am looking for reasons. I've tried them all, but most have be thrown back at me as excuses! I might try the pitch one and see where I get!

Our teams are pretty poor in the league, pretty poor in Europe, and the best of those players are pretty poor in the AIs. We're pretty poor on the summer tours too. We seem to do well in the 6N 2 months after the AIs. That's where I think Gatland may have a point in that, for him, he sees players being at point A in their conditioning when he gets them in Nov and then being at point B by the end of Nov and at the start of the 6N. I'm not privy to the data but Gatland is, so maybe he does genuinely see an improvement in out players conditioning from the Autumn to the 6N, and then a drop off from the 6N and summer when he sees them again in the following autumn? Who knows!

Griff wrote:Not at all  rugby fan. You seem very decent. I too am looking for reasons. I've tried them all, but most have be thrown back at me as excuses!

I don't think I've heard you mention gameplan and strategy as a possible reason, Griff.

Here is the tale of the tape between Wales and SA, OZ and NZ during Gatland's tenure thus far.

Wales vs New Zealand

Average score 13 - 32
Averagre tries 0.7 - 3
Average penalties 2.7 - 3.8

Wales vs South Africa

Average score 20 - 29
Average tries 1.6-2.9
Average penalties 3.1 - 3.1

Wales vs Australia

Average score 18 - 23
Average tries 1.2 - 2.2
Average penalties kicks 3.1-2.7

The big difference here is simply the attacking prowess between the teams, wales has a try deficit of 1 against Australia, 1.3 against South Africa and 2.3 against New Zealand.

Now Gatland has played virtually the same tactics against them during his whole tenure, perhaps it is time that things change.

Are there any better coaches around that could change that?

Maybe what Gatland wants is not victory but vindication. A victory as a result of a change in tactics would be an admission that he's been getting it wrong this whole time.

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

Griff wrote:Not at all  rugby fan. You seem very decent. I too am looking for reasons. I've tried them all, but most have be thrown back at me as excuses!

I don't think I've heard you mention gameplan and strategy as a possible reason, Griff.

How about we're just not good enough? Is it game plan and strategy for the regions that means (barring the Ospreys) that we're pretty poor in the Pro12? That form is carried over into the Heineken Cup where, apart from some cherry picked results as raised by the poster above, over the years we have been woeful. Same players. You pointed out yourself the locks in midfield not drawing the man before taking the contact. Is Gatland telling them to run head first into people without drawing the man or looking up? No, in my opinion. It's a hangover from the poor way they're coached at the regions. The same poor play of our players at regional level is carried over into the AIs. Jiffy et al. on Scrum V point out that very same poor play week in week out on the programme - players not doing the basics well, fatties in midfield getting isolated, overlaps wasted, numbers, numbers, numbers!

You're right that it's not to do with fitness, and that's not what I was meaning (as I described above). We can't generate that intensity at regional level to allow us to compete in the league (barring Ospreys) or the HC/AC and that is carried over into the international game. If we can't do the basics at the pedestrian pace we play at in the Pro12 then there is no way of executing them at a fast pace in international rugby. The same way our players often look clueless in the league and in the HC is magnified at international level with better defenses and organisation of the opposition. If these same players struggle to do it at club level then they're certainly not going to be able to do it at international level against the best in the world (but it might be good enough for the teams ranked around our level and below).

So for me it's not necessarily game plan or strategy, although that will have some impact (but 22 losses due to game plan?). Gatland's predecessors struggled (putting it mildly) against the SH too. Different gamplans and strategy, same result. For me it's the players and the work (or lack of it) that we're doing with them on a daily basis, in their bread and butter day jobs. The regions are failing to turn out good players and in turn the regions are failing to progress or achieve (barring Ospreys in the league). Their skills are poor. Our forwards (bar the Ospreys) are poor - how many times do we see the other 3 regions get folded up and munched at scrum time? And then we wonder why we're rubbish if we lose Adam Jones at scrum time. That's why I agree that Gatland has a point about it being like a pre-season (topic of the OP) - he's getting players not conditioned (intensity, physicality, skills) to the level needed to compete with the 3N. No gameplan is going to help them if the basics aren't right.

More spent on skills training would be a huge help, I think. Running hard and straight won't break down a committed, well-drilled defence.

The fact we're seeing narrow defeats suggest we're more or less a match for them in terms of physicality and fitness. It's the bolt-on of skills and savvy that we need now. And spotting an overlap isn't rocket science. It's actually scandalous that professional rugby players can't spot and capitalise on them when they present themselves.

Griff wrote:You pointed out yourself the locks in midfield not drawing the man before taking the contact. Is Gatland telling them to run head first into people without drawing the man or looking up?

Howley mentioned in the week of the match 'earning the right to go wide'. That suggests to me that there's a set number of times we take the ball up before even looking to go wide. That's crap.

I agree with a lot you're saying there Luckless. I just think we're coming from different angles in terms of what we perceive the cause for this lack of skill to be! I think it's down to the regions not developing the skills well enough. We're seeing players at regional level, and therefore international level, who can't pass well, who can't create simple overlaps (or exploit them), who can't scrummage well, etc. It's sad. But for me it starts at the regions. Gatland shouldn't need to be doing the work - the skills should already be there, and team Wales can then fine tune them or take them up a notch. There's a story about I think either Schmidt or Cheika at Leinster: When he came in his ambition was for Leinster to be the best passing team in Europe. Not fittest, not fastest, not highest try scorers, just best passers. That one skill, it was recognised, would sort everything else out - put players in space, allow players to hit the line at pace, etc. The tries would come and so too the wins. That's what they set about doing and it worked. They soon went on to become a dominant European force. We know we're fit, phase one accomplished if you like, but it's the skills we now need to develop I think in order to create things against the top teams in the world.

In terms of 'earning the right'. It's just a saying as far as I'm concerned - i.e. create an overlap before sending the ball out wide. Otherwise you just ship the ball from side to side and the cover defense snuffs out the attack. So I agree with the premise, we do need to draw the man and create space/overlaps/'numbahs', but I'm not sure we have a set amount of plays in mind to get us there. Terrible if we did. You can't put a number on it.

The problem was that a few times we'd created the overlap, but still, the ball went to a forward in midfield to truck it up, not to the three / four backs in space. If the first forward taking it up has drawn in the defence, then that's your 'right to go wide' earnt. All subsequent forward drives will do is allow the defensive line to realign / reorganise, and the opportunity has gone.

I just think we're too formulaic and easy to read.

When I saw the game... to often things looked scripted rather than observational from a Welsh point of view.

"Right, policy off a lineout, 3 phases of centres/backrow bashing a hole in the defence. After that we spread it wide/go for an up & under".

Rather than say first phase in and then look up, see space and then decide, shall we spread or not. Quite a few opportunities to spread were simply ignored by forwards taking it in and not realising space... or Phillips simply passing to a forward (who can't be expected to throw a Hook type miss pass).

Exactly, fa. It's all well and good having a plan - it would be crazy not to have one - but you also need the freedom (and the gumption) to see when you need to deviate from the plan.

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:More spent on skills training would be a huge help, I think. Running hard and straight won't break down a committed, well-drilled defence.

The fact we're seeing narrow defeats suggest we're more or less a match for them in terms of physicality and fitness. It's the bolt-on of skills and savvy that we need now. And spotting an overlap isn't rocket science. It's actually scandalous that professional rugby players can't spot and capitalise on them when they present themselves.

Griff wrote:You pointed out yourself the locks in midfield not drawing the man before taking the contact. Is Gatland telling them to run head first into people without drawing the man or looking up?

Howley mentioned in the week of the match 'earning the right to go wide'. That suggests to me that there's a set number of times we take the ball up before even looking to go wide. That's crap.

Howley isn't the sharpest tool in the box, but this is pretty dim by any standards, even if it's just a meaningless soundbite to throw to the media rather than a reflection of the actual tactics.

'Earn the right to go wide' is just a random sequence of words invented by Ieuan Evans when he couldn't think of anything else to say once on Sky Sports.

Who would decide when the right had been earned? Would Gatland hang a pitboard style sign over the subs bench when the 'time was right'?

This crazy notion would suggest that up to that point in a game players would boot away the ball despite there being overlaps and.....oh hang on....

Cas, I know you're joking, but it's frustrating because the basics of our game are there. What we need to take that extra step is some vision and licence to play.

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:Cas, I know you're joking, but it's frustrating because the basics of our game are there. What we need to take that extra step is some vision and licence to play.

Totally agree. Plan A can only take you so far. I'm amazed it got us a win against England, given their power, and I can't see them cracking like that again.

Problem is, when you've been sailing the good ship Bishbosh on the same course for 5 years, it's going to be difficult to turn that boat around, even if if you wanted to.

Non-Wales fan in peace! Fascinating discussion on this thread. A number of comparisons have beenmade with Ireland and Scotland. When Rob Penney arrived at Munster one of the first people he went to meet was DK. Afterwards he said he had met with DK because this washow it was done in NZ, the SXV coaches keep in close contact with the national coach.

I know there have been problems in the relationship between the regions and the WRU but that is surely no reason why the five coaches should not be talking together. If Gatland feels the players coming in from the regions are not prepared properly, as national coach, surely he has some standing within Wales which allows him to talk with the coaches-fitness, conditioning and skills coaches to correct that which he says is awry.

I was genuinely surprised to read in the report on last Saturday's game that since 2009 Wales have not won an AI, they have drawn one, against Fiji I think it said. God knows Ireland's record is not much better, (against NZ, SA & Aus it is W1, D1, L3 excl RWC; in all games it is W6, D1, L3), but despite such a rubbish record, when we take the pitch against Aus and SA I feel we have a reasonable chance of winning. I have sympathy for Welsh fans who have evenless reasonto be optimistic than I am.

Good luck at th e weekend.