Defence - watch the ball vs watch the man

In this show, there's an interesting discussion between Jerry Flannery and Andrew Trimble about defensive systems. It starts around the 11:00 mark. Flannery explains how a team using linespeed relies on players watching the ball rather than the man. Trimble understands the logic but notes that we often find fault with players for ball-watching, so it was counter-intuitive for him. While he bought into the system at Ireland, he still came away with the feeling that it was missing some of the benefits of the previous system.

They note how misleading the missed tackle statistic can be, if the risk is part of the system.

The Jacques Flannery refers to is Jacques Nienaber, who worked with Erasmus at Minster, and is now the Springbok defence coach

I know Andrew Trimble is in the role of Interviewer.  His role is to be the voice and questioner for those that want to know...but I found it a little unsettling that Flannery actually spoke to Trimble as if Trimble really was a beginner in terms of these what I'd assume to be basic defensive premises in rugby.  

And Trimble wasn't exactly reassuring me that he actually did know intimately about all the little aspect dynamics of defensive theory.

Some players seem to know why they're asked to do the things they do (the theory) - others just seem to need constant day to day, week to week, dot by dot direction.

That's just the difference between a hard nosed former tight forward who's become a coach, and a winger who...well...seems more of an affable, likeable sort of fella...but perhaps not quite the hard tackling, defensive minded player that Flannery could be.

I do agree it's a bit weird how so many players are dumb and even disdainful to certain parts of the game - the laws, the technicalities, even on the field and not knowing the scoreline and the captain taking the wrong points decision. That one's a bit different perhaps, but there doesn't seem to be the base knowledge and understanding of rugby in many players - not quite sure why. Just not the hunger to know and understand it?

Chris Ashton was talking with Danny Care on the BBC podcast about box kicking. Ashton says he hated running rbox kicks all the time but, with Saracens, he saw how effective it was at generating postions which kept Saracens winning all the time. He enjoyed winning but found it hard rugby, which I suspect is the same for Trimble with the rush defence.

Interesting to hear Flannery talk about Zebo, and how he plays rugby for specific reasons, which aren't necessarily in synch with the game plan you want. However, he argues you have to run your team so that players can get what they want from rugby, while also buying into the overall strategy.

They were talking about that in the context of how you celebrate tries. Trimble said one of his coaches wondered why they were so dour after scoring, and wanted them to acknowledge each other more. Flannery noted that's why Saracens players keep whooping after turnovers or penalties, as they don't want to wait until scores to big each other up.

The cultures of rugby is definitely an interesting point. You've definitely got to allow for individuals, and you look at Lancaster and that's surely something he learnt - tried to be like a headmaster rather than a sports coach. EJ has got that mix of PE teacher and pro coach spot on, it seems - and the players absolutely love him. Gatland...a mix, I sense. There's respect, there's an enjoyment, but he's perhaps a bit stand offish. Schmidt? Hard to say - but I come back to the point about digging players out in front of colleagues on a Monday. The effectiveness of that wanes over time and it just becomes self flagellation. Sexton was the only one allowed to show individualism, it felt from the outside - no Zebo, no Carberry, no Larmour, no Beirne. All unwanted of bit part players. Townsend? Well you can't build culture on losing.

Eddie appears to be doing something akin to what Jurgen Grobler did for rowing.

Grobler basically had a set of physiological tables that projected how fit the crews would have to be at various points in the Olympic cycle to be on course for medals, and everybody worked to that.

Eddie has his famous pluses and minuses, which sound like they were a bit more subjective but he's recently focused increasingly on how quickly each player is up and back in the line. Under 3 seconds: plus. Over 3 seconds: minus. I imagine it enables him to deliver hard messages - "you're not where you need to be" - without making it personal or subject to accusations of favouritism.

Obviously there's still an element of subjectivity in his preferred style of play - Care didn't fit the style despite some game winning performances off the bench, and was gone. But it has to be said that even the more outlandish choices he's made - Heinz, Ludlam, Daly at fullback, plucking John Mitchell out of international retirement - have largely come off.

The defensive system is where that focus really comes to bear: England are able to work their defensive system because they get up and get into the line and so there's rarely a time when they leave space for anyone to exploit. And because of that, they can press up rapidly as a line and take even more space away. It's breathtakingly simple.

It's quite telling that the tries that have been scored against them have tended to be from individual mistakes (the NZ lineout error, no one at home for Koroibete, lapses in concentration late in the early games) rather than "system errors" as defence coaches like to call them.

Jones defensive systems has been helped enormously by having players fit at the right time as well. Whether this was more luck or design could be argued without end.

Mako returning for the knockouts, Underhill being fit for the full campaign and Curry emerging this season have played enormous roles in the defensive system. Mako especially is a vital component in the England defence. His line speed, work rate and chop tackles are outstanding at bringing forward runners down not only behind the gain line. It halts momentum and forces the opposition to retreat that extra metre before clearing the ruck, buying crucial moments for Curry and Underhill to attack the ball.

Having 4 locks to pick from who are outstanding in defence is fairly helpful too it must be said.

Finally I've been really impressed with how Cowan-Dickie has been used to target the ruck rather than tackle area more in the final 15 minutes. George is outstanding in fringe defence much like Mako, in fact all the forwards to come through Sarries set-up. Cowan-Dickie is excellent in the ruck though and looks to be have been told to target it more coming on after the opposition tire.