Front Five Strength and Depth, how do Wales compare to the other top ten teams?

There has been a few posts suggesting that Wales really lack any depth in the front five, that the Front Five are also not all that good.

First Question, Strength...?

The Welsh set piece has been an issue since the the late eighties, but i thought that we really seemed to be turning a corner this last few years. An all Welsh lions front row was a great surprise.

The Second Row and particularly the Welsh line out has been dire to be flattering, it has been such a non event that we tried to avoid using it or a while.

This also seemed to improve over the last 12 months.

Then the main question Depth?

Battered by a number of injuries our former first choice Gethin Jenkins may well have slipped down the ranks to second place with the emergence of Paul James his former deputy. Adam Jones has also had a few nasty injuries and the emergence of Craig Mitchell has bolstered that. I thought Craig did very well in the six nations at tighthead, and I was very sad to see him leave the field with a dislocated shoulder against Ireland. Matthew Rees has been a shinning light at Hooker and proved a good captain, Richard Hibbard has had a great season at the Ospreys and has performed well for Wales too.

In the Second row AW Jones seems to be a consistent and unmovable object with the selectors, Bradly Davies has proved to be an able companion, behind them we have Ryan Jones who has had a great turn of form this year and Luke Chateris, who though often exemplary at Regional level, has been in 50/50 form for Wales.

Are we any different to any other nations?

Wales

LH
James
Jenkins

HK
Rees
Hibbard

TH
Jones
Mitchell

Lock
AW Jones
Davies
Charteris
R Jones

Ireland

LH
Healey
Horan

HK
Best
Flannery

TH
Ross
Buckley

Lock
O'Connell
O'Callaghan
O'Driscoll
Cullen

Scotland

LH
Cross
Jacobsen

HK
Hall
Ford

TH
Murray
Low

LK
Gray
Hamilton
Hines
Kellock

France

LH
Barchella
Domingo

HK
Servat
Szarzewski

TH
Mas
Marconnet

Lock
Millo-Chluski
Lionel Nallet
Pascal Papé
Julien Pierre

England

LH
Sheridan
Corbisiero

HK
Hartley
Thomson

TH
Cole
Doran-Jones

Lock
Lawes
Deacon
Palmer
Shaw

SA

LH
Du Plessis
Botha

HK
Du Plessis
Smit

TH
Mtawarira
Steenkamp

LK
Botha
Matfield
Van der Merwe
Rossouw
Bekker

Aus

LH
Alexander
Daley

HK
Stephen Moore
Tatafu Polota-Nau

TH
Robinson

LK
Sharpe


NZ

LH
Afoa
Woodcock

HK
Hore
Mealamu

TH
Tialata
Franks

Locks
Anthony Boric
Tom Donnelly
Brad Thorn Lock
Sam Whitelock
Williams

NZ, SA and France have better strength and Depth than Wales. But I don't think we are far enough short of the mark in international depth for it to be a crying concern.

Or maybe it is the fact that our depth has been so poor for so long that now we have any it is such a massive relief?

South Africa

Front row
Loose head - Mtawarira, Steenkamp, Oosthuizen, Greyling
Hooker – Du Plessis, Smit, Strauss, Fourie
Tight head – Du Plessis, Kruger, Van de Linde, Nel

Locks
Botha, Elstad, Sykes, Van heerden, Mostert
Matfield, Bekker, Van der Merwe, Rossouw

Australia

Front row
Daley, Alexander, Robinsen
Palotu-Nau, Moore
Kepu

Locks
Chisholm, Wykes, Campbell, Horwill
Sharpe

New Zealand

Front Row
Mcintosh, Schwalger, Franks, Crockett
Meaamu, Rutledge, Flynn, Hore
Afoa, Somerville, Franks, King, Afeaki, Faumuina

Locks
Ross, Thrush, Thorn
Bekhuis, Pyle, Williams, Jack

I think you under estimate the depth a little, the above list are the players from SA, Aus and NZ that were rated by planet rugby this super XV.

Your lineout is one of the worst in the 6nations. I don't call that depth at all.

Your first choice frontrow is strong but the 2nd choices are average.

England and France have better 2nd rows and scrums. Obviously the tri nations do.

With England you forgot Stevens who can play either side.

Ireland and Scotland have better 2nd rows. Italy has a better front three.

Wales are an average side who pretend to be otherwise.

biltongbek wrote:
I think you under estimate the depth a little, the above list are the players from SA, Aus and NZ that were rated by planet rugby this super XV.

frightening list mate

I think for the first time in a long time Wales have some decent back-up props in James and Mitchell who can both do a job. I don't think Wales have the best tight 5 in terms of strength or depth, but I don't think they'll get shown up, even if they were to suffer one or two injuries.

Saying that, you could do with some better back-up at locks. Davies and Alun-Wyn Jones are solid enough, but as an opposition fan I don't mind seeing Charteris on the team sheet at all.

As others have said, Wales have a decent(ish) front five but no real strength-in-depth to speak of.

A couple of injuries and Wales may as well forget the World Cup. Should do ok if they can all stay fit.

The Welsh set-piece is still nothing to worry anybody, though it is a little better than it was.

I think its just people being bitter. We have a fantastic front 5 with good players coming through and also good players being ignored. I.Thomas is good enough to go to the WC, we also have Gill developing at Saries, Effion moving to Toulon who yet may be untested at international level, i believe could hold his own and develop to be a very strong scrummaging tight head. Yapp who i have always thought to be over rated but he really showed up and played well against France in the 6N. Bevington, Gustafson, Hobbs, Andrews. Four more names of props who looks to have some quality which needs to be developed.

I do think that the second row is where we would suffer if a few lads got hurt. Because after Charts i dont think there are any solid options and i would not want to see Tito capped. Our options are limited after that to, Ian Evans who is injury prone. Goughy who is a great player but past his best and then who? Will James? never again please. But on the bright side Cook looks likely to be a real good prospect as does Shingler.

Coleman wrote:I think its just people being bitter. We have a fantastic front 5 with good players coming through and also good players being ignored. I.Thomas is good enough to go to the WC, we also have Gill developing at Saries, Effion moving to Toulon who yet may be untested at international level, i believe could hold his own and develop to be a very strong scrummaging tight head. Yapp who i have always thought to be over rated but he really showed up and played well against France in the 6N. Bevington, Gustafson, Hobbs, Andrews. Four more names of props who looks to have some quality which needs to be developed.

I do think that the second row is where we would suffer if a few lads got hurt. Because after Charts i dont think there are any solid options and i would not want to see Tito capped. Our options are limited after that to, Ian Evans who is injury prone. Goughy who is a great player but past his best and then who? Will James? never again please. But on the bright side Cook looks likely to be a real good prospect as does Shingler.

There are certainly a number of players emerging below the Welsh Squad that may well put their hands up over the next few years.

beshocked wrote:Your lineout is one of the worst in the 6nations. I don't call that depth at all.

Mmmm - you need to check your stats. That is horseshit of the lowest quality.

beshocked wrote:Your first choice frontrow is strong but the 2nd choices are average.

Ditto

beshocked wrote:England ...... better 2nd rows and scrums. Obviously the tri nations do.

England may have a better 2nd row, but there scrum as a whole is nothing to be feared. And in the tight Australia are little better than woeful.

beshocked wrote:Wales are an average side who pretend to be otherwise.

Ah, the nub of your post. Did mummy run away with a Welshman?

ML the 6 nations placings and world rankings would agree.

Wales are an average team. Let's not pretend otherwise.

You have promising players like Warburton and Lydiate in the backrow. Decent props like Adam Jones and Gethin Jenkins.

On the other hand are sorely lacking in the 2nd row department. Your lineout is nothing special. Your hookers aren't that great.

My main point is I don't look at the Welsh front five and go wow! It's no better than other front fives in the 6 nations.

Until Wales prove otherwise like beating a SH side you are an average team. You have potential though.

Strength in depth is a large weakness in Wales which won't disappear overnight.

2010

Wales vs NZ

Wales 8 won, 2 lost
NZ 6 won, 3 lost

Lineout success rate

Wales 80.0%
NZ 66.7%

Scrum
Wales 7 won 1 lost 87.5%
NZ 3 won 0 lost 100.0%

Wales vs SA

Scrum
Wales 3 won 0 lost %100
SA 8 won 1 lost 88.9%

Lineout
Wales 10 won 1 lost
SA 7 won 2 lost
90.9% Lineout success rate 77.8%

Wales vs Australia
Scrums
Wales 12 won 0 lost
Aus 3 won, 0 lost

Lineout
Wales 12 won 2 lost 85.7%
Aus 8 won, 1 lost 88.9%

The last times I saw Wales play was the November tests and I thought your tight forwards looked pretty good.

beshocked wrote:
Until Wales prove otherwise like beating a SH side you are an average team. You have potential though.

Wales have beaten Australia 10 times, New Zealand 3 Times and SA once.

Ireland for example (the highest ranked NH team in the IRB rankings) have never beaten NZ, Australia 8 times and South Africa four times.

There is little vs the SH giants that differ between the two teams.

In regards to the lineout issue, which people have pointed too as being a problem. We have Huw Bennet being forced down out throat every International game. Rather then gloating you could be sympathetic.

beshocked wrote:
Strength in depth is a large weakness in Wales which won't disappear overnight.

The question is whether that is much different to the other top ten teams?

I certainly think that NZ, South Africa and France are streets ahead, but Australia, Ireland, Italy, England, Scotland, Argentina and Fiji are not.

maestegmafia wrote:There is little vs the SH giants that differ between the two teams.

A record that neither Wales nor Ireland should be proud of.

SafeAsMilk wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:There is little vs the SH giants that differ between the two teams.

A record that neither Wales nor Ireland should be proud of.

Why should they not be proud of that?

beshocked wrote:ML the 6 nations placings and world rankings would agree.

Wales are an average team. Let's not pretend otherwise.

You have promising players like Warburton and Lydiate in the backrow. Decent props like Adam Jones and Gethin Jenkins.

On the other hand are sorely lacking in the 2nd row department. Your lineout is nothing special. Your hookers aren't that great.

My main point is I don't look at the Welsh front five and go wow! It's no better than other front fives in the 6 nations.

Until Wales prove otherwise like beating a SH side you are an average team. You have potential though.

Strength in depth is a large weakness in Wales which won't disappear overnight.

I didn't know rankings decided a teams strength in depth in the front 5.

Adam Jones and Gethin Jenkins didn't feature in this 6 Nations, we relied on 2nd choice props. Adam only came back when Mitchell broke his arm. Arguably, James and Mitchell in the front row is as strong as our first choice.

It's better than the front fives of Eng, Sco, Ire and Italy. Perhaps on par with the French.

It's true we're lacking at 13 and number 8. Can't be as bad as having the largest pool of players in the world and still not being able to find half decent centre's or consistent half-backs.

mm,

I think you can add James to the list of T/heads as well as he has proved more than capable of both sides of the scrum.

I am hoping Lewis Roberts has a good injury free season next year and I would love it if one of the Regions brought Gill back home.

Hooker is a bit more owrrying for me as Hibbard seems to be picking up a few injuries of late and after that its currently Bennett. Next season I hope Owen comes back to full fitness and Burns continues his good form for us down at Dave.

2nd rows we have Davies, AWJ, Charterris then R Jones, the Scarlets have some good up and coming young second rowers who will hopefully get game time and Regional experience.

BUT WE NEED AN A TEAM so when we do have to use the likes of Burns or Owen or Reed etc then the step from Regional to full International isn't as big.

maestegmafia wrote:

SafeAsMilk wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:There is little vs the SH giants that differ between the two teams.

A record that neither Wales nor Ireland should be proud of.

Why should they not be proud of that?

Their records, especially away from home, are woeful.

SafeAsMilk wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:

SafeAsMilk wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:There is little vs the SH giants that differ between the two teams.

A record that neither Wales nor Ireland should be proud of.

Why should they not be proud of that?

Their records, especially away from home, are woeful.

You might notice that most teams in the worlds records against Australia, New Zealand and South Africa, home or away are pretty poor.

I would say that any victory over them is something to be proud of, they are exceptionally good at rugby.

nottins_jones wrote:
It's better than the front fives of Eng, Sco, Ire and Italy. Perhaps on par with the French.

Almost everything you said here is wrong.

Your front five is not better than Ireland or England. Secondly your Front Row is not better than Italy's and your 2nd row is not better than Scotland's.

Finaly your front 5 has nothing even closley resembeling parity with the French.

maestegmafia wrote:

SafeAsMilk wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:

SafeAsMilk wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:There is little vs the SH giants that differ between the two teams.

A record that neither Wales nor Ireland should be proud of.

Why should they not be proud of that?

Their records, especially away from home, are woeful.

You might notice that most teams in the worlds records against Australia, New Zealand and South Africa, home or away are pretty poor.

I would say that any victory over them is something to be proud of, they are exceptionally good at rugby.

Yes, but there is too much "oh, but we played well enough and got within a score, (at home)".

Yes it is. Everything I say is correct.

Scotland, you have two second rows that are good at carrying the ball because of they're giant size and that's about it.

"Secondly your Front Row is not better than Italy's.."

The Italians are so overated when it comes to their front row. Castro was magnificent back in the day and ever since then there's been a myth that Italy churn out mighty props. All they do is collapse the scrum and the once great Martin is a big cuplrit for this.

nottins_jones wrote:Yes it is. Everything I say is correct.

Scotland, you have two second rows that are good at carrying the ball because of they're giant size and that's about it.

This has nothing to do with Scotland, I am not claiming we have a water tight pack of forwards, I would say Wales has the edge particuilarly at Hooker and Tight head at the moment.

However Scotland's 2nd row is arguably the best in the home nations in terms of Strength and depth.

Hines a HC winner and one of the best locks in Europe.

Kellock a fantastic Line out manager who has seemed to get the better of every single team in the line out all last season.

Gray is one of the best young players in the world right now. He has pace, good hands, is a solid tackler and again a brilliant option in the line out.

Hamilton, instrumental in Glaws' fantastic season down south and adds grunt in the boiler room combined with a fantastic work rate at the breakdown.

Wales have AWJ, who to be honest looks nothing like a Lion now. Other than that the ground seems pretty thin in terms of locks.

Your front row can be brilliant when fully fit Jones, Rees and Jenkins but your 2nd row is very weak. To say it compares better than Scotland, England, Ireland or France is pure fiction.

SafeAsMilk wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:

SafeAsMilk wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:

SafeAsMilk wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:There is little vs the SH giants that differ between the two teams.

A record that neither Wales nor Ireland should be proud of.

Why should they not be proud of that?

Their records, especially away from home, are woeful.

You might notice that most teams in the worlds records against Australia, New Zealand and South Africa, home or away are pretty poor.

I would say that any victory over them is something to be proud of, they are exceptionally good at rugby.

Yes, but there is too much "oh, but we played well enough and got within a score, (at home)".

I think you are a poster who has little interest in debating rugby but who would rather provoke an argument with people like myself who have no interest in your ways... I am sick and tired of the stuff you lay in response to my posts

I will answer your final post here to say that, "oh, but we played well enough and got within a score, (at home)" is the perspective of every team that plays against the best and I am not sure to whom you are making a comparison.

You can not argue that the three top Southern Hemisphere nations have not been at the top of world rugby for almost the entirety of the sports history, give or take a blip of dominance by a nation other than them for a year or two. Therefor any result against them by a Nation ranked below them is a considerably feat and something to be proud of no matter which nation home or away. You should know that if you are actually a fan of rugby.

I think you are off topic and have no interest in staying on topic.

Well said!

As I was saying Nottins_Jones, Scotland seem to have a far better pool of talent in the boiler room than wales.

In truth from my post I would say Wales are slugging it out with Italy in terms of strength and depth at lock.

maestegmafia wrote:

biltongbek wrote:
I think you under estimate the depth a little, the above list are the players from SA, Aus and NZ that were rated by planet rugby this super XV.

frightening list mate

Sykes is not eligible for SA though as he is soon to be a Rabo Direct Pro 12 player and not SA based.

Kiwireddevil wrote:
All, just locking this temporarily, will be back up in 5.

OK all. Over the past couple of weeks there's been a pile of petty bickering between a few English and Welsh posters, with posters on both sides of the fence posting some snide little asides, and then posters reacting or over-reacting to it. It's all getting a little childish and tiresome. I'd also point out that banter in print can come across slightly differently to spoken conversation. So if you're making a post in jest stick an emoticon on the end - that's what they're there for (even though they may look a little childish too). And people, if someone has tried to make a witty aside that hasn't worked, count to 10 before losing your rag. Remember WUMs thrive on abuse - it's what they're trying to get. Think about how you'd react if someone said that to your face - if it's bad enough that you'd take a swing then either you have an anger management problem , or it's something to report to a Mod and walk away from. Secondly, if you're about to post something that might get you hit in the pub, DON'T POST IT.

There has been some pretty good debate in amongst the tripe too. And I'd remind everyone that someone who disagrees with you isn't necessarily on a wind up. No-one's right 100% of the time. Except Hobo

As Mods, we do end up taking action mostly against those reacting posters - like a referee penalising the person retaliating. However we do take notice of those who cause the problems in the 1st place. So if we do PM you about your posting style do please take note - we will be harsher on you when you do cross the line if you've been making a nuisance of yourself prior.

I'm sure that there must be a rule somewhere that once you are in your thirties you are too old to use smiley faces. Sorry can't bring myself to use them.

leinsterbaby wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:

biltongbek wrote:
I think you under estimate the depth a little, the above list are the players from SA, Aus and NZ that were rated by planet rugby this super XV.

frightening list mate

Sykes is not eligible for SA though as he is soon to be a Rabo Direct Pro 12 player and not SA based.

Explain that to me?

biltongbek wrote:

leinsterbaby wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:

biltongbek wrote:
I think you under estimate the depth a little, the above list are the players from SA, Aus and NZ that were rated by planet rugby this super XV.

frightening list mate

Sykes is not eligible for SA though as he is soon to be a Rabo Direct Pro 12 player and not SA based.

Explain that to me?

Didn't SA disband their over seas rule ?

Not being eligible is something totally different to not being selected.

Butch James, Frans Steyn and BJ Botha were all overseas based and was still selected.

bedfordwelsh wrote:mm,

I think you can add James to the list of T/heads as well as he has proved more than capable of both sides of the scrum.

I am hoping Lewis Roberts has a good injury free season next year and I would love it if one of the Regions brought Gill back home.

Hooker is a bit more owrrying for me as Hibbard seems to be picking up a few injuries of late and after that its currently Bennett. Next season I hope Owen comes back to full fitness and Burns continues his good form for us down at Dave.

2nd rows we have Davies, AWJ, Charterris then R Jones, the Scarlets have some good up and coming young second rowers who will hopefully get game time and Regional experience.

BUT WE NEED AN A TEAM so when we do have to use the likes of Burns or Owen or Reed etc then the step from Regional to full International isn't as big.

I think Gill will move back to Wales at some point but at the moment he isn't doing himself any harm. He's an AP winner now.

The problem for Wales is that you will never have the depth of the likes of France and England because you don't as many teams.

How strong the Welsh front five and it's depth is evidently debatable. It's hard to fathom that Wales might have good front five strength in depth as you haven't been historically known for it. Wales are known more for flashy backs.

Personally strength in depth is not something I would associate with Wales till I see more proof of it.

Having a lot of depth and having strength in depth are two different things.

Loosehead - no probs. Hooker, no probs, Tight head OK as long as Adam and Craig aren't injured at the same time. Locks - only two who can compete at international level. If one of those two go we're in trouble. In terms of performances. Scrums are great. Lineout was shocking prior to the 10/11 season just gone but has improved to the point of respectability - TOOK YOU LONG ENOUGH WARREN!!! In the loose, they can all handle reasonably well but our ball retention is woeful and turnovers at rucks are prolific. REALLY BAD! We don't get much beyond the gainline (tactics? Or is it lack of ball carrying?). Not too bad with mauls. So over all a decent tight unit, not very good in open play - depth at front row is pretty good but bad at lock.

Totallybiasedscarlet wrote:Loosehead - no probs. Hooker, no probs,

Just checking, no problems, or no props

No problems! Got a list of quality looseheads as long as a very long arm! It's tightheads we're struggling for.

Totallybiasedscarlet wrote:No problems! Got a list of quality looseheads as long as a very long arm! It's tightheads we're struggling for.

Well these days all teams struggle to get tight heads, the ball is put in so skew, you need the scrumhalf to hook it.

biltongbek wrote:

leinsterbaby wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:

biltongbek wrote:
I think you under estimate the depth a little, the above list are the players from SA, Aus and NZ that were rated by planet rugby this super XV.

frightening list mate

Sykes is not eligible for SA though as he is soon to be a Rabo Direct Pro 12 player and not SA based.

Explain that to me?

Don't SA have a policy against picking overseas based players? Sykes is off to Leinster.

beshocked wrote:
How strong the Welsh front five and it's depth is evidently debatable. It's hard to fathom that Wales might have good front five strength in depth as you haven't been historically known for it. Wales are known more for flashy backs.

We only had the opportunity to have flashy backs in the past because we had exemplary forwards, Delme Thomas, Graham Price, Charlie Faulkner, Mervyn Davies, Dai Morris, Bobby Windsor, Bob Norster were all some of the best in the business in their day.

leinsterbaby wrote:

biltongbek wrote:

leinsterbaby wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:

biltongbek wrote:
I think you under estimate the depth a little, the above list are the players from SA, Aus and NZ that were rated by planet rugby this super XV.

frightening list mate

Sykes is not eligible for SA though as he is soon to be a Rabo Direct Pro 12 player and not SA based.

Explain that to me?

Don't SA have a policy against picking overseas based players? Sykes is off to Leinster.

No they disbanded it a while ago. They have been selecting irish based players like BJ Botha for a few seasons.

Totallybiasedscarlet wrote:In the loose, they can all handle reasonably well but our ball retention is woeful and turnovers at rucks are prolific. REALLY BAD! We don't get much beyond the gainline (tactics? Or is it lack of ball carrying?). Not too bad with mauls. So over all a decent tight unit, not very good in open play - depth at front row is pretty good but bad at lock.

Many of the turnovers appear to be tactical impatience. Wales want things to happen to early, they dont seem to understand when they have the other team on the back foot and have an opportunity to exploit it. More so they dont have the patience to wait until they do and cancel out a move before it has seen fruition by an individual trying to make something work, they get caught and turned over.

Not really in the Tri nations though? Isn't that just in the odd November international game?

maestegmafia wrote:

Totallybiasedscarlet wrote:In the loose, they can all handle reasonably well but our ball retention is woeful and turnovers at rucks are prolific. REALLY BAD! We don't get much beyond the gainline (tactics? Or is it lack of ball carrying?). Not too bad with mauls. So over all a decent tight unit, not very good in open play - depth at front row is pretty good but bad at lock.

Many of the turnovers appear to be tactical impatience. Wales want things to happen to early, they dont seem to understand when they have the other team on the back foot and have an opportunity to exploit it. More so they dont have the patience to wait until they do and cancel out a move before it has seen fruition by an individual trying to make something work, they get caught and turned over.

Agreed. Also lack of organisation in the pack. All too often I see Mike Phillips looking around with the ball in the ruck with a scarcity of Welsh forwards protecting the ball. Oposition are very wise to this and just pile on through - end result, slow ball on the backfoot or turnover. Rucks should work like this. Ball carrier is tackled drives as hard as he can. At least thre forwards drive over him in sequence and clear out. Scrumhalf previously ready and waiting whips the ball out before the defence gets a chance to recover. When Wales do it it goes like this: Ball carrier falls over before tackler arrives. One or two forwards judo throw defenders out of the way. Phillips realising he needs to pass looks around for ages. Opposition realise no one is protecting Phillips and he's taking an age send in the troops to counter ruck. Phillips waves his arms whilst the other welsh forwards jog over to try and re-secure the ball.

It's embarrassing!

Totallybiasedscarlet wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:

Totallybiasedscarlet wrote:In the loose, they can all handle reasonably well but our ball retention is woeful and turnovers at rucks are prolific. REALLY BAD! We don't get much beyond the gainline (tactics? Or is it lack of ball carrying?). Not too bad with mauls. So over all a decent tight unit, not very good in open play - depth at front row is pretty good but bad at lock.

Many of the turnovers appear to be tactical impatience. Wales want things to happen to early, they dont seem to understand when they have the other team on the back foot and have an opportunity to exploit it. More so they dont have the patience to wait until they do and cancel out a move before it has seen fruition by an individual trying to make something work, they get caught and turned over.

Agreed. Also lack of organisation in the pack. All too often I see Mike Phillips looking around with the ball in the ruck with a scarcity of Welsh forwards protecting the ball. Oposition are very wise to this and just pile on through - end result, slow ball on the backfoot or turnover. Rucks should work like this. Ball carrier is tackled drives as hard as he can. At least thre forwards drive over him in sequence and clear out. Scrumhalf previously ready and waiting whips the ball out before the defence gets a chance to recover. When Wales do it it goes like this: Ball carrier falls over before tackler arrives. One or two forwards judo throw defenders out of the way. Phillips realising he needs to pass looks around for ages. Opposition realise no one is protecting Phillips and he's taking an age send in the troops to counter ruck. Phillips waves his arms whilst the other welsh forwards jog over to try and re-secure the ball.

It's embarrassing!

Its true, but there doesnt seem to be the collective encouragement from the halfbacks to get quick ball.

Have a watch of these clips and see how fast the ball gets to the outside backs.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_union/welsh/14054220.stm

I know this is thirty years ago and bunch of blokes old enough to be most of your grandfathers but Wales look like the All Blacks in comparison to what you are addressing.

It is because Edwards and Bennet or John are demanding faster and faster ball as Wales dominate the other team in an attacking breakdown.

We do still do that, but irregularly, and when we do do that we create wonderful phase play. But i feel Phillips and Jones make to many of the wrong decisions in attack, especially after five or six dominant phases of play.

I personally think the Welsh first choice front five has the edge on the Scotland front five, but that our reserve front 5 would have the edge on the Welsh reserve front five, meaning that Wales would have the edge on quality, but Scotland the edge on depth.

1st choice:

1. Jenkins vs. Jacobsen (Wales)
2. Rees vs. Ford (Wales)
3. Jones vs. Cross (Wales)
4. Davies vs. Gray (equal)
5. Jones vs. Hines (Scotland)

2nd choice:

1. James vs. Dickinson (Wales)
2. Hibbard vs. Lawson (equal)
3. Mitchell vs. Murray (Scotland)
4. Charteris vs. Hamilton (equal)
5. Reed vs. Kellock (Scotland)

Just my take on it. Pretty even really.

funnyExiledScot wrote:I personally think the Welsh first choice front five has the edge on the Scotland front five, but that our reserve front 5 would have the edge on the Welsh reserve front five, meaning that Wales would have the edge on quality, but Scotland the edge on depth.

1st choice:

1. Jenkins vs. Jacobsen (Wales)
2. Rees vs. Ford (Wales)
3. Jones vs. Cross (Wales)
4. Davies vs. Gray (equal)
5. Jones vs. Hines (Scotland)

2nd choice:

1. James vs. Dickinson (Wales)
2. Hibbard vs. Lawson (equal)
3. Mitchell vs. Murray (Scotland)
4. Charteris vs. Hamilton (equal)
5. Reed vs. Kellock (Scotland)

Just my take on it. Pretty even really.

Nicely done... That looks about right...!

maestegmafia wrote:

Totallybiasedscarlet wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:

Totallybiasedscarlet wrote:In the loose, they can all handle reasonably well but our ball retention is woeful and turnovers at rucks are prolific. REALLY BAD! We don't get much beyond the gainline (tactics? Or is it lack of ball carrying?). Not too bad with mauls. So over all a decent tight unit, not very good in open play - depth at front row is pretty good but bad at lock.

Many of the turnovers appear to be tactical impatience. Wales want things to happen to early, they dont seem to understand when they have the other team on the back foot and have an opportunity to exploit it. More so they dont have the patience to wait until they do and cancel out a move before it has seen fruition by an individual trying to make something work, they get caught and turned over.

Agreed. Also lack of organisation in the pack. All too often I see Mike Phillips looking around with the ball in the ruck with a scarcity of Welsh forwards protecting the ball. Oposition are very wise to this and just pile on through - end result, slow ball on the backfoot or turnover. Rucks should work like this. Ball carrier is tackled drives as hard as he can. At least thre forwards drive over him in sequence and clear out. Scrumhalf previously ready and waiting whips the ball out before the defence gets a chance to recover. When Wales do it it goes like this: Ball carrier falls over before tackler arrives. One or two forwards judo throw defenders out of the way. Phillips realising he needs to pass looks around for ages. Opposition realise no one is protecting Phillips and he's taking an age send in the troops to counter ruck. Phillips waves his arms whilst the other welsh forwards jog over to try and re-secure the ball.

It's embarrassing!

Its true, but there doesnt seem to be the collective encouragement from the halfbacks to get quick ball.

Have a watch of these clips and see how fast the ball gets to the outside backs.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_union/welsh/14054220.stm

I know this is thirty years ago and bunch of blokes old enough to be most of your grandfathers but Wales look like the All Blacks in comparison to what you are addressing.

It is because Edwards and Bennet or John are demanding faster and faster ball as Wales dominate the other team in an attacking breakdown.

We do still do that, but irregularly, and when we do do that we create wonderful phase play. But i feel Phillips and Jones make to many of the wrong decisions in attack, especially after five or six dominant phases of play.

Some superb footage there Maesteg! Also the great Carwyn James - My Dad was a pupil in Llandovery College when James was a Master there and an avid follower of his phoilosophy in sport. He'd ensure that he had the fittest players at his disposal and they would practice all the skills untill they could all be performed under pressure and at pace without a single mistake. He wouldn't necessarily select the best full-back or hooker, but the guy who fitted the team best and followed his philosophy. A superb coach who transformed world rugby. The Austrailians credit his aproach (which they adopted in the early eighties) for turning them into a serious rugby team and the All Blacks certainly looked at his methods following THAT Lions tour. Incedentally, my Dad coached junior football and cricked following James methods and his teams won 30 cups in 29 years - not bad eh?

On the matter of quick ball you can see it's value in those tries. You can see that physically our pack got shoved in a number of situations but they did their job in that they got that ball out quickly. The other thing I noticed was the support play. Excellent. The fact is the best teams (NZ are AWESOME at this) use quick ball, particularly turnover ball to attack immeadiately because they know the opponents defence will have lost it's structure and is at its most vulnerable when the ball is recovered quickly from phase play. EVERYONE switches on in attack - the support is there. As soon as that ball is moved the runner goes to break the gain line and someone is lloking to support, the carrier is looking to put someone into space. It's the best part of the game. Currently Wales have lost this particular Art. Untill Gatland decides to change the kick 1st think later strategy and does something about our forwards rucking and ball retention and selects a scrumhalf who isn't amongst the walking dead we wont find it again.

well said TBS