Six Nations 2017
-
Was Jones the only child left in an orphanage?
-
@Catogrande said in Six Nations 2017:
Well, bugger. Just bugger. England were dogshite, Ireland were click or two above in the intensity and even more so in the thought processes. Deserved winners. Congratulations @Pot-Hale and @profitius and any other Irish posters.
Disappointed with the result but much more disappointed with the performance.
Bugger
The important part is how you bounce back ,
( Not trying to make it about us but I guess we have been the benchmark )
We usually have one disappointing loss a year on average , and most of the time respond by playing better than ever -
@kiwiinmelb said in Six Nations 2017:
@Catogrande said in Six Nations 2017:
Well, bugger. Just bugger. England were dogshite, Ireland were click or two above in the intensity and even more so in the thought processes. Deserved winners. Congratulations @Pot-Hale and @profitius and any other Irish posters.
Disappointed with the result but much more disappointed with the performance.
Bugger
The important part is how you bounce back ,
( Not trying to make it about us but I guess we have been the benchmark )
We usually have one disappointing loss a year on average , and most of the time respond by playing better than everIt's tough trying to bounceback against the Argies with all core players on Lions duty. Once reunited the loss will be just a distant memory.
If England are aiming to be a legitimate contender for best team in the world I hope when they assess the tournament they fall more on the side of being a team that probably played more shit halves than good ones - rather than the team a try away from a world record streak.
They definitely have developed some mental edge or ability to grind out wins and that is huge - but the fact they have had to pull that out almost every game (sans Scotland) is something that hopefully Eddie Jones is reminding the players. Not quite sure they have separated themselves from the rest of the 6N yet.
-
-
@jegga said in Six Nations 2017:
Spiro vents a little bit here
Good article. Nice to see someone of standing in the game call the Walrus out for the antiquated, dinosaur fuckstick that he is.
I did have to look up what 'expunged' meant though.
-
@MN5 said in Six Nations 2017:
@jegga said in Six Nations 2017:
Spiro vents a little bit here
Good article. Nice to see someone of standing in the game call the Walrus out for the antiquated, dinosaur fuckstick that he is.
I did have to look up what 'expunged' meant though.
He didnt miss did he ?
-
Some interesting analysis on the difference Payne made to the Ireland game on Saturday
Analysis: Jared Payne adds another dimension to Ireland's attack
The Ulsterman showed his attacking quality from fullback against England.
The analysis is accurate but also highlights the difference between some of the NH play and that of SH teams. WE find this way of playing an expectation rather than something 'unusual'. If you watched a Chiefs game without jersey numbers you would probably struggle to know who is playing in which position in the backline a lot of the time. You'd certainly struggle to know if Cruden or DMac was playing 10.
-
@canefan said in Six Nations 2017:
@Crucial Total rugby
Yep. It's a concept that hasn't taken hold up north yet. The teams up here tend to prefer to play very positionally which results in very structured attack. If the expected players aren't in the expected positions you see hesitation..
That's not to say one way is vastly superior to another, it is different styles of playing the game and makes it very interesting.
As NH teams have shown in the past a committed and organised defence that can keep its concentration for 82 minutes can frustrate a creative attack.
-
@Crucial said in Six Nations 2017:
@canefan said in Six Nations 2017:
@Crucial Total rugby
Yep. It's a concept that hasn't taken hold up north yet. The teams up here tend to prefer to play very positionally which results in very structured attack. If the expected players aren't in the expected positions you see hesitation..
That's not to say one way is vastly superior to another, it is different styles of playing the game and makes it very interesting.
As NH teams have shown in the past a committed and organised defence that can keep its concentration for 82 minutes can frustrate a creative attack.
Crucial, i would argue that the NZ way of playing is far superior. The results are there for all to see. For the sake of argument, let's ignore NZ teams and look at a different examples.
Connacht won the pro12 last season by playing the NZ way. They've far less playing resources than Leinster (just one player in the Ireland squad at the weekend) but they ripped Leinster apart in that final. They wanted another Kiwi coach to continue that way of playing so they signed Kieran Keane.
The Scots have also moved in that direction and had their best 6 nations in 11 years. Glasgow layed the groundwork for that. They won the pro12 two seasons ago playing some very good rugby.
I think teams are starting to change but in the NH once winter comes and the ball gets slippy, the coaches go back to their comfort blanket of bosh rugby. In Ireland, Leinster are playing a more unstructured way this season ( brought in Graham Henry for a few weeks over the summer) and they've already beaten the pro12 try scoring record with 5 games to go. Munster play a kick chase game and Ulster try to play ball but look badly coached. Joe Schmidt is starting to get criticism now for Ireland's lack of tries.
In Wales, the Scarlets and Ospreys play a nice brand of rugby that's more SH in style. Wales though pick the most defensive side possible. As with Ireland, fear of losing overrules attacking rugby. I'd say too that it would help to move the 6 nations back a few weeks. It's over just as the weather is just starting to change for the better.
I was impressed by the U20 teams. Compared to the past, most teams are trying to play good attacking rugby.
-
@profitius said in Six Nations 2017:
Connacht won the pro12 last season by playing the NZ way. They've far less playing resources than Leinster (just one player in the Ireland squad at the weekend) but they ripped Leinster apart in that final.
Connacht played that way by bringing in a stack of kiwis in key positions. If they tried playing "NZ rugby" with the basic Connacht team it would have been the same result as any other club team doing so.
The "NZ way" relies on guys trained from childhood to look to avoid contact & look to pass from contact, players with fast hands who run support lines. Teams without that base cannot just switch to playing that way. Its not like going from rush to slide defence.
England have moved on a lot by picking a 1st five / 2nd five combo - something NZ has done forever, and picking ball playing forwards - Mako Vunipola in particular, but also Jamie George, Launchbury, Robshaw & Itoje. They are all the type of ball playing forwards that are produced continously in NZ. But you can only pick the players you have.
It's not a case of picking a hooker with Dane Coles pace - if you don't have any hookers with his pace. Equally you can't take a slow hooker & go "we'd like to play like Coles"
Scotland got round it by just picking Glasgow. If you have the talent base you pick guys who will run great lines & know guys will be there, if you don't have the base you pick combinations who know what line to run because they practice with that combo every week.
The big difference between north & south is not style, its basic skills.
-
@gollum said in Six Nations 2017:
@profitius said in Six Nations 2017:
Connacht won the pro12 last season by playing the NZ way. They've far less playing resources than Leinster (just one player in the Ireland squad at the weekend) but they ripped Leinster apart in that final.
Connacht played that way by bringing in a stack of kiwis in key positions. If they tried playing "NZ rugby" with the basic Connacht team it would have been the same result as any other club team doing so.
The "NZ way" relies on guys trained from childhood to look to avoid contact & look to pass from contact, players with fast hands who run support lines. Teams without that base cannot just switch to playing that way. Its not like going from rush to slide defence.
England have moved on a lot by picking a 1st five / 2nd five combo - something NZ has done forever, and picking ball playing forwards - Mako Vunipola in particular, but also Jamie George, Launchbury, Robshaw & Itoje. They are all the type of ball playing forwards that are produced continously in NZ. But you can only pick the players you have.
It's not a case of picking a hooker with Dane Coles pace - if you don't have any hookers with his pace. Equally you can't take a slow hooker & go "we'd like to play like Coles"
Scotland got round it by just picking Glasgow. If you have the talent base you pick guys who will run great lines & know guys will be there, if you don't have the base you pick combinations who know what line to run because they practice with that combo every week.
The big difference between north & south is not style, its basic skills.
In that final there were 4 kiwis in the squad. The 19 others also have to be some bit comfortable playing that way.
There's stacks of kiwis in french teams too and you should see how they play.But its going a bit off point because i was originally talking about the style of play, not the quality of player.
-
@profitius said in Six Nations 2017:
@Crucial said in Six Nations 2017:
@canefan said in Six Nations 2017:
@Crucial Total rugby
Yep. It's a concept that hasn't taken hold up north yet. The teams up here tend to prefer to play very positionally which results in very structured attack. If the expected players aren't in the expected positions you see hesitation..
That's not to say one way is vastly superior to another, it is different styles of playing the game and makes it very interesting.
As NH teams have shown in the past a committed and organised defence that can keep its concentration for 82 minutes can frustrate a creative attack.
Crucial, i would argue that the NZ way of playing is far superior. The results are there for all to see. For the sake of argument, let's ignore NZ teams and look at a different examples.
Connacht won the pro12 last season by playing the NZ way. They've far less playing resources than Leinster (just one player in the Ireland squad at the weekend) but they ripped Leinster apart in that final. They wanted another Kiwi coach to continue that way of playing so they signed Kieran Keane.
The Scots have also moved in that direction and had their best 6 nations in 11 years. Glasgow layed the groundwork for that. They won the pro12 two seasons ago playing some very good rugby.
I think teams are starting to change but in the NH once winter comes and the ball gets slippy, the coaches go back to their comfort blanket of bosh rugby. In Ireland, Leinster are playing a more unstructured way this season ( brought in Graham Henry for a few weeks over the summer) and they've already beaten the pro12 try scoring record with 5 games to go. Munster play a kick chase game and Ulster try to play ball but look badly coached. Joe Schmidt is starting to get criticism now for Ireland's lack of tries.
In Wales, the Scarlets and Ospreys play a nice brand of rugby that's more SH in style. Wales though pick the most defensive side possible. As with Ireland, fear of losing overrules attacking rugby. I'd say too that it would help to move the 6 nations back a few weeks. It's over just as the weather is just starting to change for the better.
I was impressed by the U20 teams. Compared to the past, most teams are trying to play good attacking rugby.
The weather argument only holds water (no pun intended) in the puggy uneven fields at lower grades. Although we have a few of those in NZ as well.
Believe it or not it does actually rain in NZ (that's why our grass is green as well). We use the same ball and have access to the same turf management knowledge. The difference is not weather, it is attitude. -
The other advantage to playing this way is the need to train a quick transfer from attack to defence and regular practice of it. Teams like the Canes and Chiefs will take chances in attack yet if a ball is spilled or turned over will cover quickly on Defence.
The risk averse methods of play in the NH mean that when turnovers occur they are often slow to regroup and leave holes and mismatches to be exploited by a good attack. As they often don't play against good attacks then the get away with it. -
@Crucial said in Six Nations 2017:
The other advantage to playing this way is the need to train a quick transfer from attack to defence and regular practice of it. Teams like the Canes and Chiefs will take chances in attack yet if a ball is spilled or turned over will cover quickly on Defence.
The risk averse methods of play in the NH mean that when turnovers occur they are often slow to regroup and leave holes and mismatches to be exploited by a good attack. As they often don't play against good attacks then the get away with it.This area has been exploited massively in the post-Henry era. Don't get me wrong the 2009-2013 ABs and NZ Super Rugby teams were good counter attacking teams, but the last 5 years have been next level. And only so much of that can be done in the AB set up, especially given the assembly generally a week before their first fixture. The bulk of the work is done at lower levels, so even if Schmidt and Cotter or Jones are keen to play that way they don't have enough of the cattle to do it.
I think the cohesion between the AB set up and the 5 SR teams (and to a lesser extent M10 Cup teams) is huge here. There is a lot more knowledge sharing and resource borrowing that goes on elsewhere. It does help having a concentrated playing base, but it can work the other way when you get a Lam/Kirwan/Hammett/Nuciforia-at-the-end scenario where one rogue coach can take 1/5th of the playing populous offline.
But once you get enough of the franchises on side it does kind of become a survival of the fittest type thing and to keep up you have to adapt.
Also so many resources and such a focus is being put into the transition game. It seems Smith's role is pretty much exclusively this with the ABs and they were desperate to keep him. I've seen tutorials with Rennie that hint that it is his core focus with the Chiefs.
A lot of the northern unions and clubs I think still delegate the role of a defensive coach as primarily tackling skills and setting the defensive pattern etc.
-
