And Marto's call while the TMO deliberated over the forward pass "in the best interests of rugby they should award the try". I nearly threw my pint at the screen in :jbs:
That man seriously needs a second eye!!!
Printable View
And Marto's call while the TMO deliberated over the forward pass "in the best interests of rugby they should award the try". I nearly threw my pint at the screen in :jbs:
That man seriously needs a second eye!!!
Congratulations to a severely depleted and traumatised Reds grinding out an 18:6 win over a disappointing Western Force in Brisbane.
The wrap-ups by Coach Michael Foley – “We were outmuscled at the breakdown and murdered at the set piece” and Captain Sam Wykes – “No excuses – weren’t up to it tonight” – says it all.
This was a very difficult game to watch in replay to collect the ruck statistics.
Remember:
1. Early means 1st or 2nd AFTER the ball carrier has been tackled and brought to ground.
2. Impact means active engagement: strong physical contact, changed shape of ruck, clean-out, protecting ball etc. (more than hand on someone’s bum or arriving after the hard work has been done). Yes it’s subjective - but as I collect all data at least it’s consistent.
3. Impact DOES NOT equate to Effectiveness. I’ve concluded that coming up with an effectiveness measure is just too hard.
Attachment 3672
Attachment 3673
CORRECTION: McCalman's Totals should be 14 11 13 & 79% & 93%; Attack 73% 91%. Charles Def Early should be 50%. :(
Comments:
1. Ruck involvement by the Western Force Forwards showed the same trend which appeared in the game plan by the Wallabies in the latter stage of the 2014 RC and continued through the EOY Tests: standing off defensive rucks and only engaging when there was a clear advantage and opportunity to gain a turn-over. As in the game against the Waratahs, WF Forward rucks in Attack outnumbered rucks in Defence 4:1. The WF Back Row gained 3 turn-overs (Chris Alcock 2, Brynard Stander 1).
2. Ruck involvement by the Reds Forwards, particularly by Liam Gill and Adam Thomson, showed a more traditional game plan with a higher level of involvement in Defensive Rucks. Reds Forward Rucks outnumbered rucks in Defence about 2:1. The Reds Back Row gained 6 turnovers (Liam Gill 4; Adam Thomson 2).
3. Liam Gill was the standout Forward/Back Rower and clearly outpointed his opposite No 7 Chris Alcock. Liam Gill earned 4 turn-over, had 2.5 x more ruck involvements, but also had 13 tackles (at 87% effectiveness) and 4 carries for 15m gain. Chris Alcock generally showed a faster arrival and more impact.
4. Adam Thomson clearly outpointed his opposite No6 Angus Cottrell. Thomson showed a more sustained effort, similar speed to and impact at the ruck, had a strong lineout performance, 2 turn-overs, made 14 tackles (at 93%) and 4 carries for 16m gain.
5. Gill and Thompson worked extremely well together with effective individual and joint ruck involvement.
6. Angus Cottrell’s effort was a good follow-up to his game against the Waratahs with sustained early arrival and impact
7. Ben McCalman clearly outpointed his opposite No 8 Jake Schatz with faster arrival time and more impact, similar tackle count (10 at 100%) and strong ball carries (8 carries for 51m).
8. Sam Wykes was the best performing Lock with ruck engagements and tackle count nearly equal to Kotze and McDuling combined. Both Kotze and McDuling generally have higher impact upon rucks. Steve Mafi showed an improved ruck performance over his game against the Waratahs.
9. Honours fairly even for ruck involvement by Nathan Charles and Saia Fianga’a.
10. Tetera Faulkner also showed a markedly improved ruck performance compared to last week, and gains the ruck honours for Props for his 80 minute effort. Special mention to James Slipper who had 14 ruck engagements (71%/100%) in his 28 minutes.
11. Chris Heiberg’s ruck effort was marred by his Yellow Card for transgressions at the breakdown.
12. Ruck involvement was clearly not a strong point for Ben Daley with slowest arrival and minimal impact.
The following tables show ruck involvement for each 10-minutes of the match.
Attachment 3674
Attachment 3675
Comments:
1. Commendable 80 minute efforts by Gill, Thompson, Wykes, Faulkner and McCalman.
2. Number of rucks 40-60 mins impacted by focus on scrums.
Other significant ruck efforts:
Reds Kuridrani – 15 rucks (73%/67%); Slipper (28 min) – 14 rucks (71%/100%)
Force Hoskins (24 min) – 15 rucks (67%/80%); Rasolea – 13 rucks (85%/100%)
Observations re Michael Hooper & Will Skelton Rucks against the Rebels
There has been significant discussion regarding the efforts by Michael Hooper and Will Skelton against the Rebels on the weekend.
As follow-up I gathered the following ruck stats.
Attachment 3676
Comments:
Michael Hooper
1. 47 rucks is an impressive total. Other stats: a team-high 13 tackles at 87%, 8 carries for 39m and 1 turnover.
2. Hooper’s 66% impact is lower than most Forwards in the Reds v Force game.
3. Despite arriving at Defensive rucks early, Hooper earned 1 turnover from these 12 rucks. Gill earned 4 from 15 rucks; Thomson earned 1 from 10 rucks and Alcock earned 2 from 6 rucks.
4. Hooper put in a mighty early effort. By my observations he was virtually spent by the 50 minute mark, positioned himself out wide for 20 minutes and then rallied for the last 10 minutes.
5. Breakdown of rucks for each 10 mins: 10, 10, 6, 3, 8, 4, 0, 6.
Will Skelton
1. 20 rucks in 51 minutes a commendable effort. Other stats: 5 tackles at 83%, 8 carries for 7m.
2. Not surprisingly arrival to the ruck is late and average impact is low.
3. By my observations Skelton could barely raise a jog after the first 20 minutes and was usually at least 10 m behind the game.
4. Breakdown of rucks for each 10 mins: 1, 7, 5, 4, 3, 0.
I still call bullshit on the yellow card. Chris went for the tackle in my opinion.
Great work again Andrew-bloody brill! What I don't understand is if the stats (to me anyway) seem so similar by both the Force and the Reds how come the game was so lopsided? I did notice that the Force really held off in the rucks and I couldn't understand if it was deliberate or they were just too tired cos that seemed to be where they got hammered Ie leading to Turners try. What's your idea about what was happening?
PMSL when the Reds were running out under the Stadium, and right beside them was a very conspicuous cop car. Didn't anyone tell them Hunt had already left.
LOL! Yes we saw that too and had a good laugh - thought it was put there deliberately to make the Reds nervous.
The ruck stats are only part of the story.
We appeared jaded from the start. Can't explain that other than the 6-day changeover and the hard game against the Tahs.
There were certainly some sore bodies (Coleman for example had 2 x caulked thighs from TPN's brutal tackle)
We began with being late/slow to the breakdown and kicked away too much possession.
Just like last year we were reluctant to give our backs a chance with the ball.
Would also like to see Mafi used more as a ball carrier with support as he seems able to break the line with his bulk.
Gill and Thomson had great impact very early and Gus and Alcock seemed reluctant to mix it with them for a while.
We were holding off on D rucks - the same as for the Tahs game. This is one of the places that we're missing Hodgo.
We were killed at the set piece and seemed slow to the contact point all day.
Thomson's early impact and losing Coleman seemed to rattle our lineout.
They slowed down a lot more of our attacking rucks.
We gave away too many penalties.
Chris H's Yellow Card stole a lot of momentum from our game at a critical time.
At 2 stages we seemed to gained some momentum only to get pinged yet again.
We were well in the game until Turner's try.
It's a long season and Michael Foley is obviously trying to manage the team by taking Cottrell, Charles and Heiberg off at 56 min.
Another short changeover for the game against the Hurricanes.
Losing Alcock wasn't planned.
He has to test the bench to see what their fresh legs could do and we made headway when they came on.
This game will be remembered for the one that got away as the Reds were ripe for the picking.
Andrew, Im sure it was interesting. Its quicker to read "War and Peace" though. Was the synopsis that the Force was raped at the breakdown, lost the collisions, were 2nd best at set piece and kicked all their posession away?