sam16111986 wrote: ↑Fri Apr 27, 2018 10:08 pm
chris111 wrote: ↑Fri Apr 27, 2018 5:25 pm
Rugbyflanker wrote: ↑Fri Apr 27, 2018 5:11 pm
I'm confident Bakewell will sort the forwards with a full preseason.
My original post mentioned the potential advantage of gaining an extra 2-3 weeks of pre-season work as a result of finishing 5th instead of 4th. Perhaps some intensive lineout drilling might be a constructive use of this time?!
Lineout? We've got much bigger problems than the lineout.
The defence has no line speed and doesn't guard well around the breakdown (see Falcons first try as a prime example). It's nowhere near a top 4 level of organisation.
The attacking patterns we run are strictly regimented and so basic we are left one dimensional. You see Ford trying to vary the game occasionally but no one really reads it because we are drilled to work the same play to the outside. You'll see amateur sides capable of more variation yet this is supposed to be our head coach's speciality.
I've bolded the bit I agree with very, very strongly. Local, club, or international, it doesn't matter. Good defensive line speed, with a well drilled defence is a huge contributor to, if not winning, at least "not losing" (if you see the difference) games.
Were it me, I'd start there. Put the fear of Martin Johnson* into other teams by knocking them on their behinds every time they get the ball. I'd even take a few honourable losses (heresy I know) by tiny margins if other teams feared to play us. I am beginning to think the Leicester coin is well beyond spent on that score unfortunately. Teams come to WR and play us away with their heads up because they know they'll "survive" the encounter. A score here or there, and time for a song on the bus.
I'd have to look the stats up, but from memory most of our successful seasons since professionalism have been associated with comparatively low Points Against (certainly tries against). That's not as trite as it sounds, a team can be porous but very high scoring.
Rush/blitz defences are risky, dog legs, gaps etc all can form and allow break away tries. In years gone past we've exploited this. But it's a lot less risky than allowing teams to play AT you and then having to pull off heroics to stop them. Take Newcastle's last score (Ref/TMO aside), it was inevitable. Phase after phase of attritional play. Inches gained each ruck. Tigers were, if not heroic, actually good during that last minute or two, we did the job of extending those phases past the dying seconds of the game. Newcastle didn't go wide (why? I think our cover was very slightly intimidating, although I also think this was an error at two points from Falcons), and we defended well.
But at >80 mins, bodies and brains are tired, we'd spent ~10 mins letting them get their head, build their confidence. That try (or another like it, or another wide) were a dead cert unless we regained possession. I wouldn't want my body on the line like Tigers' bodies were in that part of the game, but we should not have been there at all. 10 mins to go we should be conservative, retain ball, manage (slight?) lead, smack the opposition back every time. Sure BPs and such are season changers, but you earn those, you don't deserve them, and frankly against Falcons 10 mins left was not the time to even consider it.
Then, as Sam says, we go for heads up, attacking rugby. You don't just earn the right to go wide, you earn the right to attack (breakaways and interceptions aside). We're not earning this. We're not retaining our ball. As others have mentioned our half backs look a bit at sea. That's my twopenn'orth. Build a monster defence, train attack in the background, but focus on caulking the hull first, stop the leaks, then try to pirate the entire Carribean!
Crikey, those metaphors got well out of hand.
*Others might say "God", I know who I am more scared of. Martin Johnson exists for starters...
happens.
