Will England 'do a Wales' on Wales?

I was interested to hear the comments of Ben Foden this morning on how England plan to counter Wales at Twickenham this Saturday:

"If you look at all the games where Wales have broken through and scored tries it is because someone has gone high on a big strong ball-carrier. It has enabled them either to get the offload going or carry a bit farther and put someone else into space. We'll be looking to chop them low and get them down to the ground quickly.

"We don't want to be getting into an arm-wrestle with guys like Roberts and North and Jonathan Davies. They're very strong ball-carriers and they can shrug you off. We don't want to be giving them easy metres so we need to be going in low and chopping them nice and early. We need to get our back-row into the game as well. If we're chopping these guys down before the gain line we can really utilise that sort of field position."

(LINK: http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/feb/22/ben-foden-england-wales-six-nations )

Take yourself back to last year's World Cup. Ireland, fresh from beating the Wallabies and seeing off Italy, were widely seen as favourites for their quarter-final clash with Wales. Ireland's ball-carrying back row of Stephen Ferris, Sean O'Brien and Jamie Heaslip had made a huge impression - literally - on the tournament with their tackle-busting runs and they were tipped to do the same against Wales. As it happened, Wales's masterstroke was to return to the almost-forgotten art of tackling low; rather than going high in the tackle and risking being bounced off by the Irish back row, Wales took their legs and stopped them in their tracks.

Will Saturday's match see England performing the same trick against Wales and giving them a taste of their own World Cup medicine?

Its a good idea but will it actually work? For England to tackle low on the Welsh they will have to use a rush defence to perfection. If they give the Welsh backline room to build up a head of steam, i am not sure if going low will work given the strength of the Welsh backline.

I will also thank you not to mention the RWC luckless

A good point. Rugby trends come and go. The Blitz defence was prevalent in the 50's. The risk of tackling a la Lydiate is that the tackler can be compromised by a last minute change of focus on the point of attack. The man rushing up leaves a gap behind him.

Erm - isn't "going low" on a tackler the best way to enable them to offload? Surely stopping an offload is all about wrapping up the ball with the player? or cutting off his offloading options by getting men between the ball carrier and his supporting runners (or subtly obstructing the supporting players New Zealand style?)

I am all for tackling low but if a backline gets moving then man and ball tackles are the only option.

Billy is coreect, it very much depends on the situation at the time. Tackling low when the ball carrier has an ability to offload well isn't going to stop the momentum.

Ireland surprised Australia by keeping the ball carrier in the air to turn the tackle into a maul.

Then ensuring ball and man at the same time is another option.

I personally think he is blowing smoke like any other pre match interview.

In any case, going low in the tackle carries its own risks. A player can always step out of the tackle or, if you go too low and he knows what's coming, simply jump and avoid you altogether.

miteyironpaw wrote:Erm - isn't "going low" on a tackler the best way to enable them to offload? Surely stopping an offload is all about wrapping up the ball with the player? or cutting off his offloading options by getting men between the ball carrier and his supporting runners (or subtly obstructing the supporting players New Zealand style?)

Zat is what I zaid Hugo.

We were safe enough against Ireland in that regard though

I think that Wales got the tactics spot on against Ireland in the 1/4 final Glas. The used the rush defence to absolute perfection and caught Ireland cold time after time. The rush defence has to be absolutely spot on if you are going to tackle low man on man. No room for error or a player will be behind the defensive line before you know it.

I am not sure that Englands defensive line is quick enough to use a rush defence so i would imagine that the will set the same defensive lines as they have done in the first two matches.

It will be interesting to see how the Welsh defence is handled by the officials. I thought they have been guilty of creeping offside both blatantly standing ahead of the line at ruck time, anticipating by advancing before the ball is out of the ruck and also umbrella-ing up behind the ref when his back was turned unopposed by the linesmen (sorry assistant referees) - no offence to Wales there intended - if you can get away with it, then good on you.

Lancaster has been very quiet in the media, I'm surprised he hasn't put pressure on the referees in the lead up in match week. His predecessor's certainly didn't shy away from this kind of thing.

If the officials don't hold Wales back, then England must find ways to buy space and time by putting doubt in their minds, varying play, kicking long, chips just over the line, grubbers early on, or having the back three run deep supporting lines to outflank the envelope. I also think the Welsh umbrella opens itself up as vulnerable to that old English league convert classic - the cross-field kick pass.

It's interesting that a Wales team who for years most potent attacking weapon was the diminutive Shane Williams now believe they are a tougher proposition because they are all brawn, size and rush. If England are smart enough, then just like Shane Williams did for years, we *can* indeed do a Wales on Wales.

The point about tackling low is a fair one. But there are two important differences between the Welsh back-row, especially Lydiate, taking the legs off big ball-carriers like the Irish back-row, and English backs doing the same to the Welsh backs.

The first difference is pace. Ferris, O'Brien and Heaslip were tackled at half-pace before they'd made more than a couple of metres but backs like Roberts, Davies, North and Cuthbert will usually get the ball when they're already moving with a lot of pace. There's rarely any second-chance with a leg-tackle. If it's missed, the player is away.

The second difference is space. The Irish and Welsh back-rows were operating in fairly confined spaces at breakdowns. The English backs will have to cover much wider spaces, and if a leg-tackle doesn't bring the Welsh player down at once there's a big hole in the defence for supporting attackers to exploit.

I'm not saying it can't be done, but it's very different from what Wales did to Ireland at the RWC.

Little grubbers or chips behind a rushing Welsh defence is actually a superb idea mitey, especially early on to put the Welsh defence into two minds. Good call

and remember when Eng deployed Worsley as a tree cutter to good effect at the MS when England narrowly lost to Wales 3 years ago. It needs the back row to be getting into the midfield and making decent tackles. Not sure Croft will do this even if Robshaw might be up for it.

optimist wrote:

The first difference is pace. Ferris, O'Brien and Heaslip were tackled at half-pace before they'd made more than a couple of metres but backs like Roberts, Davies, North and Cuthbert will usually get the ball when they're already moving with a lot of pace. There's rarely any second-chance with a leg-tackle. If it's missed, the player is away.

The second difference is space. The Irish and Welsh back-rows were operating in fairly confined spaces at breakdowns. The English backs will have to cover much wider spaces, and if a leg-tackle doesn't bring the Welsh player down at once there's a big hole in the defence for supporting attackers to exploit.

The problem with the Irish in that QF was that they didn;t run from deep enough to gain enough momentum. running from a standing start isn't going to gain ou much ground anyway. also they were very predictable with where the ball was going to go to, and during the QF they put themselves under pressure by making tactical erros in he desicion making processes. In the beginning of the match Ireland decided to go for the corner instead of the posts twice, before Wales was even on the borad. That would have immediately changed the complexion of the game.

I agree with you about space, but even then, the importance here is the first player to arrive once the tackle is made. Wales did that very well and had hands on the ball before the Irish ruck support arrived.

For England the importance will be to have their runners at pace, and the supporting player must clear the fetcher immediately so that who ever will play halfback can clear the ruck immediately.

That is the only way they will put Wales on the back foot.

On defence it must be a similar situation, the fetcher must be there as the tackle is completed otherwise Wales will steamroll the breakdown.

eirebilly wrote:Little grubbers or chips behind a rushing Welsh defence is actually a superb idea mitey, especially early on to put the Welsh defence into two minds. Good call

It's a great call. I just hope Stuart Lancaster isn't a member of 606v2.

I often see the grubbers and chips as a lost art luckless, it can be a very potent weapon in attack though. Problem with it is though, if it is read then it leads to very good counter attacking chances.

eirebilly wrote:I often see the grubbers and chips as a lost art luckless, it can be a very potent weapon in attack though. Problem with it is though, if it is read then it leads to very good counter attacking chances.

I agree I haven't really seen it executed well for some time. The last one I remember was John Smit putting one through for Matfield to score.

It can be very effective, but only if executed accurately, otherwise it is similar to just kicking posession away.

It depends on the weight you put on the ball. Ideally you'd want to put it equidistant between the defensive midfield and the full back. The problem is that if you try a few grubbers and balls them up, the opposition are wise to the tactic and are ready for any subsequent grubbers, even if those are actually good. But anything that puts defences in two minds is a good idea.

luckless_pedestrian wrote:But anything that puts defences in two minds is a good idea.

Yeah, a pass can do the same thing if the opposition gets used to the fact that your never do it.

For me, one of the best ever grubber kicker and chippers was a rugby league player from Australia. Alan Langer, that was pretty much the last time i ever saw grubbers and chips used to good sucess on a consistent basis. I have always wondered what he would be like as an attacking coach in rugby.

Someone upthread mentioned the 2009 Wales v England match where England put Joe Worlsey in midfield to tackle Jamie Roberts. That was so frustrating to watch, not because England were doing it but because we kept sending Jamie Roberts down the middle regardless. I'd like to think we're a bit sharper now and more willing to change tactics during a game as problems arise.

I think that Wales are a little more streetwise now luckless.

for those of you who have been watching England play in this years 6N already know that the tackling has been improved on and pretty much all tackling has been Jonny-esque

the last time I saw England do grubbers was Mike Tindall vs Ireland

damage_13 wrote:the last time I saw England do grubbers was Mike Tindall vs Ireland

And it led to a try, didn't it?

luckless_pedestrian wrote:

damage_13 wrote:the last time I saw England do grubbers was Mike Tindall vs Ireland

And it led to a try, didn't it?

Not from what i remember

In the World Cup warm-up game. I'm sure it did.

Nope, i dont remember Ireland even playing England in a World-Cup warm up

luckless_pedestrian wrote:....."If you look at all the games where Wales have broken through and scored tries it is because someone has gone high on a big strong ball-carrier.........."

Take yourself back to last year's World Cup..........Ireland's ball-carrying back row of Stephen Ferris, Sean O'Brien and Jamie Heaslip had made a huge impression - literally - on the tournament with their tackle-busting runs and they were tipped to do the same against Wales. As it happened, Wales's masterstroke was to return to the almost-forgotten art of tackling low; rather than going high in the tackle and risking being bounced off by the Irish back row, Wales took their legs and stopped them in their tracks.

Tackling low is actually proper tackling, right mates? This is how I was taught as a kid. This is how most kids are taught today at virtually club I have visited. This is how I teach my kids at the club where I coach. This is how proper tackling technique was reinforced day after day at practise at the clubs where I played competitively as an adult.

To me, the fact this is considered radical in today's game by a terrific professional like Foden shows how terribly basic skills have fallen off everywhere.

Another precedent would be Wales England in the 2009 6N, when Joe Worsley chopped Jamie Roberts down all day to good effect. We still lost mind.

Funny how much the England team's changed since then:

Delon Armitage; Paul Sackey, Mike Tindall, Riki Flutey, Mark Cueto; Andy
Goode, Harry Ellis; Andrew Sheridan, Lee Mears, Phil Vickery, Steve
Borthwick (capt), Nick Kennedy, James Haskell, Joe Worsley, Nick Easter.

None of those players will be in the 22 on Saturday whereas from Wales' lineup that day...

Lee Byrne; Leigh Halfpenny, Tom Shanklin, Jamie Roberts, Mark
Jones; Stephen Jones, Mike Phillips; Gethin Jenkins, Matthew Rees, Adam
Jones, Ian Gough, Alun-Wyn Jones, Ryan Jones (capt), Martyn Williams,
Andy Powell.

There will be 6 (?) survivors.

We hear a lot about English conservatism but we actually chop and change a lot more than other countries.

eirebilly wrote:Nope, i dont remember Ireland even playing England in a World-Cup warm up

too much eh!

Ah, selective memory is it, Billy?

"To me, the fact this is considered radical in today's game by a terrific professional like Foden shows how terribly basic skills have fallen off everywhere."

Agree there mate! Not to name drop (but I am of course) but I was chatting to Jason Leonard whilst we watched our boys training and he brought up how surprised he is now at the lack of skills training. He bemoaned the gym culture and stated that not enough time or emphasis is put on skills. Not just with tackling, but you see it in the poor passing.....how often with England and AP clubs do they not pass in front of colleagues? Shocking.

Hugehandoff,
We are on the same page, couldn't agree more!

The lack of skills training at lower levels is a huge rage button for me. And we see this everywhere.

My kids teams might not be the biggest team in the world. None of the kids look like a junior Hercules. But I promise you they can tackle, off-load out of a tackle, pass well out of both hands, ruck properly, and know how to make intelligent on field decisions.

There is only so much a man can absorb. Working on minutiae of abstract skills mean that core skills must be compromised.

I choose to only remember those things that actually happened in my mind, anything else is simply propaganda and not worthy of my attention

Doc....JL's comments were about AP clubs. Sorry for the confusion. Junior clubs are mixed in this area, but as it is Dads coaching it just depends on who is coaching on any given day.

hugehandoff wrote:Doc....JL's comments were about AP clubs. Sorry for the confusion. Junior clubs are mixed in this area, but as it is Dads coaching it just depends on who is coaching on any given day.

OK, thanks. I got it now, mate. My mistake.
But his points apply at every level, don't they (even if that wasn't what he was referring to)? If we don't teach it right when players are young, how will they get it when they are older? And why is it a sneaky, radical game plan to tackle correctly?

My Dad always taught me 'you can't run without legs'

Wise words - has done us proud

Tackle low or high?

False reasoning to come out on one or the other as let's say a certain plan by a certain coach is based on making that connundrum the damned-if-you-do-and-damned-if-you-don't nightmare for the opposition.

If their arms aren't free, they can't offload and so instead use strong leg pumping to make ground before being brought down... or just run so strongly that the defender falls away...and they're away!

If their legs aren't free, they tend to have support close quarters to take an offload (even as they are crumbling to ground), thus making the defender's take-down both redundant but also taking said defender out of the defensive equation for vital seconds.

Wales are a classic case of simple rugby... one option has the suppot of another option if first option is hampered. Their big backs make that plan more effective.

You need two players to take out big Welsh running backs. One for legs and one to try and contain offloads. But there again, that's two for one and stretching resources again.

How stretched is the attack on a one high one low tackle? The attack is at an end, further attackers need to be employed to recycle the ball. A classic case of tackling too high is the Barclay try Wales V Scotland 2010.

A well organised defence will not be stretched with a player going high and a player going low in the tackle. Timing is the key.

I agree, mates. Two tacklers is perfect because it prevents running and offloads and puts a defender in position to create a turnover immediately after the tackle.

But even in a situation with single-up tackles all going low, if the runner offloads, the next defender should be in position for another single-up tackle. The phase of play still ends.

Both options work for me.

I think we agree on that doc. Anyway, England have announce a fairly strong defensive team so its going to be a tight match.

They have indeed, Billy. However, I'm hoping that Barritt and Tuilagi's lack of time together will be a weakness we can exploit.

Ruby made a valid point about the cohesion between them all as maybe not being all that good since they havent played together.

I would not be suprised to see Wales draw the English forwards to the touchline and then attack the opposite wing as i feel Strettle and Ashton are not the best defenders and if Wales get some pace in the attack, those two may be found wanting.

eirebilly wrote:I would not be suprised to see Wales draw the English forwards to the touchline and then attack the opposite wing as i feel Strettle and Ashton are not the best defenders and if Wales get some pace in the attack, those two may be found wanting.

I like the sound of that!

luckless_pedestrian wrote:

eirebilly wrote:I would not be suprised to see Wales draw the English forwards to the touchline and then attack the opposite wing as i feel Strettle and Ashton are not the best defenders and if Wales get some pace in the attack, those two may be found wanting.

I like the sound of that!

Unfortunately "drawing the English forwards to the touchline" is called a "Lineout" and the chances are, England wil lhave the ball directly afterwards.

Otherwise, if you are suggesting that Wales will run laterally back and forth across the field and try to wait for gaps to open up, then that's exactly what Wales have been doing in attack since 1984 and nobody is fooled by it anymore.

Thats the way i would be looking to attack, the only problem with that is that Jiffy will be in the commentary box screaming "Numbeeerrrrssss" at the top of his lungs for 80 minutes