Video Analysis

I have selected 10 tries from various nations. Here's the scenario. Imagine you're a coach and all these tries have happened against your team. You're not looking for scapegoats, it's not a witch hunt. You just want to point out to your players what went wrong and what could've been done to prevent the tries. Spolier alert, you might think that some of these tries should have been called up by the ref but, whilst pointing that out, you still need to say what could have been done to shut down that play.

It's difficult as there's no lead up to the tries so you don't know who is out of position or why. We all like saying what a player did right but sometimes it's harder to say what a player did wrong. Especially if it's one of your players.

So play the role of the video analyst. It's an important part of any coach's job (or at least somebody in his set-up). Let's see if we're all on the same page. I have written down my views and buried them in the Plaza Mayor. You have until the end of the week to send in your answers and you will go into the draw to win the opportunity to dig up the answers and from there go into the draw to know where the answers were hidden.

1) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5KfwRQ38dxE

2) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Z_Jk8D7kxA

3) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uv0l6niSTEk

4) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRo_AT3hC5c

5) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3S3YaHYq1xI

6) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZOkUv3FnA4

7) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D9ZKy0AV_qU

8) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7UdfL2SV1_o

9) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYVz2OkXMU0

10) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AzuqOHH_U28

1 is extremely difficult, but there are French forwards out wide, and not many backs around so I would suggest it's a counter strike after a French break down the left.

There are no serious technical errors from French players, although the camera angles are awfull.

All depends on what happens pre clip. I wouldn't have a view on that clip alone.

Try this video with a longer lead up: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5KfwRQ38dxE

That said, you can only analyse what is in front of you rather than what lead up to what you can see. But as the camera angles were rubbish in the first vid, I'll make an exception.

2 - Well someones getting a slap in the chops, knocking on under no pressure centre field with your whole pack in front of you!

That aside it's a simple 3 on 1, could be argued Ben Smith coming in on the passer was niaive, as he didn't trust Carter to get across, Smith could have held that move up long enough to stem the try.

I'd be questioning Carters decision to make the pass too, 3 men outside him to 5 Argentinians, and Carters whole pack is in front of him, it's a ropy decision that puts the ball on a tee for a kicker had the a penalty been given. Where was sahili going from there, except for into contact?

Sahili with the 'crowds' error, Carter however doesn't need the ball, and definately doesn't need to give the pass, it's just shoveling shoite, then Smiths poor judgement in defence.

8) Missed tackle from the AB number 20 (Aaron Smith I think). It wasn't as if there were many running options off the Springbok 9, and he could have anticipated Habana's run (it's not like he hasn't done it before...). Not sure whether Dagg's positioning at 15 is decent either - the camera angle doesn't show where he's coming from.

10) The only player whose fault it can be is Orquera, the Italian stand-off. A dummy and he scores, but he didn't see that Hogg had taken a massive gamble in reading the pass. You can question the pace of some of the Italians but Hoggy is pretty sharp, and he was only up against forwards. It was really just a massive gamble by Hogg. Had Orquera held onto the ball he would have crossed the line unopposed and Hogg would have looked silly. Well done for finding a Scotland try though!

1 - Hell of a difference... Told you it came from a NZ turnover from the left lol!

Ok first and foremost, Barett wow, with the decision, although it's an easier decision to make with that scoreline and that time!

French legs and brains, all tired, forwards always make me laugh when defending out wide, they always regress to their U14 days and just run sideways to cover the touchline, had all of those forwards squared on and put the pressure Ranger wouldve been forced to take the ball 15m deeper, and would probably have just kicked clear, or chipped ahead, allowing an easy gather for the FB. Because the French forwards are just running side on it gives the kiwi attackers all the time in the world to make their decisions, firstly Baret gets a few seconds to look, decide then execute, then Ranger receives with yards in front of him allowing for plenty of time to think. From there on in it's ball bounces and running lines.

Not sure who the inside defender is 6? dussatoir? damage is done with him, he's full on panic stations, bellting out wide behind the defender to his open side yelling and screaming, so his defence follows suit, all this before Weepu makes the pass, had he stayed cool and just gone up on Barett, maybe forced him to check it's panic over.

In most cases its about being preventative, to stop the sitatuion arsiing. 

1 - the backs move is called, but from the time Huget takes the ball in most of the backs are in front of him and can't support to ruck over/compete. Also you can see some of the forwards are either waiting for the next phase or still arriving from the previous scrum. Hence turnover of possession. 
Barrett gets a call from his outside backs that there are slower forward out wide. The run from the defence is diagonal to cut space/time, but then becomes too flat allowing the pass to get on the outside of the defensive line and the covering forwards. After that there isn't much you can do apart from scramble defence, and the ABs get a lucky bounce of the ball.  

Only my opinion though!

It was a mission FES. I put in Scotland try and came up with countless videos for Susan Boyle.

10 - Orguera makes the mistake yes, but thats fluffed a try, I don't see that as a defencive error, look at the reactions of the players after the Hogg intercept...

If the 9 and the forwards react and try to catch Hogg then why were'nt they working that hard to support, the lock chases him back because he is the deepest man, meaning he's the laziest man from the last play.

The difference between good and great is working hard off the ball to make a difference, not reacting to a situation after it happens to make up for it.

It always amazes me when you see a tight 5 lumbering around a breakdown doing very little, but then is willing to give his all for the cause chasing back a guy who he's never going to catch!

9) It's all about the knock-on. I can't identify the player, but the pick and drive was scrappy and he never had control of the ball. From then on it's all about exploiting an overlap and there's little Australia can do, given Habana's pace. The Aussie winger is done on the outside but given the speed of the turnover I'm not sure he can be criticised, other than for not being quick enough.

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:It was a mission FES. I put in Scotland try and came up with countless videos for Susan Boyle.

  

I'm surprised it didn't take you back to Stanger's try in 1990, although the English would probably blame the ref and touch judge for that one!!

3 - Ruck time!

You can argue the challenge at the lineout was poor, or that Englands linespeed wasn't great but the reality is both couldve been good and the try still wouldve been scored.

You can't allow 2 second rucks, and England allow 2 in a row, 2 men comitted to the tackle, and floored yet not 1 of those 4 defenders commited gets anywhere near challenging for the ball, Ireland couldve played both those rucks without 1 attacking player going in to secure and retained ball!

Where is the 7 off the back of lineout? where is he at that first ruck? He's nowhere because he's lifting and Hartley is the lineouts last man! Where is he at the second ruck? He's making an extremely passive tackle that gets Launchbury in trouble and pushed 3m out of the way.

my review of that is that Hartley at the back of the lineout is ineffective, and I'd want Robshaw in that first ruck, also England aren't that bad, that was like a training move from Ireland with semi opposition, it's being caught cold after half time, lack of focus and leadership from the tunnell.

7) I think Nonu probably gets the blame for this one as the initial gaps comes through his channel, although he is clearly blaming the French player for blocking. Looking in slow motion he perhaps milks it a little, but it certainly distracts him. After that it's just a decent finish from Fofana, with a nice step.

5) Aussie defensive system is all over the shop. There are two players covering behind the ruck who are doing very little, and then a huge gap between the ruck, the next defender and then the next defender after that. The Lions just throw a big runner through a big hole and the Aussie defence just has too many gaps in it, and the defenders just flap at him. There's no-one looking up to see where the danger is coming from.

6) I don't think this clip goes far enough back to identify the route cause of the problem, but that's a hooker with the ball in his hands and both Launchbury and Burrell go for him without actually taking him down. After that it's an overlap and a decent step - Goode has a two on one to defend which is always tricky. My preference is for the defender to take out the man with the ball in that situation, and at least pressure the pass, but I don't blame the fullback for that try.

Neutralee wrote:3 - Ruck time!

You can argue the challenge at the lineout was poor, or that Englands linespeed wasn't great but the reality is both couldve been good and the try still wouldve been scored.

You can't allow 2 second rucks, and England allow 2 in a row, 2 men comitted to the tackle, and floored yet not 1 of those 4 defenders commited gets anywhere near challenging for the ball, Ireland couldve played both those rucks without 1 attacking player going in to secure and retained ball!

Where is the 7 off the back of lineout? where is he at that first ruck? He's nowhere because he's lifting and Hartley is the lineouts last man! Where is he at the second ruck? He's making an extremely passive tackle that gets Launchbury in trouble and pushed 3m out of the way.

my review of that is that Hartley at the back of the lineout is ineffective, and I'd want Robshaw in that first ruck, also England aren't that bad, that was like a training move from Ireland with semi opposition, it's being caught cold after half time, lack of focus and leadership from the tunnell.

I would say the ruck defence is fine, as the defensive line is set each time. The problem was the line speed. If the defence closes down Heaslip, rather than remain static then heaslip couldn't get the pass away to kearney. The line from kearney is great because it cuts a line bewteen two static defenders.

Neutralee wrote:3 - Ruck time!

You can argue the challenge at the lineout was poor, or that Englands linespeed wasn't great but the reality is both couldve been good and the try still wouldve been scored.

You can't allow 2 second rucks, and England allow 2 in a row, 2 men comitted to the tackle, and floored yet not 1 of those 4 defenders commited gets anywhere near challenging for the ball, Ireland couldve played both those rucks without 1 attacking player going in to secure and retained ball!

Where is the 7 off the back of lineout? where is he at that first ruck? He's nowhere because he's lifting and Hartley is the lineouts last man! Where is he at the second ruck? He's making an extremely passive tackle that gets Launchbury in trouble and pushed 3m out of the way.

my review of that is that Hartley at the back of the lineout is ineffective, and I'd want Robshaw in that first ruck, also England aren't that bad, that was like a training move from Ireland with semi opposition, it's being caught cold after half time, lack of focus and leadership from the tunnell.

I'd agree. It's not particularly bad defending from England, and it's a slick passage of play from Ireland. A case of smart attacking play rather than bad defending. If England are looking to improve then it's going to be the rucks, and as you say, there are a few players who aren't sure what they're doing. Caught cold is probably a fair description, rather than any howling defensive error.

funnyExiledScot wrote:5) Aussie defensive system is all over the shop. There are two players covering behind the ruck who are doing very little, and then a huge gap between the ruck, the next defender and then the next defender after that. The Lions just throw a big runner through a big hole and the Aussie defence just has too many gaps in it, and the defenders just flap at him. There's no-one looking up to see where the danger is coming from.

I like this one, defence at the maul is ok, 5 involved and not drive to speak of, the problem here is spacings, because of the solid defence I think JOC has either got over confident or niaive, as he drifts wider thinking Hoopers pace covers any hole, from that position to see what is going on he has to turn his body inwards to watch the play, and then it's difficult to keep your eyes forward. If you pause it at 30 seconds you'll see JOC straighten his body up but is still watching murray and North, as the ball passes him he still doesn't see Roberts until he's behind him!

Hoopers communication looks ropy too, he isn't directing JOC, and you can see JOC clearly pointing and screaming at North presumably 'I have North/wing/big guy'.

Fluxy FES

I think you have me wrong, it is extremely bad from England. The fact Hartley is Englands first man is a poor decision for all involved, then because of the first 2 second ruck where England have not managed to slow the ball down at all, the line has not been given the chance to reload, and as we all know a quick linespeed is dependant on a quick reload allowing for the prep for linespeed, the quick reload is dependant on a ruck defence that slows ball allowing for that reload, and a ruck defence is dependant on a dominant tackle.

Basically if I were England coach I would be furious with the 4 men at the 2 rucks, and whoever made the decision to move Robshaw to lifter and Hartley to 8 man (Because I would never have done that!)

Hmmm, I think that's pretty harsh on England re: (3). I agree that criticising the line speed and not the rucking skills is the tail wagging the dog, and England are not effective in the rucks at slowing down the Irish, and thus is looks very much like an unopposed training move. England are doing exactly what the Irish expect. It is though also an excellent and slick series of attacks from Ireland, and England just don't have the intensity to counter it.

2) All about the knock-on. A completely unforced error and the Argentinians are then slick at exploiting the turnover. No real blame to the ABs following the knock-on, and credit to Argentina for putting it away so efficiently.

I have to throw in for 3 that although its a great set piece from Ireland without POCs intervention Launchbury would have made the tackle.

I'm the one to blame when a team scores against England.

They can only do that because I am watching the match on telly from the wrong chair, or maybe I am wearing the wrong socks. Occasionally, I try to bolster our defence by walking off to the kitchen talking very loudly. During the first summer Test, I pulled all the stops out and switched off the set for the last period of the match. Unfortunately, I got my timing wrong and New Zealand scored. I think I forgot to turn the kettle on. I'll be working with the England coaches to optimize my match-watching routine so I don't leave similar gaps in the future.

No 7&1/2 wrote:I have to throw in for 3 that although its a great set piece from Ireland without POCs intervention Launchbury would have made the tackle.

If I'm England coach in that scenario I don't even bring that up, it's a non starter, there are so many other failures the half a grab just doesn't make the list!

I'm playing it from the coach of the refs!

No 7&1/2 wrote:I'm playing it from the coach of the refs!

Thats not the point of the thread though.

I'd make sure to tell my players to make sure the ref sees incidents like this and have a good relationship so you can question it. And I'd let them know they would have still stopped this initial move without the illegal input to build their confidence. Close enough to the spirit of the thread?

No 7&1/2 wrote:I'd make sure to tell my players to make sure the ref sees incidents like this and have a good relationship so you can question it. And I'd let them know they would have still stopped this initial move without the illegal input to build their confidence. Close enough to the spirit of the thread?

Right in the centre of what the thread is asking, you'd make possibly the worst coach in history, at least you answered the thread.

Why is it you are totally incapable of acknowledging the idea that that anybody who plays in white could make an error?

I haven't. Just that the try would have been stopped even with the errors. Barring the last one from the ref. All teams will make errors even with the best coaching in the world, you need to react. The reaction from the players would have stopped the try. My only point. You're probably right about me being a terrible coach much prefer just watching.

No 7&1/2 wrote:I haven't. Just that the try would have been stopped even with the errors. Barring the last one from the ref. All teams will make errors even with the best coaching in the world, you need to react. The reaction from the players would have stopped the try. My only point. You're probably right about me being a terrible coach much prefer just watching.

Well I have to disagree, POC actions were questionable at worst, Launchburys inexperience was the reason he didn't get there, nothing else. Ireland looked like they were playing an England team told to play semi opposed, and would have scored within another 2/3 phases if it wasn't for that clean break.

Thats why I put it down to being caught cold from the restart, England are better than that, damn Cyprus are better than that!

Ah right. Well it was a foul by PoC so really should have been a pen. You could blame inexperience of Launchbury in the fact that he didn't consider he would be fouled. These things happen.

It wasn't a foul, decided by professionals, so there is no debate there.

I look at it from a defencive POV and I say England were as soft and passive as you will ever see an international team, the good news is England are far better than that and you could put it down to a slip of concentration from half time, which I would have to take the blame myself.

Anyway it's detracting from kias thread but clearly it's against the rules to pull players back and should be a foul and if seen by the ref would have resulted in a pen such as the recent NZ game where Haskell was fouled. Don't think there's much more to add barring goodplay by BOD, POC and Ireland in general.

The ref did refer it to the TMO and the term not enough interference was used again as it was for Farrell's run in. Whatever not enough interference means!

Nonu's pulling Haskell's shirt back deserved at least a penalty but interestingly enough in the ruck before, Nonu was taken out which led to Robshaw I think it was being able to charge up the middle in the first place.

he just gave that one it didn't go upstairs. But like I said good move by Ireland and if you can get away with it do it.

You're right. It didn't go upstairs. Of course if Ireland do it, it's good play. If NZ do it, it's cynical cheating and the ref lets them get away with murder.   

No 7&1/2 wrote:he just gave that one it didn't go upstairs. But like I said good move by Ireland and if you can get away with it do it.

So who cheated in green for the poor Hartley attempted tackle? For the 4 men who didn't bother trying to slow ball? For the lineout pod not even attempting to challenge? For the decision to put Hartley at the back of the lineout?

Irelands phase play was basic, even a few of the carries were awkward, England 99 times out of 100 stop that at source, on that occasion they were totallt absent in all their duties, even allowing a man to enter your defencive line, then allowing that same guy to get between you and the ruck. POC touching Launchburys arm doesn't discount the fact that Launchbury drifted outside him, and was niaive enough to let him get there in the first place.

If you watch from 15 to 18 seconds Launchbury is stood still flat footed for all 3 seconds, while watching play go left when he's right.

Not only is POC in his line, so is Irelands 6, Launchbury makes no effort to get the other side of them until the ball is played to Kearney, Hartley is using them as cover, and is at sea himself.

I'd go as far to say that if POC doesn't touch Launchbury he still doesn't lay a hand on Kearney.

This is the difference between the top 2 nations and everyone else, foresight, and reacting before something happens.

Still a foul though.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Still a foul though.

Well with that reasoning and blind devotion I don't think i'll bother debating anything English with yourself again, clearly there is little point, and few discussion points.

Good luck at the RWC, not for Englands performance obviously, because that will be good enough to win it, I meant with cheating opposition and refs...

Everyone bends the rules don't be childish. I'm not here crying over spilt milk but it's an important aspect for teams to consider and accept. Refs like players make mistakes. The best teams take the ref out of the equation.

Neutralee wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Still a foul though.

Well with that reasoning and blind devotion I don't think i'll bother debating anything English with yourself again, clearly there is little point, and few discussion points.

Good luck at the RWC, not for Englands performance obviously, because that will be good enough to win it, I meant with cheating opposition and refs...

Careful now. You're starting to sound like Steve Hansen...   

No one seems to have done 4).

It's pretty slow England ball. Rory Best is covering the 10 - 12 channel. He and D'Arcy (not sure if he was the 12 that day) run up quick out of the line but Murray is someway behind them. When you run up out of the line you have to get your man, ball and all. Murray should be tracking Brown and trust D'Arcy to get his man. As he's too far back, it allows the offload to occur with space. The damage is done. You might argue that there's enough cover defence and the last defender should trust his teammate to make the tackle and track Care but it's a good step by Brown and he would've got the offload in any event.

The real culprit is the first phase where the Irish line fails to meet the England players in a straight line and the gap is opened up.

I did have a look at (4) but struggled to make up my mind. The quality and technique of the first tackle allows an easy offload but the reactions of the Irish defenders to that situation isn't stellar either. It's also a good attacking piece of play.

I think I agree with you, the real issue is the Irish line and technique in the tackle in the first instance.

Conor Murray is too deep and reacts too late what is happening in front of him. He's flat footed and even though the tackle allows the offload, he should have been anticipating what was going to happen. You could argue it's 12's fault for rushing up too fast when the English backs are set deep with options to pass behind. But the more I look at it, the more I lay the blame at Murray (it's not like they were out of the blocks and up on the defence like jack rabbits) for not keeping a straight line and being aware of what was happening behind the ball carrier.

4 is difficult, and sorry I havn't read any comments about it before posting so if I regurgatate you know why.

Damage is done before the clip starts, we've already entered a scenario where the Irish defence has been disjointed.

It's a typical situation really, players who aren't used to being inside or outside certain other players have been caught out.

Conner murray does not defend the 13 channell regularly, and Darcy is in his prefered position.

As the experienced line leady Darcy should be directing players inside and out of what they have to do, he pushes and Best goes with, however murray has Sexton outside him who is also lost, and murray makes the decision to safety.

Now in this scenarion England aren't particularly well alligned, and as a defencive coach I'd want my defenders to do what murray is doing, push slow and drift, contain the 2 man pod of England, let them recycle until Ireland get organised, then they can blitz. So in Essence what murray did was right, howeve he has a line of sight of Darcy, and Darcy's the experienced man, in his usual position, and has made the decision early, so murray HAS to go with him!!

The key breakdown is communication from Darcy and murray not reacting well enough, id doen't really matter what decision is made in rugby, good or bad, as long as one is made and everyone goes with it!