Stats Indicate Some AB Problems



  • https://www.thesilverfern.com/2018/10/08/stats-point-to-some-ab-problems

    This was written by @gt12

    I thought it deserves a thread of its own. It'll get lost in the main one



  • Stats don't tell you everything, but they don't paint a pretty picture for this game. I was tempted to give Read a vote, but he accounted for about half (4) of our penalties (9).

    Here is the crucial stat for me: According to ESPN, we had one offload. All game. We just never got going.

    We played with the ball for 40% of the test (apparently) but kicked it 21 times in comparison to their 20.

    Beauden Barrett probably had his worst game in black: Five runs for 11 metres, although he beat three defenders (Edit: on the rewatch, I see that at least two of these were after he moved to FB). He made slightly more tackles (4) than he missed (3), but conceded three turnovers.

    Btw, in 30 minutes, Mo'unga ran twice for 10 metres, and beat two defenders, making one tackle and missing none.

    Only two forwards ran for more than 10 metres (Whitelock, 12; Taylor, 23), and there were a few missed tackles with Whitelock missing two and making 10, and Franks missing two and making nine. Taylor also missed one and made nine, but also conceded one turnover, and underthrew at least one line out, being outplayed by Marx.

    If you take out the hookers (where Marx ran for one more metre than Taylor), their locks ran for about the some amount of metres (26) as the rest of our starting forward pack (31).

    Our lossies ran for a total (including Savea) of 10 metres. In comparison, SA got 100 from theirs, with Du Toit getting 44 of them. That's telling, as he beat a number of defenders, including making SBW (amongst others) look a bit silly.

    Frizell made 12 tackles, missing none (leading the forwards) but ran once for two metres. That's it. I don't think he got many chances of course, thanks to the fucking stipid kicks and dropped balls, but nevertheless, we got no real got forward from any of our supposedly 'power' runners (except one Taylor break that led to a try). SA defended well, but also I don't think we ever really tried to use him or Read or Savea (Cane has zero running metres btw) anywhere except for tackling.

    So, lots to work on - not just tackling and kicking. Reading those stats, I can't see how we won - which just shows their limitations - because they don't show the quality of decisions in the last 10 minutes when we got ball, straightened things up, got some metres from the subs (RM with 10, ALB with 16), kicked better, and used the forwards (both as a group and individually - Pat T with 2 rns for 6 metres helps here), we managed to get over the line.



  • @gt12 thanks for the summary, interesting reading.



  • @no-quarter

    Yeah, they don't tell the full story - of course - but it's not good reading.

    Just for fun, before the test, what money would you get if you bet that Etzebeth (1) would have the same number of offloads as the entire AB team?



  • @gt12 Not too surprising about the lack of run metres in the starting forwards. Moody is the best of the props, BBBR much better than Whitelock and Squire the most effective amongst the loose forwards. None of those 3 were playing. If the forwards aren't making ground up the middle it's hard for the backs to play off.

    We saw none of the short passes to Frizell that were so effective in Nelson, but we didn't in Arg either. It has to be tactics.



  • @gt12 sheesh, when you think Taylor probably did almost all of those metres in one run too....



  • @bones

    I was just checking the game to see that!



  • @gt12 keen to know!



  • @bovidae

    My guess is that they found some things that worked and put them away, or that they never had the ball for long enough to get going.



  • @bovidae said in MOTM All Blacks v Springbokke II:

    @gt12 Not too surprising about the lack of run metres in the starting forwards. Moody is the best of the props, BBBR much better than Whitelock and Squire the most effective amongst the loose forwards. None of those 3 were playing. If the forwards aren't making ground up the middle it's hard for the backs to play off.

    We saw none of the short passes to Frizell that were so effective in Nelson, but we didn't in Arg either. It has to be tactics.

    we didn't win any of the collisions for a long time in that game, which is sort of backed up by those run metre figures. The Boks were stopping our ball runners dead, and that contributed to our appalling ruck ball. They on the other hand got behind us, allowing them to generate really quick ball, which they used really well. We really should have been a lot further behind.



  • @bones said in MOTM All Blacks v Springbokke II:

    @gt12 keen to know!

    Looks like about 15 of them!

    Plus, it's worth noting that we didn't score a try until Mo'unga was on - Barrett received the kick at FB and beat two men on the return, setting up the ruck for Taylor's break.



  • @mariner4life said in MOTM All Blacks v Springbokke II:

    The Boks were stopping our ball runners dead, and that contributed to our appalling ruck ball. They on the other hand got behind us, allowing them to generate really quick ball, which they used really well. We really should have been a lot further behind.

    This! Same as Wellington (and other games against the Bokke) - when they are interested defensively, i fyou don't have something special, they just form walls to run into. IT's awesome, btu hard to break down.

    The LIons and the Boks show that if you have a team of big, committed physical players it is hard to break them down. You need something special. Good to have the boys remidned of this now, and not next year 🙂



  • @gt12 Excellent post. Very little go forward ball from the fatties, even less from the midfield meant BB had a tough game and the quick men out wide were living off scraps.

    The return of Moody, BBBR and Squire will help. That said, I'd like to see Akira Ioane in the All Blacks set up. He is a very powerful ball-carrier who can break tackles and offload.

    I know neither were available at Loftus but for me Laumape and Goodhue is the first-choice AB midfield.



  • Adjacent to the lack of go forward from the AB fatties, I noticed that the Boks have now employed our forwards passing close tactic and it worked quite effectively (I'm sure it took us at least a year to be competent at it - they seemed to have picked it up quick).

    It's funny reading about this great comeback in a bunch of articles, but, I personally I didn't get any of the elation you normally have from these comeback wins, and I haven't warmed to it even more on the partial re-watch. It's a strange feeling - I wish I was over the moon about it. We still won a test with the Boks.

    @sparky There's no way Laumape is part of the first choice midfield, he must be the last pick out of the current 5 if we're being honest.



  • Also, note that the article is longer than the original post. There's some more thoughts about the midfield etc



  • I said this in other post. Taylor and Whitelock look like they need a rest. With BBBR and Squire, Moody and maybe Coles that solves issues...but injuries. Game plan with BBBR looks sooo different than without, takes pressure off 9/10
    Best ball running forwards outside squad for NH tour that are available

    Romano, Akira, Evans, papalii, Aumua.....
    Others?

    Give Taylor rest bring in Squire, Moody, BBBR should be resolved.



  • @gt12 said in Stats Indicate Some AB Problems:

    @no-quarter

    Yeah, they don't tell the full story - of course - but it's not good reading.

    Just for fun, before the test, what money would you get if you bet that Etzebeth (1) would have the same number of offloads as the entire AB team?

    Pretty even. The big fella has a set of massive cannons that he loves to free up when he's not busy doing Bruno impressions.


Log in to reply