Weekend preview

by Tony Johnson | 20 March 2010 (12:22)
It’s hard to believe we are already fast approaching the halfway point of the Super 14 round robin, and the next few weeks are going to have a huge bearing on the make-up of the top four.

South Africas challenge will consist of the Bulls and Stormers...there’s already been too much damage done for the Cheetahs, Sharks, and Lions to be contenders.

Australia’s fortunes have really picked up, winning 6 games out of 6 in the past 2 weekends (game 6 was an all Australian affair).

The Brumbies head the Aussie challenge...they’re not exactly setting the house on fire, were a bit lucky to beat the Sharks last week and have no bonus points but their South African trip is behind them and they are right on the cusp of the top four.

The Waratahs are also handy to the pace, although you can’t read too much into last weekends landslide win over the Lions because the Lions were truly dreadful. It’s just a gut feel and I might well be wrong, but I don’t see them making the top four.

That leaves New Zealand and after a 5 out of 5 weekend in week 3, the going has already started to get a bit tough for all but the Crusaders, who are the only NZ team to win in the past 2 weeks.

The ‘Saders are ticking over nicely without having hit anything like top gear. Their defence and structure are all there and they have yet to put a full strength team on the park. I’d be surprised if they don’t make it to at least the semis.

But the Hurricanes have turned into a rabble on their South African tour, forcing Colin Cooper to wield the axe ahead of the Bulls game, which is hardly ideal. They are not getting value out of some of their top players and their discipline and tactical acumen has been non existent.

The Chiefs have stumbled twice since returning home. They’ll lose further momentum with the bye this week and then face the Brumbies in Canberra, which is a hard place to win, but after that they have a run of home games. I think they’ll be in the frame but will need good results from their matches against the Stormers and Bulls. If they win those they’ll be right in the hunt but that’s easier said than done.

The Blues have no real momentum and face a crucial game this weekend against the Brumbies. Win and they not only improve their own hopes, they put a dent the Canberra campaign. But they are unpredictable and hard to have faith in.

The Highlanders were never going to be in the hunt, but have a string of games at home and will be aiming for a mid table finish. However they’ll be vulnerable this week against the desperate Sharks. For some reason New Zealand teams often struggle to win their first game back after the trip home from South Africa...it’s not an excuse, it just seems to be the case.

So, time to look into the crystal ball to see if I can repeat last weekends 6/6..

Blues v Brumbies. Keven Mealamu plays his 100th for the Blues, they’re at Eden Park for the first time this year and Stirling Mortlock is out of the Brumbies. I’ll go Blues, but not with any confidence.

Bulls v Hurricanes. Bulls. By plenty.

Crusaders v Lions. The Crusaders have rested a few top guns but have them in reserve if needed. Unless the Crusader decide to have a bad night at the office I can’t see this being close either.

Highlanders v Sharks. The Sharks are due a change of fortune, and I think they’ll finally get it this weekend.

Force v Waratahs. The Force are on the big round donut, and I reckon they will still be come Sunday. Waratahs by 15.

Stormers v Cheetahs. Cheetahs will keep them honest but I can’t see the Stormers dropping this one.


Recent Blogs



Comments

by Tim_67 March 20, 2010 13:43 GMT
Tony always good articles. I have a point for you about high kicks. I have noticed that SA teams kick high balls and chase them well but also they always make contact with the other teams catcher. Last year a couple of the Springbok tries came from this and I noticed the Bulls against the Highlanders that everytime a high kick was put up when the Bulls player challenged for the ball they made some sort of contact with the other player. This makes it hard for the other player under the high ball and I wonder if this is a deliberate tatic or just a result of the kick being so good and the timing of the chase being so good. Also I wonder how legal this is.
Report this comment
by thomas ash March 21, 2010 19:56 GMT
Good point Tim, I noticed the same thing. The attacking team makes it almost impossible for the defending player to take the high ball. The problem is that the defending player is standing still, and the attacking chasers just use the momentum to completely take out the other player. As long as they're going for the catch I think there isn't much the ref can do against it, but it does seem to be a tactic adopted by especially the Bulls.
Report this comment
by Flying Wing March 22, 2010 16:21 GMT
Tim and Thomas: It is generally obvious when a player is going for the ball or not. When they are deliberately attempting to make contact with the other player their eyes are not on the ball (Remember Schalk Burger's suspension in the World Cup against Samoa? Also, Sivivatu in the Hong Kong test last year?). When the attacking team runs into a good kick, which is not too far or too close, and focus on catching the ball then contact is almost inevitable if the defending team has someone attempting the catch the ball as well. I do not think that the contact in order to disrupt is a deliberate tactic. Rather, contesting for the ball when possible seems more likely. Sure, by legally contesting a good kick it does make it more difficult for the defending team to catch the ball, hence the repeated tactic. Spoiling tactics are not effective enough to win games, ask Italy. I agree that there might be more contact in these games simply because there are more contesting from both sides and that the kicks, on average, are just better placed that in most cases. (Because some NZ players struggled with this last year they have significantly improved since then under the high ball. Think Rococoko and Sivivatu.)
Report this comment
by Tim_67 March 23, 2010 13:27 GMT
Flying wing your ppoints about Rococoko being poor under the high ball are true but Israel Dagg is not and in the game against the Bulls there was at least one time where he beat the attacker to the ball and then was hit. You can have your eyes on the ball but it doesn't mean you didn't run a line that would collide with the defender and do so with that intent. The attacker doesn't really have to catch the ball just make the defender drop it as they then have all the advantage. There was then a second one when the attacker missed read the jump but as he comes down he drags Dagg with his arm causing him to drop the ball. The commentators all said he had a bad game but it is hard to catch the ball when someone is pulling on you or crashing into looking like they are making an attempt at the ball when all they are doing is jumping. In most of the cases I am thinking of the attacking player never gets close to catching the ball but hits the defender solidly by jumping up if as they are attempting to catch the ball. All that said the kick still has to be a good one and the chase good too to actually make it work but if you have those two things it is very easy to target the player and make it look like you aren't. Giteau's case last year he was just plain stupid and so was the AB who did it as well. (I think Sivivatu.) Mind you Giteau got away with it. The case I am thinking of are not dangerous play in anyway but they do make it hard for the defender to catch the ball.
Report this comment
by Flying Wing March 25, 2010 03:25 GMT
I'm not sure I agree Tim, but I will go back and take a look at those incidents with your points in mind. I think Dagg had a great game against the Bulls though. Not just the tries, but his overall game. The kid is going to be a superstar if they develop him properly and injuries stay away. His talent is phenomenal. It was a good enough game to rewatch, so when I get the time I'll do so and say more.
Report this comment
by thomas ash March 27, 2010 13:21 GMT
I'm a big bulls supporter and I love the way that they're playing the game at the moment. My point is simply that it seems to be a game plan where they aggressively contest for the high ball whether they're in a position to catch it or not...Of course the defending player can counter this by getting off the ground to contest, i thin alot if it is down to poor technique under the high ball. I think we're talking about the same thing Tim. Although in Giteau's case it was obvious that he wasn't trying to get the ball. But yes, it can't be done without well placed up&unders and good chasing.
Report this comment