Week 2: Roundup
Tight Five Team of the Week Round 2
Gloucester 26-33 Leicester Tigers
MOTM: Nic Dolly
Top Performers Gloucester: Ackermann, Atkinson
Top Performers Tigers: Genge, Wells, Martin
Summary
Gloucester’s first game back at Kingsholm was emotional and spirited. The Cherry & Whites fought hard and clawed back for a valuable losing bonus point though they will be very disappointed that they lost at home. Leicester showed that they are the real deal, last week’s statement win against Exeter was backed up with a clinical display where despite not everything going to script they defended hard and scored when they had the chances, they will be a tough team to beat home and away this season.
Gloucester
Gloucester were much improved in their match-up against Leicester and fought back from an early deficit to challenge for a draw and deservedly get a losing bonus point. Their attack benefitted from the return of key ball carriers to the starting lineup and favoured position, Ackermann and Ben Morgan, respectively. Evans and Meehan controlled the game a lot better than last week. They managed to hold possession and win the territorial battle enough to launch maul attacks that resulted in a try off the maul and a well worked try by Atkinson after just one phase.
Although their attack was a lot more direct and aggressive, their defence in the first half gave them too much work to do in the second. Harry Potter’s try resembled the issues in the Gloucester defence with a number of one-on-one tackles being missed amassing to a total of 17 missed tackles. When they did defend well they really stopped Leicester’s attacking momentum and they desperately need to threaten at the breakdown more to slow down the opposition’s ball and generate more turnovers to attack from.
Leicester
Leicester’s attack this week lacked the polish, precision and power that they had on display last week against Exeter. However, they still scored easily when they put the gas down with George Ford having an abundance of hard runners around him. Leicester’s attack has benefitted from the abundance of options around Ford making them very difficult to defend against, making 7 line breaks against Gloucester and running 352 metres with just 69 carries almost a 100 metres more than Gloucester had with 32 extra carries. The gap was only 7 points at the end of this game because Ford’s kicking boot was not very accurate, missing 2 conversions and a 2 penalties which ultimately allowed Gloucester a sniff at the death.
Leicester’s defence was outstanding. They made 94% of their tackles and were dominant in the engine room with Reffell (15 tackles), Martin (14), Wells, Liebenberg (both 12) and Dan Cole (10) these 5 players making 40% of all of Leicester’s tackles. The Tigers also had 7 turnovers won which is what ultimately won them the match as they managed to interrupt Gloucester’s rhythm on many occasions despite the Cherry & White’s really threatening at the end.
Bath 13-20 Newcastle Falcons
MOTM:
Top Performers Bath: Ojomoh, Bayliss
Top Performers Falcons: McGuigan, Peterson, Van der Walt, Stephens
Summary
Bath’s close loss last week at the AJ Bell looked promising, however this week, they crumbled into the habits of old and made far too many errors to give themselves a real chance to start in winning ways at the Rec for 2021/22. Newcastle, on the other hand went one step further from last week’s ‘impressive loss’ to Harlequins and managed to string together a clean performance based on territory and good defence and they left their two young wingers to feast on Bath’s mistakes.
Bath
Bath have a bit of an identity crisis, seeming unsure how they want to play. At times they try to play free-flowing rugby with offloads in contact but make lots of errors in doing so, other times they look to play a power game up front but don’t dominate collisions enough.
They also desperately need Cipriani back, he gives them the control and tempo they need at fly-half. Cipriani has the ability to both slow down and speed up Bath’s attack in the right moments, against the Falcons they looked frantic at times as if they tried to score off every phase. Ojomoh was a shining light in an otherwise unflattering display. He constantly challenged the line and looked to put support runners in space. Going to be a great player for years to come.
Bath’s defence overall was not terrible with an 85% tackle success, but their inability to generate turnover ball cost them. With 0 turnovers won they could not stop Newcastle’s attacking rhythm, it also meant they did not have many counter-attacking opportunities to exploit.
They also struggled to set a territorial platform because of their difficulty in disrupting the Falcons’ set-piece.
Their performance was also marred by the 16 penalties conceded, many of which were avoidable. Especially attacking penalties such as going off their feet at the ruck in key attacking moments.
Newcastle
Newcastle’s attack is not revolutionary, but they know their identity, they know the way they want to play. Newcastle limit their errors and make other teams play from their own half, it's a simple but effective recipe which was good enough for the W against Bath. Their attacking threats are limited in general structured play but they threaten off the back of solid scrum and lineout ball. Radwan and Stephens have now added electrifying pace and an ability to punish errors in loose play with long-range 5 pointers.
Outside of their try-scoring moments, which still come with too much difficulty as can be seen by their 1.21 RZ efficiency, they implemented their game plan very well. Louis Schreuder’s kicking game and their set-piece controlled the game enough to pick up 4 crucial points on the road.
Defensively Newcastle are just solid. Despite Bath’s 11 clean breaks they only conceded 13 points testament to their resilience and cover defence. Falcons also had 5 turnovers which proved crucial at interrupting the flow of Bath’s attacks.
Exeter Chiefs 24-26 Northampton Saints
MOTM:
Top Performers Chiefs: Armand
Top Performers Saints: Ribbans, Ludlam, Harrison, Dingwall, Proctor, Furbank
Summary
It is hard to pin down how Exeter lost this game, its the type of game they usually win and despite not playing their best they seemed still in control till the last penalty and they had the chance to win with a Simmonds penalty from 40 in front before the Saints fightback. But credit ought to go to Northampton. Their pack stood up, their defense from 1-15 was rock solid bar the first 10 minutes. They took their chances, stayed in the game and pipped it at the end with 3 clutch penalties by George Furbank.
Exeter
Exeter’s attack seemed on song early on as they dotted down two early tries including one from long range and a typical pick and go score. After that however, their attack was un-typically disjointed especially in the backs. Their forwards’ rolling maul and pick and go was stifled by Northampton’s tough defence. Exeter have persisted with their tap and go style close to the tryline. The Chiefs had 23 phases in the red zone compared to Northampton’s 9 despite them having 13 and 14 Red Zone entries respectively.
Their backline struggled to get the go-forward ball that they usually thrive off and ended up being very lateral and going for the ‘out the back’ option a little aimlessly. Furthermore, their attacking ruck speed was average and their support at the breakdown was very slow.
Exeter’s defence was typically solid in structured phases but they were unusually vulnerable to open play attacks and really struggled in one-on-one situations. They only had an 80% tackle success rate and both Maunder and Simmonds missed tackles that directly led to tries.
The Chiefs were still excellent in their goal-line defence and they demolished Northampton’s attacking mauls. They were also well disciplined and attacked the breakdown really effectively.
Northampton
Northampton kept the game close and took their chances. They made the most of one on one situations exposing Exeter’s open-play defence on a number of occasions. They made 351 metres on just 61 carries along with 8 clean breaks and 15 defenders beaten! The key to their success was mainly on the defensive end but in attack they played in the right areas, executed an effective kicking game and were clinical with their open play opportunities, not to mention 100% accuracy from the boots of Grayson and Furbank.
Defensively Northampton really stood up, outside of two early tries they only conceded 10 points for 70 minutes. Northampton made 93% of their tackles and won 6 turnovers. Their maul and tryline defence were both outstanding and when they chose to attack the breakdown they often did it in pairs very successfully. The maul defence was especially impressive against a notoriously clinical side like Exeter, managing to prevent three rolling mauls from 5 metres out.
Their set-piece was also solid granting them the stability required to beat teams like Exeter. Teimana Harrison, Ribbans, Ludlam and Wood Were exceptional. Juarno Augustus also had a positive impact coming on and making a clutch turnover that led to a crucial late penalty.
Harlequins 35-29 Worcester Warriors
MOTM:
Top Performers Quins: Lamb, Dombrandt, Care, Esterhuizen, Marchant, Lynagh
Top Performers Warriors: Hatherell, Heinz, Venter
Summary
This was one of the only games that went to script this weekend. Despite Worcester’s vast improvements in attack and defence, the reigning champs just had too much firepower and ousted the Warriors. When the Quins say they abc themselves to outscore anyone they really mean it, and though the old saying says that defence wins championships, it seems pretty clear that attack wins championships too! Quins have become a different beast since their defence has turned into their first point of attack, though they have got iron resilience they really seek to defend for the shortest periods of time to take advantage of their counter-attacking abilities.
Harlequins
Harlequins played to their identity as usual. Despite Worcester’s 20 penalties conceded, Quins never took a shot at goal, they had 27 visits to the Warriors 22 instead. Their fast pace play was typified by Care’s tempo, he pushes the pace at every ruck and quick taps as soon as he sees that the defence is slow to react. His speed at the breakdown is what makes Quins so formidable and his link play with both forwards and backs paired with his kicking game gives Quins a variety that is so hard to defend against. Quins split their attack with great variety, playing off 9, 10 and 12 at impressive 53%, 31% and 16% splits respectively making it hard for the Worcester defence to settle. Together with DC’s pace, the other key ingredient to unleash Quins’ potent outside backs is the need for go-forward ball. Andre Esterhuizen provided this at the weekend and the pack chipped in with good carries evenly distributed throughout the game with Alex Dombrandt, Dino Lamb and James Chisholm off the bench the standouts.
Defensively Quins had a 95% tackle success rate, which is exceptional. However, their defence was not and did not feel exceptional as the game wore on. Harlequins defended very well in periods but would then have big lapses, sometimes getting their structure all wrong. They conceded tries off set-piece plays as well as in open play. The worst aspect being that Worcester scored 29 points with just 8 visits to Quins’ 22. They must improve their defensive resilience.
Nonetheless, there were positives from their defence as they won 7 turnovers a key source of their attacking prowess. Their ability to create turnovers in defence is often their first and most effective opportunity to score in counter-attack situations. In this game it was their collision dominance from Marler, Lawday and Symons that led to turnover opportunities for their jacklers to thrive off of.
Worcester
Worcester’s attack really blossomed in the second half as they managed to get more possession, something they weren’t able to do in the first half as their penalty count was far too high early on. When they had the opportunity to attack they were both effective and diverse alternating between forward’s pod play including tip passes and lots of players around the ball. Similarly in the backline they varied between crash balls, out the back passes and little chips which lead to Willi Heinz’s try. Their set-piece was immaculate and that allowed them to build the platform for their attacking opportunities. In addition to their set-piece, Willi Heinz was once again formidable for Worcester as he brought great tempo and control in attack. His box-kicking is exceptional and always leads to an aerial contest. Worcester’s ruck speed was also very good, partly because of Heinz’s ability to push the pace but also because of their strong ball carries such as Venter and Lawrence, as a team they had a 65% gainline success rate - crazy.
Defensively Worcester struggled to contain Harlequins’ strike players. Even though the Warriors had a respectable 85% tackle success rate, Quins managed 10 clean breaks and ran for 425 metres, ultimately visiting Worcester’s 22 a staggering 27 times. Worcester also conceded 17 defensive penalties, a real indicator that they could not deal with Quins’ attacking pace at the breakdown. On a positive note, their red zone defence was effective at limiting the damage of the numerous Quins visits to the Warriors 22.
Wasps 44-8 Bristol Bears
MOTM: Ali Crossdale
Top Performers Wasps: Toomaga-Allen, Willis, Robson, Crossdale
Top Performers Bears: None
Summary
Wasps executed their game-plan to perfection. They defended hard and played in the right areas, absorbing much of Bristol’s attack in the first half and punishing any mistake to the max. Bristol have not looked great in their opening two games, they have lacked the go-forward up-front and quickly ran out of ideas. Wasps’ relentless line speed won them this game, but Bristol must find ways to create midfield threats even when they are missing Semi Radradra.
Wasps
Wasps took every attacking opportunity they were given. Every Bristol mistake was punished to full-effect with Wasps showing their counter-attacking prowess. Wasps beat 31 defenders, the most of any team this round, and made 5 offloads. Their attack was not exceptionally creative but they used the concept of ‘defence as first your attack’ to the fullest, generating 14 turnovers from which to launch their dangerous attacks.
Whilst many of the Bears errors were unforced, there were also a lot caused due to Wasps swarming defence. Their line-speed was excellent all game, pressuring Bristol’s backs into poor passes and having to attack from slow ruck ball. The Wasps defence also won a staggering 14 turnovers, the highest of any team in Round 2. When the Bears did manage to get into the Wasps 22, the defence was excellent. In 14 ‘Red Zone’ entries for Bristol, they only had an RZ efficiency of 0.36.
Bristol
Despite out-running Wasps for an extra 130 metres in attack, Bristol’s attack struggled to fire once again. The Bears continued to try and play in the same attacking structure as last season; keeping the ball in hand and limit kicking possession back to the opposition. They kicked away just 28% of their possession back to the opposition, the lowest of any team this round.
However, the problem in this game was that they didn’t have runners coming onto the ball at speed. They have immense attacking variety coming off 9,10 and 12 but they lacked strong lines off of those playmakers to test Wasps tacklers and line speed. This created little gainline momentum and ruck speed, which caused the Bears’ attack to become lateral and easy for Wasps to defend against. Along with this, the numerous unforced errors made it very hard to play the multi-phase rugby they were so successful at last season.
On the defensive side, the reactions to their attacking errors was a real issue. Unforced errors as a result of early-season rust have been augmented by the fact that the Bears didn’t play a single pre-season fixture. However, the reaction or lack thereof to those errors was most concerning. On four occasions in the second half, Wasps scored a try directly off a Bears mistake and in each of them, the defence was all over the place. Along with that, the identification of numbers in defence was subpar. Both of Ali Crossdale’s tries were caused because Bristol defenders weren’t recognising the matchup of numbers in front of them.
London Irish 31-31 Sale Sharks
MOTM: Sean O’Brien
Top Performers Exiles: Creevy, Coleman, White
Top Performers Sharks: Will Cliff, AJ MacGinty, Tuilagi
Summary
A potential game of the season with a typical ‘game of two halves’ scenario. Sale were dominant up-front in the first half compared to a lethargic London Irish, and the second half was a complete opposite. Sale really crumbled after AJ MacGinty left the field but they also gave a number of unnecessary penalties and could not keep hold of possession. Credit to London Irish though. They came out firing with some menacing ball-carries that allowed their finishers to, well, finish!
London Irish
London Irish’s attack was too erratic and disjointed with far too many handling errors in the first half. A complete contrast to the second half where their energy was high, ruck speed was excellent and ball-carries constantly got over the gain-line. This was demonstrated by their excellent ‘Red Zone Efficiency’ with 3.10 points scored per visit to the Sharks’ 22.
The defence overall was not great throughout the game. In the first half they were really slow around the ruck and not winning the collisions. In the second half, the Exiles attacked for the most part. Sale gave away unnecessary ruck penalties when they had possession to the extent that Irish’s defensive end was not a real focus of the half.
Paddy Jackson’s sideline conversions and missed penalties ultimately cost them the second-half comeback but they showed that when they are on song they have serious try-scoring ability all over the park.
Sale
Sale’s first-half attack looked really crisp with quick service from Will Cliff who was also able to snipe around the ruck very effectively. AJ MacGinty pulled the strings using a variety of combinations including Manu Tuilagi as a battering ram and some deft kicks in behind. His vision, control of the match and ability to get a ‘second touch’ stood out in the 40 minutes he played. They were not the same without him in the second half.
Sale’s second-half defence was very sloppy. Alex Sanderson mentioned that their work-rate was not good enough. This was evident in the second quarter, when Irish managed to speed up their ruck ball, ‘turn the corner’ quicker and put Sale on the back foot for much of the second half. In the first half it was a different story as they were winning the collisions and slowing down a lot of Irish’s ruck ball. The Sharks backline defence also suffered without MacGinty as both Manu and Sam James had to compensate on the inside shoulder.
Sale’s second-half demise was also down to the fact that they gave away a total of 18 penalties, 11 of which were whilst in attack, a true sin and something Sanderson will definitely highlight in this week’s training.
Tight Five Highlighted Player of Round 2 - Tom Willis (Wasps)