Northern Edition

Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
New Zealand New Zealand
France France

Frustration, field position and Reece Hodge can be the answer for the Wallabies

Reece Hodge. (Photo by Dan Mullan/Getty Images)

The Wallabies can defeat England in their quarter-final at Oita Stadium this Saturday if they can frustrate the English out of the rhythm and the areas in which they like to play the game.

ADVERTISEMENT

It is far easier said than done, but if the Wallabies select the now-available Reece Hodge, their chances of doing so improve.

I say this as Hodge’s ability to not only punt the ball further than most, but also his ability to kick penalty goals from over 50 meters could make him an effective weapon if used properly as part of an overall strategy designed to agitate England.

Eddie Jones’ side enjoys grinding down the opposition through their strong set-piece and powerful ball-runners through the likes of Billy Vunipola and Maro Itoje, yet seldom do they use such tactics to work their way out of their defensive zones for multiple phases.

Like any tactician worth their salt, Jones likes England to be constantly applying the pressure of field position and does so through the kicking games of fly-half George Ford and inside centre Owen Farrell.

Continue reading below…

Video Spacer

If selected, England will look to single out Marika Koroibete with contestable high balls, as it was shown against Wales the powerful Wallaby winger is built for ground warfare only.

Therefore, I suggest the Wallabies select a back three who can defuse such high ball tactics, but can also kick long-distance in return to counter such tactics.

ADVERTISEMENT

Australia, in the past several seasons, has failed to deliver as a true counter-attacking side from such opportunity. In fact, I would suggest counter-attack is something the Wallabies struggle with.

They traditionally do look to run the ball back at the opposition from a deep kick if there is space to do so.

Israel Folau did this for numerous seasons, and since his departure, Kurtley Beale and Dane Haylett-Petty have often both followed suit. I suggest England would expect the Wallabies to do so again this weekend.

So, why wouldn’t the Wallabies do what England neither expect nor want them to do and kick long back into their opponents’ 22 and follow up with a strong line chase looking to force the English into error in their half?

ADVERTISEMENT

If you were the Wallabies, would it not be more advantageous to expel your energy on keeping England down in their half than trying to run the ball out of your own?

If Michael Cheika were to employ such counter-tactics to the English kicking game, it effectively limits England’s ability to use their ‘choke’ tackle and line speed as they like to do so in asserting their authority at the collision.

https://www.instagram.com/p/B3qFZRCAF_b/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link

While I am sure the inevitable long kicking ‘tennis game’ would ensue for a period, yet it may also invite the likes of Jonny May and Elliot Daly, both of whom are dangerous runners of the ball, to counter-attack from deep within their half.

This where the Wallabies must shut the English down, and can do so with a fast yet connected defensive line in kick chase.

Such a tactic would frustrate England, and may force the game to be played more in the middle of the field rather deep in the opponent’s half.

This too could play into the Wallabies’ hands, as if penalties are given away in such an area, they can call upon Reece Hodge to start taking shots at goal.

Although Hodge may not have the most accurate boot, what he has is the distance in his kicking, and if he does miss the penalty goal, the game will likely have to re-start from an English kick-off from the 22, thus giving the Wallabies possession again with England defending in their half.

As the Welsh illustrated to the Wallabies in their pool match, one must keep the scoreboard ticking over, and having a long-distance goal-kicker at your disposal enhances a team’s ability to do so.

If the Wallabies find themselves leading or within seven points of the English with 25 minutes to go, that is when they can unleash the bench and look to exploit the gaps that tend to exist in the latter parts of the game.

However, if they try to run over England in the opening 20 minutes, I think that will play right into English hands as they want the collision early.

The Wallabies should look to do everything possible to disrupt and prevent the rhythm he English enjoy to play.

My Wallabies side

1. Scott Sio

2. Tolu Latu

3. Allan Alaalatoa

4. Izack Rodda

5. Rory Arnold

6. Jack Dempsey

7. Michael Hooper

8. Isa Naisarani

9. Nic White

10. Christian Lealiifano

11. Jordan Petaia

12. Samu Kerevi

13. Tevita Kuridrani

14. Reece Hodge

15. Dane Haylett-Petty

Reserves:

16. Jordan Uelese

17. James Slipper

18. Taniela Tupou

19. Adam Coleman

20. David Pocock

21. Will Genia

22. Matt To’omua

23. Marika Koroibete

In other news:

Video Spacer
ADVERTISEMENT

LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

0 Comments
Be the first to comment...

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

J
JW 4 hours ago
Does South Africa have a future in European competition?

I rated Lowe well enough to be an AB. Remember we were picking the likes of George Bridge above such players so theres no disputing a lot of bad decisions have been made by those last two coaches. Does a team like the ABs need a finicky winger who you have to adapt and change a lot of your style with to get benefit from? No, not really. But he still would have been a basic improvement on players like even Savea at the tail of his career, Bridge, and could even have converted into the answer of replacing Beauden at the back. Instead we persisted with NMS, Naholo, Havili, Reece, all players we would have cared even less about losing and all because Rieko had Lowe's number 11 jersey nailed down.


He was of course only 23 when he decided to leave, it was back in the beggining of the period they had started retaining players (from 2018 onwards I think, they came out saying theyre going to be more aggressive at some point). So he might, all of them, only just missed out.


The main point that Ed made is that situations like Lowe's, Aki's, JGP's, aren't going to happen in future. That's a bit of a "NZ" only problem, because those players need to reach such a high standard to be chosen by the All Blacks, were as a country like Ireland wants them a lot earlier like that. This is basically the 'ready in 3 years' concept Ireland relied on, versus the '5 years and they've left' concept' were that player is now ready to be chosen by the All Blacks (given a contract to play Super, ala SBW, and hopefully Manu).


The 'mercenary' thing that will take longer to expire, and which I was referring to, is the grandparents rule. The new kids coming through now aren't going to have as many gp born overseas, so the amount of players that can leave with a prospect of International rugby offer are going to drop dramatically at some point. All these kiwi fellas playing for a PI, is going to stop sadly.


The new era problem that will replace those old concerns is now French and Japanese clubs (doing the same as NRL teams have done for decades by) picking kids out of school. The problem here is not so much a national identity one, than it is a farm system where 9 in 10 players are left with nothing. A stunted education and no support in a foreign country (well they'll get kicked out of those countries were they don't in Australia).


It's the same sort of situation were NZ would be the big guy, but there weren't many downsides with it. The only one I can think was brought up but a poster on this site, I can't recall who it was, but he seemed to know a lot of kids coming from the Islands weren't really given the capability to fly back home during school xms holidays etc. That is probably something that should be fixed by the union. Otherwise getting someone like Fakatava over here for his last year of school definitely results in NZ being able to pick the cherries off the top but it also allows that player to develop and be able to represent Tonga and under age and possibly even later in his career. Where as a kid being taken from NZ is arguably going to be worse off in every respect other than perhaps money. Not going to develop as a person, not going to develop as a player as much, so I have a lotof sympathy for NZs case that I don't include them in that group but I certainly see where you're coming from and it encourages other countries to think they can do the same while not realising they're making a much worse experience/situation.

144 Go to comments
LONG READ
LONG READ Return of 30-something brigade provides welcome tonic for Wales Return of 30-something brigade provides welcome tonic for Wales
Search