Northern Edition

Select Edition

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

'So smart': Eben Etzebeth's quick thinking stuns Harlequins with crafty runaway try

(Source/Champions Cup)

Sharks lock Eben Etzebeth came up with a cunning piece of play to stun Harlequins at the Stoop stealing the ball from the base of the ruck and streaking 40 metres away untouched to score.

ADVERTISEMENT

His unique try exploited rules around unbound players at the ruck which saw Harlequins prop Joe Marler detach early with an improper bind.

That meant the ball was live, allowing Etzebeth to stalk around the breakdown and pinch the ball out of the scrumhalf Danny Care’s hands.

Video Spacer

Video Spacer

Harlequins were setting up a box kick at the time and were left confused by the play, not reacting in time to be able to chase down the Springbok lock.

A counter-ruck push by a Sharks forward was the catalyst for Marler’s bind becoming unbound, with Etzebeth timing his poach perfectly.

Etzebeth’s quick thinking highlighted the dangers of caterpillar rucking if officials are going to enforce the binding rules properly.

Early in the second half a similar situation unfolded as Harlequins set up to exit via a box kick, but this time Marler made sure his bind was correct.

ADVERTISEMENT

Former England flyhalf Andy Goode heaped praise on Etzebeth and explained why the try stood after a review.

Etzebeth was widely praised by fans on Twitter for exposing the caterpillar ruck while England’s experienced Test duo Care and Marler were criticised for their lack of accuracy and effort on the play.

ADVERTISEMENT

The Harlequins outscored the Sharks by five tries to four in the end to secure a spot in the Round of 16 with a 39-29 win.

 

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

f
fl 4 hours ago
What is the future of rugby in 2025?

on the article "Why defensive aggressor Felix Jones will drive new-look England" I said:


"Look at the kick:pass ratio from England’s games under Borthwick:

Italy 20:100

Argentina 50:100

South Africa 53:100

Fiji 24:100

Samoa 22:100

Chile 12:100

Japan 25:100

Argentina 55:100

Fiji 30:100

Ireland 21:100

Wales 24:100

Wales 13:100

Ireland 26:100

France 22:100

Wales 26:100

Italy 23:100

Scotland 18:100

The average is 27:100

The average in games we have won is 28:100

The average in games we have lost is 26:100, but these averages are skewed by the fact that we have tended to kick less and pass more against worse sides

The average in games where we have beaten current top 10 sides is 35:100

The average in games where we have beaten current top 8 sides is 39:100

The average in games where we have beaten current top 7 sides is 53:100

The average in games where we have lost to teams currently ranked lower than us is 20:100"


on the article "Four talking points after England's narrowest-ever win over Italy" I said:


"Look at the kick:pass ratio from England’s last 8 games

Italy 20:100

Argentina 50:100

South Africa 53:100

Fiji 24:100

Samoa 22:100

Chile 12:100

Japan 25:100

Argentina 55:100

So (1) England spread it wide more yesterday than against anyone bar Chile, and (2) all of england’s best performances have been when we kick loads, and in every match where we kick loads we have had a good performance."


"In particular you're neglecting the impact of the type of D Felix Jones was trying to introduce, which demanded most of England's training energy at the time."


I'm not, actually, I'm hyper aware of that fact and of its impact. I think it is because of the defence that England's new attack faltered so much for the first three games, something you ignore when you try to judge England's attack in the six nations by taking an average of either the trys scored or the rucks completed over the whole tournament.


"International coaches don't just pick those styles like sweets from a sweet shop!"

Yeah, I know. England's defence wasn't exactly the same as SA's, but it was similar. England's attack did rely on turnovers more than the Irish system did, but it was still pretty similar to it, and then shifted to something similar-but-not-identitcal to the Labit/Nick Evans systems, which are themselves similar but not identical.

105 Go to comments
TRENDING
TRENDING Rob Baxter left fuming by key decision as Exeter lose at Leicester Rob Baxter left fuming by key decision as Exeter lose at Leicester
Search