Bob Dwyer Rugby Workshops

Twickenham. 27^th December, 2009.

Harlequins v Wasps. 20-21.

A record crowd of 76,716 fans packed Twickenham on Sunday to witness a tough, tense match between two teams ranked 5^th and 6^th on the league table. A win was important for both teams fighting to stay in touch with the play-off group, and both teams, indeed, played with a commitment matching the occasion.

Although it was a thrilling contest, with the result in doubt until the final whistle, it was not a top quality game. The attacking play was not of the highest order and the goal kicking from both sides was disappointing. Indeed, after Danny Cipriani had missed five from seven, not all easy mind you, he was replaced by Dave Walder. Walder was then successful with his two attempts.

Harlequins showed their intent early and Nick Evans chipped over the defence and regathered to put Quins on the attack, but, in an indication of what was to follow, they took the “50:50” option and play broke down. Almost immediately, George Skivington broke away, through a gaping hole in the Quins defence. When covered, he kicked ahead for Joe Simpson to show his great pace on the chase, and when Joe Strettle made a complete hash of his attempt to cover, he simply dropped on the loose ball in the in-goal area for a very soft try. It seemed to me that Wasps had predicted this flaw in the Quins defence, in behind the tackle contest, because later in the half Simon Shaw exposed the same fault. Shaw’s run also produced points, this time from the penalty given after he was tackled and the pressured Quins defence “handled on the ground”.

Wasps scrum was well on top, almost from the start, and this was perhaps the single most influential component of the game. This is more often than not, the case; that a dominant scrum grows to control the game. The scrum is, after all, the “back door” escape from a period of defence – when your defence has been extended, perhaps almost to breaking point, and you are awarded a scrum feed as a reward for the break in the attack caused by the pressure of your defence. If your scrum can’t deliver quality, useable ball for your turn to attack, it suddenly looks like “a long, hard day at the office”.  When Tim Payne was forced off, injured, in the 58^th minute, you could hear the sighs of relief from the entire Quins team, through the tv set. Quins would not have got close if Payne had been fit and able to continue.

It was a messy game and lacked most of the fundamentals required for quality attack. Perhaps the referee, Dave Pearson, played his part also, because, from the start, there were far too many bodies on the ground around the ball, at the tackle contest. I found it difficult to follow when a defender could advance and make a tackle and when he could not. The players obviously had the same problem, so they took to asking the ref, on the run. This is a weird, and inadvisable, situation in a game meant to be played instinctively.

From my vantage point, I cannot see just how Quins managed to finish so close on the scoreboard. As I have already said, their scrum was demolished, until Tim Payne was forced to retire. Their play was so structured that support play was at times non-existent. The ever-livewire Danny Care made one line-break of about 25m, from in front of his forward pack, only to be penalised for ‘non-release’. This is really a penalty against his team-mates, for ‘non-support’. Surely they have noticed that he does this sort of thing often; actually it’s his strength, and good support would make his strength even stronger.

Quick ball was obviously to be discouraged – actually it goes hand in hand with good support play. Full marks for quality “bridging” at the tackle contest. If the ball looked like being available too quickly, another player would arrive to lengthen the “bridging tunnel” and further delay the recycle, whilst the defence restructured their line. I hate “bridging”; it’s an excuse for poor support play and poor realignment. Then we have the scrum-half who spends an ‘eternity’, organizing and reorganizing his phase attack (I use the term loosely). On one occasion in the second half, Danny Care, with the ball at the back of the ruck, took the time to adjust his socks, before passing the ball. I kid you not! Take a look; it was around the 43min mark.

Quality attack requires urgency in the recycle of possession and in realignment. Quins had neither of these qualities. After yet another individual spark by Care, he chipped ahead for the industrious Robshaw to regather and set up an opportunity wide out on the left wing. Alas, when the (at last) quick recycle was delivered, only the fly-half and left wing, some 30m away, were in position. Perhaps the quick recycle was not part of the game plan.

Urgency in attack suddenly appeared again in the game, for each team in turn, for the last fifteen minutes. First it was Quins turn, when, realizing that they were eight points adrift, decided that they had better play. Care took the tap (again) and after three quick phases, they were on the Wasps’ line. Care (again) sneaked over inside a pressured defence.

Next it was Wasps’ turn and, following five quick recycles or off-loads, flanker Hart scored and the conversion re-established the eight point margin. It was noticeable that replacement scrum-half, Mark Robinson, cleared the ball much more quickly than the original choice and that close support play was at hand for the off-load. It’s a simple game if you do the easy things well!

Back to Quins now, who were full of urgency and enthusiasm to grab the losing bonus point. The attack asked a series of questions in quick succession. The defence came up with a wrong answer and Dave Strettle skipped through the gap for a try under the posts. A one point margin again.

That’s another thing that I hate; teams who don’t try their utmost to win, until they’ve lost!