Wasps v Saracens

[Brandnewtorugby]

There are due to be a few players back for this game. I wonder if a few players will have picked up 'knocks' in the Bath game. Much as I love Gopperth, I would like to see next week used to try a faster 10. It's not new as mentioned before, his style doesn't suit the team, not saying they would never win or have never won, just not maximising the backs by playing to their strengths.

[NellyWellyWaspy]

Hi notso

If JG moved to 12, then either Eastgate or Umaga would have to play 10. I can't see Dai doing that.

[Rossm]

Rob Miller has played 10 before and made a decent fist of it.

[NellyWellyWaspy]

Except that he took quite a hit on Sunday, which is why (I suspect) he was replaced by Watson. Of all the positions on the pitch, 10 has to be super fit and injury free.

[Brandnewtorugby]

I was thinking Miller or WLR, a question mark over both for fitness. Need to be careful that I am not developing a man crush on Miller though :-)

Sounded like it was Eastgate's kicking that was the main concern in the last A game and we do have other kickers available.

[NellyWellyWaspy]

Eastgate and Umaga are playing tonight, as is my 'player to watch', Langley.

[wasps]

Last season when Gopperth played at 10, we still attacked incredibly well

This season when Cipriani was at 10, we didn't always play that well
I'm as big a Cips fan as the next guy, but he's currently gaining a lot of credibility by not playing

I didn't like to see Gopperth standing as deep as he was, but I don't think a part time fly half (WlR or Miller) will be a significant improvement

And i definitely don't think Dai will be making that kind of change.


Instead, there's likely to be minor changes using the same/similar personnel.
It's usually just minor sharpening that's required to change from a blunt blade into a sharp.... something (terrible analogy. sorry)

[Brandnewtorugby]

Fair points. I would add that Gopperth has become a part time fly half as well though.

[Gaz]

Gopps is a seasoned pro and, as much as I hate the Southern Hemisphere colloquialism, has a 'good footie brain'. Sorry, can't think of a better way to phrase it! So I'd trust Gopps to know what needs to be done, personally and tactically.

[Raggs]

Last season when Gopperth played at 10, we still attacked incredibly well

This season when Cipriani was at 10, we didn't always play that well
I'm as big a Cips fan as the next guy, but he's currently gaining a lot of credibility by not playing

I didn't like to see Gopperth standing as deep as he was, but I don't think a part time fly half (WlR or Miller) will be a significant improvement

And i definitely don't think Dai will be making that kind of change.


Instead, there's likely to be minor changes using the same/similar personnel.
It's usually just minor sharpening that's required to change from a blunt blade into a sharp.... something (terrible analogy. sorry)

Last season Cips played almost exclusively 10, and Gops 12.  The season before we attacked well with Gops at 10, but if you check the actual plays, we used a huge number of players regularly at first receiver, Daly and Miller both regularly took those duties, and we saw the same in the few games Gopps started at 10 last season, and in the Bath game.  Gopps 2 seasons ago was useful though, not amazing in terms of attack (kicking yes), but he did a better job, and that we had so many viable stand-ins at first receiver, would help beat a defence, since they'd never be able to relax when they saw the 10 wasn't available.

I've said I need to watch again, but it really felt to me like Gopps was the issue.  He was far deeper than Cips normally players, but the rest of our alignment was our normal attacking structure, when Daly/Miller slotted in at 10, the structure looked far more familiar as to when Cips plays, with this


9.
...........F.....F
.............10
.....................F.........F
.........................12
...................................Outside backs/odd forward

It gives the 9 a choice to go one out to a forward, and then the first reciever also has a choice of a forward runner, or further out the back to release the backs.

When I watched Gopperth it looked more like:

9.
........F.....F
............
........10.........F........F
..................12
.........................Outside backs

He's removed his option of going to the forwards, and either runs himself (to an already advancing defence), or we go even deeper, and the defence hasn't been checked by any other options, since the 2nd line of forwards were never a viable choice.  Also, by being deeper, he has to be closer to the 9 in terms of width, so that the pass is still a reasonable distance.

I do need to watch again though, and could be wrong.  Would be very interested in how others view our attacking structure too.

[ElthamWasp]

Dai set out the game plan to be more direct. However we over did it and used the crash ball 98% of the time. Only in the last 10 - 15 mins or so did we start to revert to our usual patterns and use the back door to 10 pass from 9. Hugely disappointing that it took 65mins for the players to realise route 1 was not working. All for playing to a pattern but you need to realise when the pattern is not working.

We have good players and we need to be able to mix things up. We know whats coming with the Sarries blitz defence. We need to get runners at pace with close support. So far this season our support players have been too far away and we have either been turned over or held up.

[matelot22]

Something that really irks me, and apologies as I've said it several times on the DW board, is that our forwards very really hit the line at pace. Ash, for just one, has proven very difficult to stop once he has a head of steam. Dai says we need to be more direct and get more penetration, but we insist on man and ball passes to forwards who are standing still. Given the offloading ability of some of our lads, surely this would reap benefits, or am I missing something?