bazzaj wrote:I think BOD did his fair share of off loading though.
I tend to see Joes sides as being fairly flexible and adaptable depending on the players he has at his disposal and the opposition.
For example the way the great Leinster side played is different from what we have seen from Ireland.
Leinster played a multi phased possession based game with players playing heads up without numbers on their back.
They had a back line and a pack of extremely high skill levels so the roles could be interchangeable.
With Ireland the roles are more defined with the emphasis on play being dictated through the more traditional means of the half backs as thats where our strength is.
Off loading is high risk so Joe probably would rather keep possession than risk losing the ball but Leinster would have been encouraged to do that more as the players were of the same culture.
In Ireland its a culmination of 4 different sides so he has come to a comprised style to suit the side.
We could see in the past how Leinster players especially Sexton, struggled to get to grips with DKs Munster style he imposed on the Irish team.
Of course there are common themes in Joes teams where he inspires commitment, intensity and belief in his sides, which any coach will tell you is half the battle.
Not a bad analysis but not strictly true IMO.
Leinster made off-loads, certainly, but they were high-percentage offloads not high risk and it took time for the players to 'earn' that right to make the decisions.
The reason, IMO, Leinster seemed so interchangeable or 'playing without numbers on their back' was down to the organisation and discipline Schmidt, and the rest of the coaching staff, instilled in the players. The roles of each player were made crystal clear and the emphasis was, and still is, on performing YOUR role correctly and to the best of your ability. It wasn't and isn't necessarily about making a lung bursting break it was and still is about the fine details. Supporting the ball carrier being Rule Number One.
It sounds simple but I don't think that many teams or coaches still down that deeply. Most coaches allow/encourage players to maximise their individual skills/talent but the outcomes in those instances are uncertain.
Situation-Payne, Ludik and Andrew all can play fullback for Ulster. Are the instructions/plan for each individual player the same regardless of who starts and do they all follow/buy in to that plan? IMO no. Do Ulster play the same way if Olding starts at 12 rather than McCloskey? Again probably not. Is the same expected if Diack plays at 6 than say Wilson? If Touhy is injured does his replacement perform the same role or is that responsibility transferred to say VDM with the replacement picking up the role VDM would perhaps ordinarily perform?
Schmidt's Leinster, and now Ireland, are incredibly disciplined and structured. With Leinster it was a little but more pretty because he had exceptional international class players playing at a level slightly below the very highest and thus were generally better man for man than many of their opponents. Ireland are less flair because, IMO, we cannot afford to be. Individually we are not necessarily better than our opponents but for Ireland the whole is greater than the sum of our parts and that is because we play low risk, well planned and well executed rugby.