Take a moment to consider the headline. On average Saracens concede just 12.2 points per game. By contrast, the Premiership average is 20.8 points – a difference of almost nine points per game. London Irish, the team with the worst defence in the league, concede 30.1 points per game – in theory, a whopping 17.9 deficit. The below chart shows each team’s average points conceded per game.
The big question is, of course, how is there such a difference? Why do Saracens defend so much better than London Irish? And why can’t Irish just replicate these tactics?
What Saracens do well
So much of what good sports teams do is based on being extremely effective at the simple things. How much of Barcelona’s success comes from the fact that they can pass the ball to one another with consumate ease? The All Blacks might have a seemingly impenetrable aura around them, but the main reason for their success is their ability to pass a ball across a pitch faster than other teams.
With that in mind let’s have a look at the things that Saracens do well, with the minimal amount of fuss.
In the above still, Newcastle are running three men off the scrum half. Saracens put their trust in their players’ one-on-one tackling ability. Three Falcons go up against three Saracens forwards and fail to gain any yards. The blue line is included to show that there’s a clear dogleg in the defensive line, but in this case it’s no bad thing. Quick line speed when it’s accurate won’t create a meaningful dogleg. In this case the chances of the ball going wide are so slim that the wider defenders can hold off and wait for the next phase.
There are a lot of good things going on in the next example – all of it from Sarries. Firstly, the Falcons have lined up four men on the short side but the defence have matched them up. Secondly, Maro Itoje is leading the line and preventing the fly half from distributing. He will also be the tackler if the Falcons run a crash ball. You’ll also notice that we haven’t seen a back in a key defensive position close to the ruck in either of the first two examples.
This image again shows Saracens doing something very simple very well. There’s no danger here, the Falcons are just going to kick it away from the base of the ruck. The Falcons have put five men into the ruck, but Saracens remain disciplined and don’t needlessly join a ruck they can’t win.
This last image is also an example of how defences are changing in rugby. A forward rushes out of the line and leaves a big hole and potential dogleg behind him but again, if the defender times his run correctly and makes any tackle accurately, it is a more effective strategy as it requires fewer defenders to coordinate together. This one man blitz is becoming more and more common.
What are London Irish doing wrong?
London Irish’s main problem is not necessarily anything to do with their defensive structure. They just tend to make a lot of negative tackles, whereby the attacker breaks the gainline. I watched a 10 phase play during the recent Quins game, where nine of their 10 tackles were negative ones.
The first thing to mention above is that this is turnover ball, and yet there appears to be very little urgency amongst the Irish players to form a defensive line. The second thing is that the Irish scrum half has a firm hold on a stationary Joe Marler, and yet the Quins prop makes it to the yellow dot before anyone actually makes a serious tackle attempt.
There are, however, structural errors in the Irish defence as well. The above is an example of defensive confusion. The blindside defenders (red arrows) are all running to the open side of the field. It’s sometimes a good idea to follow the ball but in this case they’re all going and this leaving five completely unmarked Quins attackers (pink dots). The result is that the Quins inside centre cuts back and Danny Care runs almost the entire length of the pitch on the next play.
In this last example Tim Visser runs through the black rectangle for one of his hat trick of triess. The question is why none of the trio of circled players were able to get even a finger tip on the Scottish winger, given there is hardly any space between them in the line. Communication is key here – they should all be shouting at each other as to who has which man.
The player at the head of line hasn’t been defeated by the first dummy from Nicky Evans, he’s staring right at Visser. But he can’t get to him. There’s something comical about Blair Cowan, white scrum cap, peering out from behind two other forwards to see whether maybe he could make the tackle on Visser. He waits in line though, and the winger waltzes through.
In conclusion…
The Premiership is a league of small margins. The fact is that you don’t get to this level without a passable defence. But there is no doubt that Irish are a long way behind Saracens in their defensive effectiveness, and a lot of that comes down to individual tackling skill. They couldn’t play the game Sarries play because so much of the league leaders’ success is down to individual tackling.
Saracens don’t look like they will fall from their place at the top of the defensive rankings. It will be intriguing to see how effective England’s defence, under the watchful eye of former Saracens defensive guru Paul Gustard, is this Six Nations.
By Sam Larner (@SamLStandsUp)
3 replies on “Analysis: How the Wolfpack gives Saracens a 9 point advantage”
It’s a very good point made. What Saracens demonstrate here is the fact that the right to run the ball is earnt. You can’t build an attack without first creating the opportunity.
The effect of the strong defence is two fold. Firstly by forcing an attack to work extra hard compromises their ability to defend and two by defending hard forces an attack into an aimless kick into the arms of a rampaging attacker with often an open, broken and tired defence in front if it.
Possibly the best example of this was England Wales RWC first half where Billy Vunipola was given ball time and time again, gaining yardage on each occasion. Makes the second half even more inexplicable.
Is everyone going to start naming their defensive lines something vaguely naff sounding now? The commentator kept referring to “the wolf pack”, I thought he was confused about the Ireland B side or something. Please, please tell me Saracens do not use this name themselves.
“Hi, my name is Arnold Rimmer, but my mates call me Ace.”
The idea that an amazing England defence/offence were tiring Wales out in the 1st half and so they were falling off tackling Vunipola, if that is what Jez meant, is an interesting reading of the Wales game. I’d say that it’s the second half that proved the reading is false. Far from being tired Wales were coping within themselves as their superior fitness in the last quarter showed – they retained the ability to defend and attack but even more crucially what being fit gives you is the ability to think clearly under pressure, something England lacked in that game as Wales wore them out.
Yes they do call it the wolf pack and naff or not it’s highly effective. And their wolf pack lager is also very tasty!
On the Eng Wal game I think had England kept to their game plan of the first half then the result would have been different. However, the mental breakdown of the skipper at the breakdown cost England dear. Just as well we have a calm leadership presence as skipper for 6 nations….