Review of Week3

By PerryGo
September 17 2002

Quins’ supporters were lost for words at the end of last Saturday’s match against Leeds. A few sprang to mind, actually, but being a decent lot, we only mumbled them under our breath so as not to cause offence to anyone listening. Mark Evans may not have been so demure in the dressing room, though..

Thankfully, the attendance was counted at the beginning of the game, because the figure would have been a lot lower five minutes from the end, when streams of dejected Quins’ supporters decided it would be more fun to sit in traffic on the A316 than watch the sorry spectacle any more.

We may have been lost for words, but the media – which is, after all, paid to produce words – was not. Planet Rugby talked about ‘hapless Quins’. (That’s not a compliment…)

The Mail on Sunday referred to ‘another inadequate performance’. According to this paper, Jason Leonard ‘threw his headgear to the ground in disgust and remonstrated with one of his own team as the final whistle sounded’. Hmmm.

Writing in the Sunday Telegraph, Paul Ackford said Quins ‘lacked energy and shape to their effort’. He went on: ‘they turned over far too much ball and crabbed sideways in attack on the few occasions they were able to create space for themselves’. Ouch.

Prof the Positive might have some trouble filling a sentence this week, let alone an article.

Fighting back the waves of deep, dark depression that I felt after the game, there are inevitably some positives to mention. Let’s start there, in case the negatives overwhelm us and we forget to go back to them later.

Woody and Shaggy played with as much aggression and effort (call it ‘passion’, maybe) as I have ever seen. They deserve the accolades for their contributions. As my son said afterwards, “Thank goodness for them, I don’t know what would have happened if they hadn’t been there”. If Keith and Will read the messageboard, they must wonder why some people seem to regularly have a go at them – what more could they do?

Bemand seemed to play pretty well too, and Burke’s goal kicking was up to its usual high standard. Gollings maintained his consistent form and looked dangerous on occasions. And Satala looked more comfortable than at Welford Road, retaining and offloading well and making yards on most occasions he got the ball.

That may be about it.

After the first two defeats, we were at least able to rationalise things. We were (so I said) “making progress”. On Saturday, though, we went seriously backwards.

So to the negatives.

Firstly, the shockingly high individual errors count. I don’t know whether all the time in the world on the training paddock can do anything about players making so many personal mistakes, particularly the experienced ones. That, to me, is one of the most worrying things about it. If we are lacking players with sufficient skills, it is too late to do much about it now, except begin to worry.

Secondly, the way the forwards were outplayed. Leeds does not, on paper, have an immensely strong pack, although players like Palmer are clearly top drawer. Glaws and Tigers, we know will cause us problems – but should Leeds? On this evidence, it looks like most of the packs we are going to face will have a field day. If the pack can’t cut it, the backs will not be able to compensate. A winning team must have a dominant pack.

As always, it is dangerous to be too specific without video analysis to support or correct impressions gained from the one, live viewing. But the general disarray and failure to play together (e.g. players getting isolated from their support and conceding possession) is worrying.

Thirdly, the lack of concentration. What on earth was Williams thinking when he kicked a low spiral (OK going for a touch-finder, but not when it should have been a Garryowen coming down with ice on it) straight to the opposition in the middle of their half, giving them all the time in the world to run it back against a disorganised defence for a score? A schoolboy wouldn’t have done that. How could the pack once again – it’s now two weeks in succession – be pushed off the ball at a 5 metre scrum to concede a try in the last 10 minutes?

Fourthly, the decision making. I admire the ambition that said ‘let’s not try to claw our way back through penalties and DGs’ (a negative strategy that will gain bonus points in defeat but is unreliable as a way to win matches) and therefore elected to kick to touch for a 5 metre lineout, 15 minutes from time. Especially since we had some momentum going for us at that moment. But (once again) - predictably, you might say - we lost possession from the lineout and the chance was gone. Why did we not take a 5 metre scrum? That was our call from the stand - surely a safer, more prudent option?

Most worryingly, perhaps, is what Quins can do about it. Some teams would be making wholesale changes (well, a few, anyway) after such a failure. But who would we bring in? We had as close to our first-choice team out on the park as injuries would permit. We do not exactly have a whole slew of squad members who can lay claim to a place in the starting XV. One-on-one, there are few if any who could make a case for replacing the player they are understudying.

As an aside, our inability to clear our lines with the kind of 50 metre touch-finders that Tigers (through Stimpson) and Leeds (through Van Straaten) can produce is going to hold us back. Maybe they are trying to ‘play it safe’ but neither Burke nor Gollings possesses that sort of range it seems. Is there a case for Shaggy kicking more?

I am particularly concerned about the forwards. A lack of star individuals can be overcome by team performance (last season’s London Irish being a classic illustration) but it isn’t happening at the moment. In Week One I wrote ‘Hurry up, Mr. Vos – we need you’ and it seems to bear repeating in Week Three.

Credit is due to Leeds, of course. There were probably more Leeds players on the park than supporters in the stadium. They managed to overcome the intimidation of ‘Fortress Stoop’, hundreds of miles from home (or is it thousands – where exactly is Leeds?) and prove they can now win away. Braam van Straaten punished us, as I feared he might, and that 60 metre penalty is the longest kick I have ever seen converted - a fantastic strike, even if it did have a bit of wind behind it. Dan Scarborough’s two tries also proved what a good player he is. They played with a grit and determination that we seemed, with a few exceptions, to be lacking. As Mr Ackford said, “The thing players hate most is when their attitude is questioned, but…”

What I fear most is that rather than saying how good Leeds are as a side (I still don’t think they’re that good) Saturday may have said more about how bad we are right now.

We have one week to sort it out and a perfect test of how well we do that is coming up next – another home match, this time against London Irish. The Exiles (exiled to Reading, Berkshire that is…) can expect to be a fellow mid-table team, like Quins and Leeds, and thus provide a good test of where we are at. They too have not really performed yet this year, although their confidence will have been boosted by the win last weekend.

Yes, OK, we’ve only lost 3 matches, not a big deal in the overall scheme of things, but – especially given the inadequacy of the performance in defeat, which should always be as crucial a factor in our assessment as the result itself - we can’t pretend the pressure isn’t on now; this has become a ‘must-win’ match.

Irish v. Quins games are always highly charged local derbies – stereotypically, the working man’s club against the toffs’ team. They will be fired up for it – but will we?