Puja wrote:Stom wrote:Puja wrote:
Sometimes you might have quick ball, but be numbered up against the defense. In that scenario, it's about disarranging the defence and getting it back quick again - bosh is far from the only way to do that, but without it as an option, sides will stop having to defend against it.
And yes, you can use a winger, but that requires them being close to the decision-maker when the decision's needed. If the fly-half looks up and bosh is the right option, but the big winger's out on the wing, then you're screwed.
Puja
But what is bosh, then?
Taking an unpromising attacking situation and carrying the ball forward in such a way that a) a tackle is broken or it looks like it might be and it draws men in to halt the gap, or b) ties in two defenders and gets the ball back quickly, or worst case scenario c)
you don't go backwards, you don't have to commit more attackers to secure the ball than the defenders had to to stop you, and you get to reset and try again from a different angle.
Puja
So, in other words, Robshaw was the best bosher we had?
I don't see how that differs from using footwork to put the defense off balance. By making it hard for the first defender, a second must come across.
Our best proponent of bosh against Aus was probably Sinck. And while Sinck is powerful as hell, he also shifts his weight in the tackle to break through. He doesn't just plough straight through them.
Joseph continuously sucks in more defenders and makes more metres than Te'o is basically what I'm saying.
You've basically defined bosh as any positive result from attacking activity that does not result in a clean break.
Sam Simmonds made quite a few metres targeting the gaps. And, if you target the gap - and this is a radical idea, I know - won't both defenders make a move to tackle you? Meaning that if you're good you can open up a nice big gap.