Ireland’s stamp on rugby’s counterattack revolution was revealed at Twickenham

According to Opta, Ireland are the worst team in the Six Nations. Don’t shoot the messenger.

Granted, just in one particular metric, one that is familiar to football fans. Rugby’s equivalent to expected goals (xG) – aptly named expected points (xP) – has Ireland bottom of the xP table after three rounds of this year’s Six Nations.

Based on their first three outings, Ireland have been expected to score fewer and concede more points than they actually have. Opta says England “won” on Saturday, according to xP by a margin of 34.6 to 27.2. Yet no sensible being would seriously suggest that England deserved to win at Twickenham.

Expected points don’t suggest that one team should win a game. Instead it shows who is more effective with their attacking opportunities based on the quality of chance. England had 12 attacking entries into Ireland’s 22 compared to Ireland’s nine last weekend. Attacking inside the 22 should present a higher likelihood of scoring than elsewhere on the field.

England were wasteful with their opportunities, scoring 1.7 points per entry. Ireland’s equivalent figure? 4.8 points per entry. Three points is seen as a good return. Ireland nearly scored an unconverted try every time they crossed the 22, a sensational, efficient return which goes some way to explaining how they outperformed their xP.

The key question, then, is how they achieved such efficiency? The answer lies with the new Irish attack. After a period of flux, trying to bed in new habits, Saturday was a window into how Ireland’s new game plan can work when everything falls into place.

After a poor display in Paris, this column wrote that Ireland’s new style does not suit the players. Kicking more, creating scraps and searching for opportunities to attack in transition looked alien to a group of players that for so long has played possession-dominated ball. Turns out that a fortnight and a date with an imploding England can create greater levels of suitability. That and getting two of the fastest men in the country – Robert Baloucoune and Tommy O’Brien – on to the field at the same time.

Four of Ireland’s five tries at Twickenham came from the kicking game. They had a clear formula for how to score quickly after winning the ball back in the air.

Take the first kicking try, the second of the game, scored by Baloucoune. It all starts with a Jamison Gibson-Park box-kick, and O’Brien outjumping Tommy Freeman, who should have had more support from Freddie Steward behind him. From there, Ireland get into their shape.

It’s not a particularly novel one. A pod of three forwards sits in front of a playmaker, in this case Jack Crowley. Perhaps a sign of England’s shoddy display in many aspects, the three forwards draw in four defenders.

An already disorganised defence, which was set to receive a kick just seconds earlier, is now scrambling in midfield. Ollie Lawrence misses a tackle and Stuart McCloskey is away, Baloucoune ultimately profiting in the corner.

The very next score saw a similar structure with a hint of variation. This time, after Jamie Osborne fields a kick, Ireland set up with a four-man forward pod. Tadhg Beirne works hard to get back and into the line, adding an additional attacker that further narrows the English defence that has to respect the runner.

Once the ball goes wide, after a quick breakdown, Ireland use their pace to exploit the space they have created. Fraser Dingwall is sucked in by Caelan Doris, allowing Baloucoune to burst through and link with O’Brien. Ireland have used their transition to open up a remarkable 22-point lead.

Technically speaking, though, the next two tries scored by Dan Sheehan and Osborne had kicking in their genesis, they don’t count as pure transition scores. The four-man pod after winning a kicking duel opened up a gap for Doris to surge through – Ellis Genge failing to link with his defenders on the outside – but Henry Pollock’s penalty concession and card meant Ireland didn’t score directly from that passage.

Similarly, Gibson-Park’s kick into space after a Baloucoune breakdown turnover led to good field position in Osborne’s score, but the scrumhalf first had to win a penalty by putting Marcus Smith under pressure in the backfield. The latter two scores would be penalty/set-piece ones, rather than transition, even though kick return played a big part.

Before this tournament, we highlighted a key stat to watch for Ireland: rucks per try. Particularly when Ireland are on the counter or in transition. For the Baloucoune and O’Brien scores, Ireland scored just two rucks after winning the ball in the air. That’s a significant improvement on what has gone before.

What has any of this got to do with efficiency and outperforming expected numbers?

By creating line breaks shortly after receiving possession, teams run through a defence that is not in a good position to scramble. If 22 entries come from tearing up the field through a disorganised line, it should be more straightforward to score. By holding on to less possession between the 10-metre lines, improving their aerial work and creating chances in broken field, teams become more efficient. Look at South Africa and France.

The latter remain the transition attack gold standard at the moment. Ireland did well to score within two-rucks twice at Twickenham, but the French are masters of the zero-ruck try. You can’t be more efficient than that.

The other key difference between Ireland and France is how they go about scoring after winning back possession. France immediately get the ball to a playmaker, often Thomas Ramos. He links with a speed threat such as Louis Bielle-Biarrey. Game over.

As much as Baloucune and O’Brien are fast, Ireland don’t have the same athletes that have been embedded in this unstructured mindset for the duration of their career.

Instead, after winning back the ball, Ireland set up a ruck and get into their pod shape with playmakers in behind. Sometimes there are three forwards. Sometimes four. They tried the three-man shape with an extra pod further out wide against Italy, only they lacked energy in the decoy or punch in the carry to sufficiently narrow the defence.

In a way, Ireland have turned their transition attack into another set-piece. One that offers numerical variation and forces defenders into making decisions. On Saturday, bad decisions led to terminal defensive errors.

If cynically minded, you could worry about clever defences finding a counter, depriving a team reliant on making decisions within a structure the very framework they crave. If more positive about the whole thing, you could argue that Ireland have improved an area of weakness by adding their strengths to create a hybrid situation. There’s no point trying to mimic the French tactic of yearning for chaos given Ireland do not have the same playing cattle. Instead, add an element of Irish structure that still allows for individual decision-making to exploit space.

Improvement is rarely linear in sport. Ireland will have days when this new transition string in their bow will not come good. Regardless, the Irish coaching staff have told us that they wanted to be better in transition and Saturday was their best display yet since that subtle shift.

A blueprint for the improvement, and a more efficient attacking game plan, has finally become clear.

Click here to read article