Italy have won only once in their previous 42 Six Nations matches.
This piece normally focuses on five tactical ploys Ireland can use to beat a given opponent. Cynics may say they only need one against Sunday’s opposition given their record: turn up.
Despite Italy’s horrendous run, there were signs of green shoots under previous coach Kieran Crowley, while many expect new head coach Gonzalo Quesada to implement a more pragmatic game plan more suited to winning at international level.
Quesada’s first game in charge started with a defeat, albeit by a narrow three-point margin, to England last weekend. Signs of progress could be seen, but many of the failings that cost Italy were consistent with the flaws shown in recent years.
With that in mind, here are the five main weaknesses in Italy’s game that leave Ireland as overwhelming favourites for Sunday.
Territory
In last year’s Six Nations, Italy entered the opposition’s 22 on just 8.4 occasions per match (second fewest in the competition). Obviously, it’s hard to score if you don’t get close to the opponent’s line.
That trend didn’t improve on Saturday, Italy entering England’s 22 on just six occasions. Four per cent of their possession came in the so-called green attacking zone.
Half of Italy’s entries into the 22 came from players running in tries from deep. Relying on scoring long-range tries, while impressive, is not sustainable against a side such as Ireland who have a more settled defensive system than England.
Steve Borthwick’s team conceded five defensive penalties and only eight in total, meaning Italy didn’t have many simple opportunities to kick into the 22. Without that easy access, they struggled to work their way up the pitch and exert consistent pressure on the English line.
On the flip side, Italy’s attempts to get the ball out of their own 22 were poor last week. Alessandro Garbisi, starting at nine instead of Stephen Varney, often opted to kick high contestables when clearing. This frequently gave England possession close to the Italian line. Garbisi also had one kick charged down. He was hooked after 53 minutes for Varney who looked far more assured when using the boot to get out of the 22.
When Italy tried to clear through the other Garbisi brother, outhalf Paolo, his exit kicks found touch far too close to the Italian 22. Staying away from the opposition 22 and inside your own is not a winning formula.
Kicking – Italian quantity over quality
When people hear talk of pragmatism in rugby, thoughts immediately turn to kicking. This isn’t wholly unjustified. Yet the emphasis should be on quality of kicks, not quantity.
Stats company Oval Insights recently published research stating that, in tier one international matches, the team that gains the most metres from kicks – not necessarily who kicks most often – wins the match 79 per cent of the time.
As a result, teams such as France, Ireland, England and South Africa opt to kick frequently in order to gain more metres.
Armed with this knowledge of what pragmatism is and why it is important, backed by their new pragmatic head coach, you would think Italy would opt to kick either more often or put in higher quality kicks. You’d be half-right.
In last year’s Six Nations, Italy averaged just over 21 kicks per game. On Saturday, they kicked 24 times during open play. Yet despite kicking more often, Italy only kicked for 547 metres. Their per game average last year was just under 605 metres. Quality does not equal quantity.
Granted, it’s just one game under new management, but this trend of Italy kicking more often but for less territorial gain lends itself to one conclusion: Italy’s designated kickers need further development before we see a kicking game that leads to regular wins.
Trouble in the wings
On both sides of the ball, Italy’s play in the wide channels can let them down. In defence, Italy struggled whenever England opted to go wide, an unusual ploy for a Borthwick-coached team.
During three consecutive first half England attacks, Italy sent defenders shooting out of the line but they failed to shut down the ball. When marking up attackers out wide, communication and connectivity between Italian defenders was poor, leaving gaps for England to exploit. This led to Elliot Daly’s first-half try.
On the flip side, Italy’s tendency to go wide in attack was shut down by England. In last year’s Six Nations, they passed the ball 10 metres from the ruck 60 per cent of the time, the highest figure in the tournament. Against England, they moved the ball beyond the first receiver 30 per cent of the time, the second most of any team in round one.
A fast, connected line speed can shut teams such as Italy down if successful in cutting off access to the wide channels. In the first half, England sent shooters but they weren’t connected. When silky Italian handling beat the first onrushing defender, there were gaps out wide to exploit.
After half-time, England’s rush defence was better connected and left fewer gaps. Their blitz therefore shut down at least four different wide attacks by forcing errors or rucking over isolated carriers caught behind the gainline.
With their wide threat gone, Italy had no plan B in attack.
Slow breakdown
A big part of England’s successful blitz defence, especially in the second half, was the speed – or lack thereof – of Italy’s breakdown. They could not recycle the ball quickly enough to prevent England from setting their line, making it easier to get onside and rush up before the ball was in play.
Italy do not have a problem when it comes to dominating contact in attack. In last year’s Six Nations, 33 per cent of their carries were dominant, a figure towards the higher end of the tournament rankings. On the weekend, Italy beat 19 defenders. Their issue, therefore, is not a failure to build momentum through poor carries.
Instead, something clearly goes wrong at the breakdown. On Saturday, 50 per cent of Italy’s rucks lasted fewer than three seconds, compared to England’s figure of 58 per cent. Even more damningly, 24 per cent of Italy’s breakdowns lasted more than six seconds, a significantly higher figure than England’s 15 per cent.
Italy struggle at creating their own quick possession and slowing down the opposition’s. In attack, this leads to problems when protecting their ball, both on the floor and when trying to go wide against a defence that has time to set. Italy’s 14.4 turnovers conceded per match last year was the second most in the Six Nations.
Lineout and discipline
For all the talk of kick metres, territorial battles, entries into the 22 and breakdown efficiency, sometimes the most glaring problems are the simple ones.
Italy’s lineout was average on the weekend, coughing up the ball three times. This figure doesn’t include knock-ons by England when they beat Italy to the throw or Italy securing scrappy possession, actions which still can scupper the quality of the ball supplied to the backs.
England lost just one lineout out of 12. This could go some way to explaining why Italy often kicked to keep the ball on the park in a bid to prevent England from using their own superior lineout. However, as previously stated, that ploy often handed England possession in advantageous areas of the pitch.
As for falling foul of the referee, England’s better discipline prevented both shots at goal and entries into the 22 for Italy. By contrast, while Italy’s total of 11 penalties wasn’t vastly higher than England’s eight, nine Italian indiscretions came on defence, compared to five for England. Conceding penalties while defending feeds the opposition’s attacking momentum.
For all of their improvement, Italy still have a tendency to give away needless penalties. No moment summed this up better than the first play of the game, Italy giving away an avoidable maul penalty off the opening kick-off. The tone for the next 80 minutes was set.
