Where Should Matt Giteau Play For The Wallabies?
Columnist
By Spiro Zavos, 27 Feb 2007 Spiro Zavos is a Roar Expert
Matt Giteau’s pathetic attempt at a drop goal right on time against the Lions at Perth revealed, once again, that he is not a natural first five-eighth. This position really requires a player to be able to read the game several phases in advance. Giteau is an instinctive player. He is at his best when he just makes his plays. He decided he wanted to go for a drop goal to win the game for the Western Force. But he did not think through the possibility of waiting for a better opportunity. A more natural, thinking five-eighths would have organised more hit-ups to penetrate the Lions 22. And then drop-kicked an easy goal, like Jonny Wilkinson in the 2003 World Cup final. Instead Giteau fired away from a long way out and his drop goal fell to earth well short like a shot duck.
Halfback is the obvious position to Giteau for the Wallabies and the position he will make his own, presumably, when George Gregan retires after the 2007 World Cup tournament.
I’ve been told by one of the great coaches that Giteau is the nearest equivalent Australian rugby has to Tim Horan as a world class inside centre. My only objection to this assertion (which has merit) is that he is rather small for a position where he might have to mark monsters like Ma’a Nonu or Luke Macallister who is over 100kgs, and fast with this weight.
My predecessor as the Sydney Morning Herald’s rugby columnist, the great Evan Whitton, insists that Giteau’s best position is outside centre. He suggests the old South African-type of centre combination of a hard man at inside centre (Stirling Mortlock) and a runner at outside centre (Giteau) would work well for the Wallabies.
I also believe that Giteau could play brilliantly on the wing, in the David Campese manner of coming in at first receiver inside the opponent’s 22. He could also play this roving role at fullback.
In summary, then: Giteau is a freakish talent who can play any position in the backline up to test standard. His worst position is first five-eighths. His best positions are halfback and inside centre.
Where John Connolly plays him will tell us a great deal about the type of game the Wallaby coach wants to take into the 2007 World Cup tournament.
Enjoy sports? Enjoy a bargain? All Sports Online has your favourite sporting brands at up to 70% off. Online only, premium quality sporting goods and merchandise at discounted prices. Get a deal now.
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Rugby Union articles
- Will Super Rugby crowds continue their slide? (201)
- Will South African rugby force a Super 21 by 2018? (173)
- The real story of how John O’Neill turned Manchester City down (70)
- Dan Parks and the unsolved questions of expat rugby (65)
- Australian teams at Super disadvantage (58)
- Pocock set to be named new Force skipper (56)
- Can the ‘Tahs win the battle after losing the Waugh? (51)
- France turns to Parra and Trinh-Duc
- Rebels look to lift for formidable Blues in rugby trial
- Mr Fix-It Lucas wants to nail down No.10
- Force roost loses ‘Mother Hen’ Sharpe
- Victory beat Mariners with Kewell winner
- Waratahs romp to 83-5 trial win over Samoa A
- Quade Cooper’s return to the Reds goes up a gear
- Wales show Southern Hemisphere how to play running rugby (29)
- What opening matches of Six Nations taught us (19)
- Will Super Rugby crowds continue their slide? (202)
- Clinical Chiefs cost rusty Rebels in Corio (9)
- Six Nations shows rugby is a parochial game at heart (5)
- Goose’s Super Rugby up-and-comer XV for 2012 (29)
- What does the future hold for the Six Nations (50)
- Explore:
Greg said | February 28th 2007 @ 3:31am | Report comment
Personally for the Force I think he should be playing as a centre.
We should stop all of this nonsense about him playing at scrumhalf because there are many players equal to him (or only just below) and it would be an imense waste of his talent to line break and get over for tries.
I will just look at it from a Force perspective, because this issue will come up again this week with Hilgendorf back from injury. Henjack in his current form is equal to Giteau’s form in the europe tour at scrumhalf – there I said it. Anyone who disagrees hasn’t watched all of the Force games.
Let’s not forget Hilgendorf was in sensational form before he was cleaned up in the Blues game last season and he is a very gifted playmaker who can also play anywhere. I think he should be given first go at flyhalf becuase if he is allowed to get back into the form he showed last season (pre-injury) then look out! McKay when he is not injured should also be given a go there because he is another exceptional young talent.
You can not possibly go past Staniforth at inside centre, equal top try scorer last season after being moved there and as Spiro said last year in a column – Staniforth is one of the only Australians who plays as a proper inside centre (correct me if i’m wrong, it was a while ago). He is big and damaging and can break the line with ease, not to mention he has one of the best defensive games of any Aussie back.
This leaves Gits at outside centre, but if you must I guess you could swap him with Staniforth. Either way this position leaves him to be spontaneous and play his own game without worrying about dictating the plays – an ablility no one seems to think he is good at.
Cross can go to a wing, and like most league converts he will fit there nicely and can always cover the centres if needed. That way his defensive flaws are not so obvious as it would be playing at 12 or 13. Mitchell on the other wing, he can play there no problems and will be effective with his damaging runs and chip kick game. He can also kick for when needed.
This leaves Shepherd to play in the position most people want to see him at – full back. His all round catching, kicking, running and tackling game is superb and is better suited here than Mitchell. The way he played this position for the Force last year was nothing short of superb and he seems to be the natural Latham successor.
So to summarise: Giteau in the centres would be the best for the Force gameplan and I think the Wallabies would benefit the most from that too. The Wallabies don’t need him at flyhalf and they certainly don’t need anymore scrumhalves (Henjack’s form adds another contender to the list).
spiro said | February 28th 2007 @ 9:14am | Report comment
I reckon Greg should be coaching the Western Force, or at least selecting for them. I like the way he’s arranged the backline so that Cameron Shepherd gets to play fullback, his best position.
GregH said | February 28th 2007 @ 11:23am | Report comment
Spiro.. I agree greg should be on the phone to Mr Mitchell.. if the force could get their players in correct positions..I believe they would be a ‘force”.. By the way what has happened to lachlan mackay??.
further to our past conversation to you belive there is a chance we will see argentina in expanded tri-nations next year??
cheers
spiro said | February 28th 2007 @ 11:44am | Report comment
There is talk from South Africa that Argentina should be in the Tri Nations (thereby making it the Four Nations) tournament. This has many merits, among them would be the ending of each side playing each other three times. Also, Argentina, is the next big rugby power. It is already a more powerful rugby nation than Scotland and Italy and it is a matter of time before it consistently beats England, France and Ireland. Southern hemisphere rugby should get on to the Argentinian bandwaggon. There has been talk of Argentina playing in the Six Nations (Sseven Nations) with a team playing out of Spain. The problem with Argentina right now is that rugby is an amateur game in Argentina. Only one local player is in the Pumas. The rest of them play professionally in Europe. Hence, the interest in the Spanish connection.
My feeling is that Argentina should be brought into a Four Nations southern hemisphere tournament. But are our administrators up to the task of making this happen?
Bill said | February 28th 2007 @ 11:55am | Report comment
Agree with Greg, Giteau should be outside center. give him more space and time. provide we have a half back that gets the ball out quickly ( Not George).
Argentina should join the 4 nations, will add more intrest and variety to the style of play.only problem for them is the travel. I would rather shorten the end of season Northern Hemisphere tour.which was usually playing a tired seconds from their respective countries.
GregH said | February 28th 2007 @ 12:00pm | Report comment
I hope they (the administrators) are up to it!! it would broaden the global nature of the game and refresh the tri-nations
tournament..which has teams playing each other to much..imagine if the six nations was run with each team playing each other 3 times!!..what a joke.. part of the success of that tournament is teams play each other normally once a year!! it has a sense of history and occasion and its the ultimate test!! a test match..
It takes away from the sense of occasion..that it is a test match..with history and uniqueness when the teams play each other three times a year in the one tournament.
it seems to me that rugby in the south needs to get back to the basics and appeal to its uniqueness in the marketplace..it doesnt have to be marketed like league and soccer and flogged to death..
I hope they are taking note of what your saying!!
Greg said | February 28th 2007 @ 1:07pm | Report comment
Absolutely agree, we need to expand the tri-nations, the format is repetitive and boring. If the administrators do get their act together and make this happen, the revenue Argentina generates could surely go to establishing a better grass-roots program and maybe even a lower teir professional comp. Even if it is just a stepping stone to Europe, like the A-League is for football over here.
On the Force selection, I think it was Greg Growden in his Ruck and Maul column a few weeks back who said there was a rumour that John Mitchell promised Drew Mitchell the first 4 weeks at full back as part of a signing agreement. Now that we are in week five, I wonder if this rumour is true and Shepherd is moved to full back… Spiro do you know anything about this?
spiro said | February 28th 2007 @ 1:46pm | Report comment
I read the rumour in Greg Growden’s ruck n’maul column, a favourite of mine. Greg’s information is usually very good. So, as you say, it’ll be interesting to see when Cameron Shepherd is moved back to fullback. Drew Mitchell has been making a hash of the job and on form would be lucky to stay in the side. There is also the matter of Digby Ioane? What has happened to him? He was the best of the Force’s outside backs last season. There was talk earlier this year that he was working on his handling. But with one hand tied behind hios back he’d be better value to the Force right now than Drew Mitchell.
Greg said | February 28th 2007 @ 2:32pm | Report comment
I think he will, if for nothing else but to give him a chance like Mitchell has been given a chance. Ioane has been working on his handling it was evident in the game against Samoa where he did some really nice things, he should at least be given a run in the squad – he was in the Wallaby training camp after all! He’s only young and he will get his time…
To answer GregH MacKay has just injured his hamstring last week after recovering from his last injury, he’s out for another 4-6 weeks. It’s a shame because he is another one with potential.
Bill said | March 1st 2007 @ 12:13am | Report comment
I think Drew Mitchell should play in the win if any. i believe Shepherd is playing fullback this week.
GregH has a point, may be reduce the 4 nation to two games.