By Matt Rowley
July 18th 2007 @ 10:47am
Get a Roar profile
Dare to dream?
This weekend effectively sees the grand final of the 2007 Tri-Nations, with the Wallabies taking on the All Blacks in Auckland. The twists and turns of this year’s competition means the default supposition of only a month ago — that the All Blacks should stroll this one — is no longer a foregone conclusion. So what can we expect on Saturday?
I see two scenarios.
Scenario 1 – ‘Doomsday’
The Wallabies haven’t won at Eden park since 1978, and Saturday doesn’t buck the trend. The Australians yield yet another horrific start to a test. However, this time there’s no turnaround. The All Black scrum finally exerts its superiority and the Wallabies simply can’t get their hands on the ball. McCaw reigns supreme at the breakdown, milking penalties and turnover ball in dangerous positions. With the pristine ball delivered by the forwards, the AB backline starts to click, to devastating effect, and put away all of the tries they’ve spilled earlier this season. McCallister shows his ability to beat a man at will and Carter’s kicking radar is back on line. On the back foot from the start, the Aussie backs, with the inexperienced Ashley-Cooper at 15, simply hoof the ball aimlessly down field. This just serves to make things worse by giving the All Blacks all the counter-attacking opportunities they could want. The scoreline is a 30 point hiding. The All Black wobbles are expunged and the Wallaby progress this far is destroyed. It gives me cold sweats writing this, as I can just see it in my minds eye (and I haven’t even thrown in an injury to Larkham, Giteau or Mortlock).
Scenario 2 – ‘The Alamo’
The Wallabies show that the grit and self-belief demonstrated this season is no flash in the pan. There’s the trademark slow start, but it lasts only a few minutes this time and they are still within 6 points after 30 minutes. The forwards successfully attack the AB line-outs and in the scrum can hold on long-enough to clear quick ball. They show why defensively they are the misers of world rugby and repel all the ABs have to throw at them in this period. Still unable to find their rhythm, the AB back-line again splutters and Carter’s form hasn’t returned.
Ten minutes before half-time and the Wallabies find their rhythm, holding the ball for extended periods and driving into Kiwi territory. AB penalties start to leak again, there are plenty of warnings, but no cards. Mortlock wobbles a few over and the scores at the break are about all square. The AB’s come out firing in the second half and get a try up on the Wallabies through sheer power. However, the Wallabies once again close ranks; Smith, Elsom and then Hoiles from the bench haranging and competing like madmen in the loose. Larkham shows a flash of genius to ignite the Aussie backline and score’s back about even. Again the tide has turned and, while doing anything he could to stop the advancing Wallabies, McCaw infringes once too often and is off (the controversy)! The All Blacks are a man down and rudderless. The Wallabies get home by less than 5 points. I daren’t speculate on the ramifications.
Obviously there are many in-between versions of these 2 scenarios and it’s statistically more likely that one of them will occur. Given the points differential between Doomsday and The Alamo though, the balance weighs significantly in favour of the home side. But for me, well I’m going to dare to dream. What about you?
Going to the Waratahs v Brumbies blockbuster at ANZ Stadium, Saturday 24 April? If you're keen to meet up with other Roarers, register you interest and we'll keep you informed on the place to meet. Register now.
Get Australia's best Rugby opinion emailed daily.
Like this content? Buzz it up!
Free Email updates:
Our daily emails are only sent if there is content for the sport or that author. You can subscribe to multiple daily emails; or get the daily Roar email with all our content in it. We value privacy. More...
(27)
Hayden said | July 18th 2007 @ 12:08pm | Report comment
I think you are pretty much spot on Matt.
However don’t forget Matt Dunnig’s ability to throw away a winnable game in NZ through mindless penalties, especially after 50 minutes of Haymen pushing his head through the dirt to China.
If Macalister and Toeava click then we are are in trouble. However, Hoiles could spur a mighty comeback later in the game with Staniforth crunching through some weak No.12 AB defense.
rob mccourt said | July 18th 2007 @ 12:19pm | Report comment
matt
i hope your second scenario comes through.
an historical point. it was 1986 not 1978 when we last won and won with it the bledisloe cup. we have played well at eden park in the past . in 1985 it was a 1 point loss 10-9. in 1991 2 goals to grant fox against 1 to lynagh 6-3. and last year in a rebuilding of confidence stage ( which connolly has done so well ) we ran them very close. this all blacks team will not carve us up. this is most definitely not one of the great all black teams. if you look at tri nations over the last 2 years you will find there is not much more than 3-4 tries per game in this kiwi outfit and of those a good 50% have been scored on the counter attack when defences are not in their awful faces. so deny them the counter attack and their attack can look very pedestrian. the only issue is can we kick well enough to deny the counter and can we attack better off first and early phases.
rob mccourt
Craig said | July 18th 2007 @ 12:32pm | Report comment
McAllister showed he was not a number 12 at the MCG.
Ashley-Cooper will show he is not a fullback at Eden Park.
One positional lapse proves vital in the modern game.
AB’s by 15. Dunning to be shown up for what he really is – a body double for the Pillsbourgh Dough Boy.
Monty Stringfellow said | July 18th 2007 @ 4:39pm | Report comment
Here’s anothert scenario – all of NZ is wondering what kind of trick Gregan will pull to delay putting the ball into the scrum, a tactic that worked so well against the Boks.
They find out when the Wallabies get an early penalty and lead 3 nothing.
At the kickoff, the ABs knock-on and the first scrum of the game goes down. To everybody’s surprise, Gregan puts the ball in immediately, but the scrum collapses. When the forwards pick themselves up, something amazing has happened – the ball has disappeared.
“Where the hell’s the ball?” the puzzled ref asks.
“He’s hiding it,” Gregan says, pointing to McCaw. “He’s been doing it all day.”
“The game’s just started,” the ref reminds him. “And besides, it’s night.”
“Dunning’s got it,” Oliver says. “Up his jumper.”
“Nah, he always looks like that,” the ref says, and calls for a video replay but it’s inconclusive.
“Well,” Murray Mexted tells the TV audience, in his crisp, Etonian enunciation, “I reckon they’ve lost the ball.”
The ref brings in the touchies and they pat everybody down, but they can’t find a thing besides Chris Jack’s Hustler magazine. So the ref calls for a new ball and the scrum packs down again. Gregan puts the ball in, the scrum collapses, and again the same things happens – the ball’s disappeared.
The jumbotron shows a shot of Knuckles chortling behind the diptheria window. The crowd goes ballistic. They know something’s up. Rugby balls don’t just disappear – those damn Aussies are putting one over on them again.
But there’s nothing to be done – as fast as they bring on a new ball, it disappears. Finally the ref declares the game over and Australia the winners seeing they were ahead. They’re awarded the Bledisloe Cup.
The crowd goes super-ballistic. So does Chris Jack who had his magazine confiscated.
Later it all comes out – how they did it.
John O’Neill hired a computer geek, an IT wizard.
The game was played with virtual balls.
However, the Kiwis have the last laugh – crafty Graham Henry was way ahead of O’Neill – the trophy the Wallabies carried off was a virtual
Bledisloe Cup.
It could happen.
Matt Rowley said | July 18th 2007 @ 5:29pm | Report comment
Rob – you’re right, I stand corrected. Unfortunately ‘86 rather than ‘78 doesn’t make me feel much better!
Nice one Monty.
Matt R
sheek said | July 18th 2007 @ 8:22pm | Report comment
It’s simpl really. If both teams play to their best, the ABs will win. Reality hurts.
As much as the Wallabies are improving, either only Susie the waitress or massive apathy will stop the ABs.
My daughter has to do a speech on the “power of imagination”. Unfortunately, like aircraft, we have to come in & land sometime! My imagination says Wallabies, buy my reality screams All Blacks!
Leeboy said | July 19th 2007 @ 5:46am | Report comment
My quiet optimism of the last few weeks at the gradual development of the Wallabies and the impressive foresight of the selectors in putting the likes of Hoiles on the park at the first whistle fell by the wayside when I was left crestfallen by the selection of David Lyons and Stephen Moore together on the park as well as AAC at fullback and Latham straight to the bench.
Why I say Stephen Moore and David Lyons together is that it leaves us with less ball winners in the loose. Both the Hobbit (Freier) and Hoiles are mobile ball winners which is where we gain a lot of possession rather than your traditional brute rucking. The regression of the selectors in going back to a traditional, conservative starting line up, as well as rushing Chris Latham straight back into the International arena (in the mould of the poms bringing back Johnny) reeks of a lack of confidence…. and if the coaches are lacking confidence and the vibe is rubbing off on me way over in Hong Kong, what is it doing for the players?
Knuckles help us out here: Send Lyons back to the teddy bear factory… run another mobile ball winner in Hoilles or the Hobbit… give Latho a rest…. give Staniforth a chance and get him on the wing….. keep AAC on the other wing where he has been doing a great job… and give us some confidence that the direction in which you were taking us has silverware at the end of it…. don’t regress.
Gregan to engineer a yellow card for an AB forward and Australia to clinche it by 6 points…. 23-17
Hoilles has a blinder in the second half….
Lee
(Hong Kong)
Matt said | July 19th 2007 @ 9:28am | Report comment
My dream scenario is #2 but I feel #1 is a little closer to reality…I don’t think it’ll go all the way to becoming a reality as I think the All Blacks still have a few selection problems in the backs.
I would have thought #2 would’ve been more realistic for the Wallabies with a settled squad but the ridiculous situation with Julian Huxley and picking an underdone Latham points to a touch of depseration in the Wallabies camp. Just when you think they’re getting things back on track they find something to derail their campaign.
I’m not sure if I agree with the selection of David Lyons. Great player that he’s been for the Wallabies in the past it seems as though he’s a bit past it. If the All Blacks are able to get that up-tempo game going more consistently than they did in Melbourne a big guy like Lyons will be found wanting. Unfortunately Hoiles is paying the price for not being a big man…He’s an excellent player with all the skills and really does deserve a crack at the All Blacks from the start but the preoccupation with big men will always see him relegated to the bench for the big games.
Peter L said | July 19th 2007 @ 9:50am | Report comment
Reality?
Reality in the day of Professional Rugby is that stats from pre-pro don’t count, so the pre 1994 stuff is relevant only for a round-the-BBQ reminisce.
Reality in the Pro era is that the diff between the top 3 – 5 teams in the world is pretty much an on-the-day thing.
Reality in the modern era of Union is that we are in for a rare treat this weekend with two of the top teams in the world each out to prove a point, and with not one, but two trophies at stake, both very dear to their hearts.
OK, on stats over the last ‘n’ years the ABs have it, especially when the stats on the Wallabies point squarely the other way as well. But more recent stats (the Tri Nations) tend to indicate otherwise.
Here’s what I hope for this weekend. I fervently hope for an AB win (goes without saying), but more than that, I hope for a game where the Ref does not become a telling factor. I hope for a game not cheapened by a yellow card to either team, a game that is allowed – by the players (including Gregan’s scrum feeding) and the match officials – to flow and be the specatcle it deserves to be on the world stage.
I suspect that my second and third hopes may be forlorn. Depending on which side gets the card will most likely determine whether or not my first hope is equally forlorn. To my mind, that is sad. These two great teams should (MUST) be allowed to play the game, compete, and entertain, but I don’t know of a single ref that will allow that to happen.
Ce’st la vie – so just enjoy what you can of the game and the contest that IS allowed, and try to overlook the human factor imposed by an over zealous ref.
Bob Thomas said | July 19th 2007 @ 10:29am | Report comment
Peter L true, very true.
The approach to the world cup is on the line this weekend as well as 2 trophies. If the AB’s lose they will work their butts off to get up for the WC. Should Australia win it will be good for us as we need the confidence that beating the AB’s away from home brings.
Therefore QED its better for both teams that Australia wins.
If that aint a dream then what is?
Justin said | July 19th 2007 @ 11:21am | Report comment
McAlister showed he is not a 12 in Melbourne because he was wearing 13, which he def isnt. He is one hell of a 12 though and it was in fact Mauger who missed Mortlock once in Melbourne and McAlister once also. Mauger got out of that very easily from the media.
Ashley-Cooper is an excellent fullback and has played brilliantly for the Brumbies there in the past 18 months although 13 is his best position.
Key to AUS victory is to stay close for first half. I truly believe the pressure on the ABs is great and this will come into play if the score is tight with 30 to play. That means kicks must go out and tackles must be made. Scrum ball must be quick.
sheek said | July 19th 2007 @ 4:59pm | Report comment
Peter L,
Yes, the reality seems to be that Rugby didn’t actually exist before 1996. But that seems to be a generational thing, or a youth thing. As a famous NFL coach once exclaimed in exasperation: “I’m not young enough to know everything”!
As far as the young (teenagers & 20-somethings) are concerned, what they know is ALL they NEED to know. I was the same at the same age.
When I was in my early 20s (circa 1980-84), I couldn’t/wouldn’t believe Australia had ever had better players than Mark Ella, Campo, Moon, O’Connor, Gould, Loane, Tony Shaw, Poido, Rodriguez, etc.
While some of those players would still make most people’s all-time XVs, those who bother to read & learn our history, they’re all up there. But so are many other players from before & since.
These days, today’s heroes are in our faces almost every weekend on TV. They play 12-13 tests a year, 70-odd tests during their peak years, so its easy to get carried away with thinking today’s players are the best ever.
But I digress…..
Bob Thomas said | July 19th 2007 @ 5:46pm | Report comment
Lyons out with a calf blood clot and Hoiles to start. This could be great or it could be a further disruption to the dream. Would have been happier with a specialist breakaway/No8 maybe put David Pocock in rather than Mark Chisholm as the bench player.
There is more talk from the AB’s camp than I have heard for years and I guess it all builds to a great game on Saturday. We must knock them backwards from the start, give them no room and stay on top of them for the first 40 then who knows. If not then I think we all know what will happen.
Will Nathan Sharpe stand up or go missing in another big one. What has George got left in the small tank and can Stirling Mortlock destroy another AB dream. Have a lot of faith in Ashley-Cooper at 15 and with Drew Mitchell covering as well it should be fine.
Mark Gerrard will be our weakness, not because he can’t play but because of a lack of speed. Watch the AB’s target his wing.
This game is so big that’s why I believe we can do it, Australia’s cooler heads in a storm. Our problem is will we get up for it or wait until it’s nearly lost before we start playing.
Jackie said | July 20th 2007 @ 5:23am | Report comment
It’s interesting about the influence of referees …
Peter L, you say that, “These two great teams should (MUST) be allowed to play the game, compete, and entertain, but I don’t know of a single ref that will allow that to happen.” In saying this you indicate that it is the referees who decide whether or not a game is “played”. I understand your point, but when a high penalty count is blamed on referees (and not the actions of the players) then where to from there?
Which rules are ok to break?
Which rules should referees turn a blind eye to? (just the ones that don’t interupt ‘my’ team?).
I understand my point is a little bit dependent on the presence of a set of rules that exist BEYOND interpretation, but in what sport do such rules exist?
Cricket’s LBW?
Football’s off-side rule?
(Australian) Football’s “Holding the ball” rule?
As much as I find myself frustrated when my team are the ‘victims’ of what might be called a referee’s “interpretative adventures”, I also see those adventures as an opportunity for my team to rise above them, to force their presence on the event, and to find a way of succedding that is within the rules.
J.
Peter L said | July 20th 2007 @ 10:09am | Report comment
Sheek – age-wise we’re the same (I’m a ‘61 kiddie so was in my 20’s in the 80’s – I think…), and my comment wasn’t meant to denigrate the past great players – for NZ players like Stu Wilson (Ivory) and his offsider Bernie Fraser (Ebony), like Syd Going, like Colin Meads. Rather I was reflecting on the radical change bought about the game with the onset of the professional era. The number of games played, the greater focus on fitness and skills, the level of the game itself in terms of intensity and pace.
It’s impossible to say how players of earlier days may have gone in modren competition. Some early greats would likely still have been great, others…who knows.
Fact is, tomorrow we’re in for an intense, pulsating game of Union at it’s absolute best – as a contest, and as a game. It will be intense. It will be fast paced, and (hoipefuly) open and (hopefully) flowing. Regardless of the result, it behoves all present including the refs and the players, to make this the occasion it deserves to be – a showcase for Rugby Union.
Alex said | July 20th 2007 @ 1:19pm | Report comment
Well I dont know about you guys, but for the first time since the late 90’s I am genuinly exited about the game tomorrow. Forgive me as I it makes me reminince of when we were kids and the game fast approaching we would all get those knots in our stomachs as our heros game time neared . We would speculate as to who would make that move , would throw that pass lift the team and the day would be ours , or not . But mostly this Wallabies /AB;s encounter has me exited personally I cant wait for the whistle to blow , the moments to linger on and to see if these two great teams can explode for an entire 80 minutes . Or am I just to bloodly optimistic ?
Bob Thomas said | July 20th 2007 @ 1:57pm | Report comment
Alex everybody I speak to is excited by the dream of knocking over the AB’s in NZ. The reality is anybodies guess.
Our roles both Australian and NZ followers of rugby, is to wind the game up as high as possible so that both teams know what we think about this contest and don’t undervalue it. If it is viewed by the players and coaches as just a step to the World Cup where if they lose then ‘hopefully’ they will have made some progress within the team.
Bugger that! Australia must only be there to win, nothing else matters but the time on that park.
In my view this game will be bigger than anything that will happen in the World Cup. It couldn’t have been better timed and being in NZ is the ideal venue to prove ourselves.
I read reports that Dan Vickerman is wound up to play and he will drag the other forwards with him. The look on David Lyons face talking about being out of the game spoke volumes about how much he wanted to play in it.
This time and opportunity comes along very rarely in a players career where they can say that they helped the team to take the step from no hopers 12 months ago to contenders.
Faith without facts is what I am counting on. This may be a religious experience.
george goatleg said | July 20th 2007 @ 2:13pm | Report comment
I take objection to one of the poeple on this forim that says we can’t spell too good. Even Spiro makes misakes because like most of us he wants to get his throughs down quick. Besides, it doesnnt matter if the spelling is crook. What matters is the though behind it. If anyone wants perfect english, read the encilopedia Britanica. If you only want to talk rugby then talk rugby and forget about good gramar etcetra.
Matt said | July 20th 2007 @ 2:44pm | Report comment
I’m currently in the middle of a vow of silence until 5pm tomorrow afternoon where I will end my vow and begin a ferocious bout of telly yelling.
All hard objects will be removed from my lounge room so the TV is safe for the time being unless I get really agro and go looking for something.
With the knowledge that I’m safe in the privacy of my own home I’ll question players/officials ancestory, sanity, intelligence, eyesight…anything I can think of in a bid to vent my frustrations.
If all goes according to plan I’ll be giving my version of Phil Kearns’ victory salute to Richie McCaw (from the safety of my loungeroom) as he gives another muted response to the aftermatch grilling…As the title of the article says…Dare to Dream!
jameswm said | July 20th 2007 @ 3:01pm | Report comment
Sheek I really think you overrate the ABs. Yes they are very good but to say if we both play to our best is oversimplifying things. The trick is to stop the opposition playing at its best, so if the ABs do play their best, then Australia by definition hasn’t.
Comparing the teams, the ABs have a superior scrum, but Australia has the better lineout (note how often the ABs throw to So’oialo for shock value). The ABs seem a bit more dynamic at the breakdown and I don’t think the Aussies commit enough players, especially in attack. The ABs have explosive backs, but Giteau and Mortlock are the equal of anyone in the world and overall the Aussies have the smarter backs. It will come down to ball handling and accuracy of kicking on the night, possibly some refereeing interpretations (hopefully not) and each team’soverall attitude and execution. That is the way of the modern game.
As for pre-1996, I’m inclined to agree that those results have little relevance today. For many years the ABs were semi-professional and the national obsession with rugby has to an extent been overcome by the typical Australian professionalism to sport. It is not only in rugby that the Aussies have been able to get the best out of themselves, sometimes with limited resources. Cycling, swimming, triathlon, cricket, hockey – there are many sports where Australia succeed partly because of their unequalled preparation and professionalism.
I pretty much agree that NZ need to blow us away in the first half, because if it’s close, they will certainly get nervous. And in Vickerman, Freier, Smith, Hoiles, Larkham, Gregan, Mortlock, Staniforth etc Australia has wise and seasoned heads in there.
On another note, if we replaced Gerrard with any of Latham, Turner or Tuqiri, suddenly we have a very fast and explosive back 3. Assuming Latham and Tuqiri are automatic selections, I would love AAC to be the other winger. That good game in Melbourne was no flash in the pan.
Peter L said | July 20th 2007 @ 3:06pm | Report comment
Jackie, you’re right of course that the ref has only so much impact which is why I was careful to also place onus on the players.
Bob – you’ve assumed Alex is an Aussie. Tch tch….
I have a suspicion that this game will be one to remember. It will be a great contest, but regardless of the result (I reckon the ABs by 12 – 15 points).
Funny, in the year they look at replacing the TriNations, it finally comes of age!
Alex said | July 20th 2007 @ 3:16pm | Report comment
Peter now you are assuming that I am a Kiwi , ……..I will reserve a prediction until the first ten minutes of the second half, dependent upon what is happening at that time , I believe that we will all have a much better idea .Unless the Wallabies have a brain explosion and just throw it away . So many possibles , will Dunning surprise us all and keep a good head on his shoulders , will GG be able to contain himself and shut up and play out of his skin, Will Latham/Mortlock/Giteau or any of them break the line often , will Dan Carter return to his natural level of brilliance , with the AB’s contain the pressure if it is close will the Wallabies . As I said before everybody I speak to , and reading the comments here people are genuinly exited at this test match , and at the end of the day isnt it important leading into the RWC that people are exited and talking it up , lets hope it is all we hope for
Sam Taulelei said | July 20th 2007 @ 4:13pm | Report comment
The Wallabies scrum will be under more pressure and with the wet conditions forecast for tomorrow night it will be difficult for Hoiles and Gregan to clear the ball and to launch attacks from the scrumbase.
The Wallabies won’t catch the All Blacks by surprise again with their scrum engagement manouvres.
I don’t think the All Blacks will blow the Wallabies away and they don’t need to, I also don’t subscribe to the theory that if it’s a close game the pressure will get to the All Blacks. They have won many tight encounters under Graham Henry both at home and away.
Can the same be said for the Wallabies?
I predict the run of losses away from home aginst the top teams to continue for the Wallabies.
Bob Thomas said | July 20th 2007 @ 4:36pm | Report comment
Sam and Sheek you need to be more emotional than that, the time for logical thought was about 2 weeks ago. This is not a game based on logic, if it was Eddie Jones would have been the worlds greatest coach. It’s about who wants to do the hard stuff on the night over and over again and then the backs producing something special to make the hard work worthwhile. You can only get that by being prepared for it both in planning and psychologically and having belief in your team and yourself.
If your views prevails in the AB’s minds tomorrow then things might be looking OK for us.
Matt Rowley said | July 20th 2007 @ 4:42pm | Report comment
Jameswm,
Good points. I believe Australia have an edge in the number of leaders on the park, spread through the backs and forwards; Gregan, Mortlock, Smith, Sharp, Vickerman vs McCaw (not much sign of it recently) and Oliver. Haven’t seen anyone step up in the AB backs. People talk about the gap left by Umaga – I believe this has as much if not more to do with the leadership gap he’s left, than a talent one.
This leadership pulled the Wallabies through at the ‘G and has been notable in its absence for the AB’s. Should the game live up to it’s billing, this could well be the difference between the two sides: who can keep their heads and pull their team through under pressure.
I’m with Alex on the excitement front, and just hope the game lives up to it’s potential.
Matt R
max atwell said | July 20th 2007 @ 4:43pm | Report comment
George – it’s not the bad spelling that annoys me in this forum, it’s the constant use of existential rationalization. Why can’t people just say what they mean instead of ducking behind Swiftian obscurities? This is supposed to be a forum for people to talk about a plain and relatively simple game like rugby in plain and simple words. Instead we get posters lapsing into savage melancholia and using obscure polysyllables only Spiro could figure out. Well, we’re not all academics. Some of us are just ordinary folks who like a VB and a meat pie. Please, everybody, keep it simple and understandable. Enough of this idiosyncratic diffusion.
Jerome said | July 21st 2007 @ 12:09am | Report comment
On the point about leadership within the two teams, it is quite evident australia has more men willing to stand up and be counted. You can see mortlock gathering the backs, and sharpe the forwards time and time again.
For the first time in a long time, i saw the allblacks do that last week, in seperate huddles. chris jack pulled the pack in and gave a stern talking to. it has been said Jack, and robinson bring a calming and strong leadership to the group which has been lacking.
It has been noted by mccaw too that he needs to be more assertive, and carter has also said he needs to dictate play verbally a bit more.
Id like to see the AB’s compete with the wallabies in this respect. A strong leadership group could be the difference between a tight game.
Even oliver is getting in with the talk, discussing old war stories on the years of 98-02 where Aus dominated the Abs. This talk from the camp is just talk, but it represents a big shift in attitude i feel, this AB team does not want to succumb to mental pressure.
last year the 2 bledisloes were very tight wins by the allblacks, and we were all commenting on how they have overcome the mental hurdle and now have the ability to win those tight games. I think the melbourne loss has woke them up, they now know they cant just turn up to matches and expect to win.
This is the most talking and hyping up of a game ive seen from a NZ camp. they normally keep a low profile, perhaps their FINALLY playing (mentally) the same level as the old heads of Australia?
on another note, when Mcallister shifted to 13 a lot was made of it, how bout the back three for aus? ACC at 15 in test level is a HUGE risk, maybe more so then mcallister.
This aus team is not the same as the one in melb, it has 3 changes to its lineup, surely that must mean the difference of 5points + home advantage at eden park will mean an allblacks victory?
The blacks by 8 i say, in another tight one