By Andrew Logan
November 17th 2008 @ 6:29am
Super 14 tipping now live for sign-ups. Join now and invite your mates..
---------------
Crusading Wallabies run through England
The strip worn by the England rugby team is the modern version of the battle dress worn by English crusaders of the twelfth century, so it was ironic that they were crushed by an Australian team bearing all the hallmarks of another bunch of Crusaders – the Canterbury version.
So many times in recent seasons, teams in the Super 14 have dominated the Canterbury team early, starved them of possession, pressured their line and scored a try or two, only to find that when the smoke had cleared at the 80 minute mark, they had blown it.
The Crusaders, under now Wallaby coach Robbie Deans, just had a knack of winning tough tight games. They would control the forward battle, soak up the pressure, remain calm when behind on the scoreboard, cover defend and then take their opportunities. The result was an opposition that cracked in the last 20 minutes and succumbed to the pressure of having a team constantly punishing their mistakes.
This Test was so much in that vein, that England manager Martin Johnson might have borrowed his after-match script from John Mitchell, whose Western Force side have frustratingly made an art form out of getting close to the Crusaders in the Super 14 without winning.
“Today we have played a team who are away from home, at the end of a long season, and who have won a Test match by 14 points – and they’ve known how to win a Test match.” said Johnson. “They knew how to accelerate at the end of the game and score that try that put the game away”.
“From our point of view we had plenty of opportunities, we were in that game territorially and possession-wise, but we haven’t turned that into real, clinical try scoring opportunities”.
The perplexity on Johnson’s face was obvious and his heavy brow betrayed his frustration.
As many Super 14 teams do against the Crusaders, his England side made all the running in the first half against the Wallabies. They had the lion’s share of possession and territory, and Australian fans were entitled to feel that it was possibly just a matter of time before the Wallabies set-piece crumbled and their option-taking went west.
But instead, it was England who lost their composure at the ever present Wallabies. There is something spooky about a set of footsteps following you down the street at dusk, never getting closer, never getting further away. After a while they get under your skin.
And Australia got under England’s skin. As they kicked their penalties, and ticked over the scoreboard, the English options, particularly through Cipriani, became more grotesque. His horror attempt at drop goal with the Wallabies under pressure was a trademark play from a player spooked by footsteps over his shoulder.
Although the Wallabies had little ball of their own in the first half, they were dogged in their efforts to slowly turn the screws on the English side. Cipriani’s excellent break at quarter time was cut down by committed, organized cover. Drew Mitchell, focused like a laser, ran through a loitering Armitage on a kick chase. The England scrum was wheeled, collapsed and confused, if not yet dominated. And Paul Sackey was reduced to the scatterbrained play of standing over Burgess, hopelessly offside, while the ball emerged from a ruck.
After halftime the story was much the same. Mortlock gave an excellent impression of a dump truck crashing through a paling fence, when he clobbered his way through two England tacklers at 44 minutes. Nathan Sharpe charged down a kick and continued to pursue Cipriani to his own in-goal with an admirable chase. The Australian scrum then turned on the pressure on the England line and the human water-buffalo Andy Sheridan was unbelievably penalized for collapsing.
This was the continued story of a match where only two tries were scored, but which was nonetheless intriguing. Australian supporters were treated to the unusual (in recent years at least) sight of a Wallaby team remaining calm in the face of adversity and gathering themselves to deliver the coup-de-grace.
The death knell came for England in a four minute period immediately after the 60 minute mark, the entry point into that part of the game which might aptly be referred to as the “Crusader quarter”.
At 61 minutes, Mortlock crashed into England’s best back Riki Flutey, and then planted him in the ground like a new season petunia.
At 62 minutes, maligned prop Al Baxter led the Australian scrum to a rock-solid engagement which bemused the England pack in the same way that you might be bemused to lie down on your bed and find that your pillow had turned to cement.
At 63 minutes, Benn Robinson demolished the England scrum driving up and across. Robinson’s tactic was probably borderline-legal in this instance, but England/Australia Test matches are no place for the faint of heart, and like his countryman Harry Morant before him, Robinson simply applied Rule 303.
And at 64 minutes, Mortlock tonked home a long range penalty, after which the game was gone for England. The Adam Ashley-Cooper try simply confirmed what everyone at the ground already knew.
The Crusader quarter was closed out by the Wallabies to great effect, showing that the Deans fitness regime has paid off. In the final five minutes, Al Baxter made two open field tackles and was chatting constantly in the defensive line, and Benn Robinson buried some poor unfortunate returning a kick from the England half.
Therein lay the secret to the Wallabies victory. Where in recent times they have often been like Marlon Brando (looks substantial, but is actually pretty erratic), on Saturday they were much more like Robert de Niro(quite consistent and often threatening). Their defence was punishing more often than not, and their set-piece gave them a platform to exert pressure, even though they had limited ball.
England fans will argue that their team was their own worst enemy, making some 30 turnovers, but enough pressure will cause errors among even very good teams.
The Wallabies are not yet a great team. Far from it in fact. Their newly-sturdy scrum is yet to be fully tested, and their kicking game and options are light-on at times. They are also limited in attack as long as they choose to use inside-centre-natural Matt Giteau as a sole playmaker.
But against England, away from home, three weeks into a laborious tour and with questions marks over their set-piece, they finally showed their Wallaby coach the sort of Crusaderesque heart, work-ethic and composure needed to win tight Test matches.
He must be pleased. After all, who could ask for more than that?
Super 14 tipping now live for sign-ups. Join now and invite your mates.
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...
(62)
Rabbitz said | November 17th 2008 @ 6:47am | Report comment
I have only watch bits of the replays, however, the moment for me was just before one of the scrums late in the game. As the packs were assembling, the camera held a reasonably tight shot of Baxter. The look of controlled anger and determination was telling. He looked confident and was setting himself to once more show the opposition pack that the Wallaby pack had improved and “owned” the English pack.
And once again his opposite number failed to bind and crashed to the ground.
Benjamin said | November 17th 2008 @ 7:07am | Report comment
A fair and readable article Andrew. Good stuff.
What a game from Nathan Sharpe. When he charged Care’s box kick and lumbered off his black boots actually looked like flippers. What a man. His new look is pretty awesome too, as long as he doesn’t consider entertaining a sweepover then I’m all his.
I think some of the early scrum calls were 6 of one and half a dozen of another, however as the Wallabies gained ascendcy in that area it was almost bizarre to see the perplexed look on Sheridan’s face as he was penalised for not binding. I’d be intrigued to hear his version of events because I’m beginning to think he isn’t the sharpest tool in the box.
Arky said | November 17th 2008 @ 7:33am | Report comment
Good summary and perspective.
Australia still some way to go to be a real force but the result was a fair demonstration of building momentum.
Benjamin, I agree with your Sheridan comment above - as a former front rower it astounds me that Sheridan was perplexed when clearly he failed to bind at times. I suspect he thought that Australia may have on more than one occasion been blamed for bringing it down in a defensive field position but with the pendulum having swung it was to go against him.
Bring Back Melon said | November 17th 2008 @ 8:24am | Report comment
Rabbitz,
Baxter always LOOKS the part.
This time he proved he WAS the part.
Bring Back Melon said | November 17th 2008 @ 8:32am | Report comment
Impossible to overstate what a *HUGE* psychological boost this is for the scrum..
Opposition teams won’t go in quite as confident.
Referees won’t be quite so willing to assume Australia are the ones infringing.
Knowing what they are doing is making a positive difference will only make our boys even keener to work even harder at it.
Now for the backs…
(Who would have thought we’d be saying this a few years ago)
Ian Noble said | November 17th 2008 @ 8:48am | Report comment
Andrew
I was at Twickenham yesterday and whilst I have no gripe with the Ws winning, the difference between the teams was not as great as the score suggests. The tackle count by thw Ws was three times that of England which is an indication of England’s intent. The trouble was whether through inexperience in the backs or poor decision making in the forwards they were unable to break the Ws defensive wall.
I was not surprised by thw Ws expertise in the scrum. It has been clear for some time and certainly during the 3N’s that the scrum had improved through Deans overall coaching strategy of building a platform to set off the backs. The only problem yesterday was that ironicaly the backline of England was more enterprising than the Ws, with ball which at times was badly delivered.
SouthernWaratah said | November 17th 2008 @ 9:45am | Report comment
I love the Brando – de Niro analogy well done…
Andrew Logan said | November 17th 2008 @ 9:58am | Report comment
Ian - I’d agree with you to an extent. I think 1 try each indicates a close encounter. However, as you say, the Wallabies made 3 times as many tackles. This may be an indicator of England’s intent, sure, but it may also be an indicator of the Wallabies fitness and heart, as well as an indicator of England’s inability to finish even though they had mountains of possession. The stats can indicate anything really.
I think England have a very exciting backline, and in Brian Smith, an excellent coach who has a great record. If I was English, I would be hoping that Johnson sticks with his 9/10/12 combo at least. Flutey was the best English back by miles, and Cipriani showed that he has the ability - he just needs to develop the brain and composure.
For mine the stage is set for a massive clash next time Aus play England. Unfortunately this won’t be for a year or more.
Alan said | November 17th 2008 @ 9:58am | Report comment
Damn it!
Back to losing for England - the cricket, the Rugby League and now the Union. At least we have darts……
hayden said | November 17th 2008 @ 10:17am | Report comment
Well done Wallabies. Anyone who watched them play throughout the TN shouldn’t be at all surprised, especially by their forward performance.
stuff happens said | November 17th 2008 @ 10:21am | Report comment
Good article and well done Australia, particularly the front five.How good they will feel this week!
The English front five were made to look unfit I thought and seemed to run out of steam in the last 15 mins.As Benjamin says Vickery has played his last test probably, but I was impressed with their No 6 Tom Carter I think. Their backline is young & naive but may give English rugby the excitement it has been missing over the past 5 years or so if they stick with the plan.Tait will make a difference.
And so to Paris…
Ian Noble said | November 17th 2008 @ 10:25am | Report comment
Andrew
I think England will need at least a year for Johnson to stamp his imprint on the squad. The influence of Brian Smith will be very significant. His coaching of London Irish transformed that team to an open attacking enterprising team. His influence has already been felt with the introduction of Delon Armitage who come from outside the originally selected squad members under the new club/country agreement. Armitage plays for London irish and will have learnt alot playing with Peter Hewat.
I hope Johnson doesn’t make too many changes as there must be more consistency of selection and time for the squad to get more experience at test level.
Alan
Darts I thought the Dutch were better than us, what about tiddlely winks or snooker?
Terry Kidd said | November 17th 2008 @ 10:59am | Report comment
I have maligned Sharpe this year and called him “Notso” … well in this test he has earned “Razor” …. best game I have ever seen from him.
Benn Robinson had a stormer against Stevens …. Baxter was good against Sheridan, and shaded him as fitness told …. but Robinson absolutely smashed Stevens and that is where the English scrum problems started in this game.
Palu was a human wrecking ball both in attack and defence when he came on …. should he be impact off the bench all the time?
The backs …. now there is another story …. 9-10-12-13 …. right now we look unbalanced and there is very little communication. I don’t know what the correct combination should be but would be happy to see Burgess-Barnes-Giteau-Mortlock. The back 3 were ok.
How good was it to see, in the 63rd minute, Mears the Pom hooker flat on his back, arms and legs outstretched, as the rest of his tight five were smashed back to stand in a melee with Easter at No8? Oh, the bliss !!! That effort by the Wallaby front row was appreciated by most of the nearby players slapping all 3 on the back for a top demolishon job.
James Mortimer said | November 17th 2008 @ 11:07am | Report comment
Agree with much of the article.
But the Wallabies doing a “Crusader” on England only in their 2nd match together with a team still so green in many aspects is one thing.
But I am not sure if the Australians have the personal to do it at the top level - as evidenced by the close games won by the All Blacks this year.
Wallythefly said | November 17th 2008 @ 11:37am | Report comment
Thought England had their chances, could not believe the opt for drop goal when England were 10 metres from the Australian line. The fact they buggered that up was even worse.
Worlds Biggest said | November 17th 2008 @ 12:43pm | Report comment
Moving forward in regards to our backline, questions marks on Burgess as long term answer, he is enthusiastic and committed however he is all over the shop at the moment. He needs a mentor to take off the rough edges. His promary role is to provide quality service to 5/8, Giteau is still taking balls around his knees. He also need to initiate the forwards in rolling mauls and pick and drives, when was the last time the pack pick and drove ?. Ryan Cross is not the answer at Outside centre, he is too slow & one dimensional. Barnes or Giteau to 12 and Morto to 13. The backline just looks disjointed at the moment. Well done Piggies !.
Sam Taulelei said | November 17th 2008 @ 12:59pm | Report comment
Nice article Andrew.
Delighted for the Wallaby front row and in particular Al Baxter who has been subjected to many derogatory comments and harsh criticisms about his abilities and has done so with good grace. Not all of the comments have been unjustified but the satisfaction etched across his face when they pushed England back late in the second half was some redemption indeed.
The Wallabies have gotten one monkey off their back on tour and they won’t want to take a step backward by losing to the French this weekend. Aside from all the obvious comparisons to the Crusaders in style and intent (as well as the coaching connection) the Crusaders were not the enthralling and complete side they are now when they began their title march in 1998 and beyond. They scrapped and fought hard for every victory and relied on lady luck on more than a few occasions, but it was those formative years that setup the juggernaut we know and expect now.
Baby steps for the Wallabies but in terms of their ultimate prize in 3 years time, Aussie fans could well be reminiscing in the future about Twickenham 2008 as the moment when it all began for this team.
gforce said | November 17th 2008 @ 1:19pm | Report comment
I would agree on Burgess - he had a shocker. Indecision and bad options. Several time running to the left , back to the right before being nailed. Surely a half needs to know which way he is going before he picks up the ball and starts running. You would think Giteau or 1st receiver would be telling him ” we are going right ….”
He was also caught a few times walking sideways along the line seemingly undecided on what to do, before being nailed.
His pass is too ordinary on too many times. The movement when AAC scored was nearly over before it started with an erratic , bouncing pass to 1st receiver.
Obviously Deans is giving him as much time and experience as he can get but surely RD must have felt like hooking him from just after half time onward.
Maybe he just needs to concentrate on feeding the 5/8 or 1st receiver, concentrate on the pass. Maybe the others need to be communicating to him.
Apart from that, a very good win. Great defence. The backline needs Barnes at 5/8 though . We never looked like making a break.
Roll on Paris.
Cheers
sheek said | November 17th 2008 @ 1:28pm | Report comment
Sigh…..winners are grinners!
stuff happens said | November 17th 2008 @ 1:37pm | Report comment
Sheek; what are we going to do about these endless scrum resets - it is just so boring? In the end I was beyond caring whose ‘fault’ it was. How many minutes of the game were lost with this nonsense?
Who Needs Melon said | November 17th 2008 @ 2:25pm | Report comment
I agree Burgess wasn’t the best. But I still prefer him to any other 9s running around in Australia.
What I like about Burgess is his attitude. The rest will follow. Same goes for a lot of the team at the moment.
DaniE said | November 17th 2008 @ 3:17pm | Report comment
Speaking of number of scrum resets, are they also that frequent in non-Wallaby test matches? So many minutes of our lives wasted seeing them re-engage again and again. I was watching an old test match on DVD from the early 90s and there were hardly any. And yet those scrums looked good?
Greg Russell said | November 17th 2008 @ 3:22pm | Report comment
A tidbit on this match from Sean Fitzpatrick (now a BBC rugby commentator) via RadioSport in New Zealand: he said that before this match he was of the opinion that Stephen Moore is now the best hooker in the world, and this match absolutely confirmed this view for him. Who would argue with Fitzy on such matters?
stillmissit said | November 17th 2008 @ 3:43pm | Report comment
A great effort by the tight 5 and the other 3 were pretty good too. McMeniman was into everything and Brown and Smith covered a lot of K’s. Palu was great when he came on.
The worry I had was that the game would end up with Australia winning the tight 5 battle and winning by PK’s whilst England ran everything (well almost) and came 2nd. I thought the English fullback Delon? was one of the best players on the park.
Giteau continues to prove that he hasnt got it at 5/8, at one time we were on their line and Burgess was digging for the ball whilst Giteau was moving around in the backs - how the hell are you supposed to hit him? looking for him before passing costs critical time. Mortlock had a solid game as did Cross apart from the cross field crab that took us nowhere but it didnt gel I thought.
We dont have space for Tuquiri in the starting 15 but he could be useful off the bench as an impact player. Mitchell and Hynes looked great. AAC’s kicking was poor but he was in line with all 6 backs who kicked badly. Giteau’s goal kicking was a huge contrast to his field kicking.
England have the makings of a good team which surprised me. I thought that the guy who took over from Cipriani looked more composed and solid without being brilliant.
Did any of you see the SA v Scot game it was a really good game of football which surprised me.
France will expose our weakness in the backs this week but I dont think it will be enough to win it for them. Australia by 5.
stuff happens said | November 17th 2008 @ 4:45pm | Report comment
Greg R:The Fitz says Stephen Moore is the best hooker in the business - what happened to Suzie the waitress?!
What a woman - still she had a good run ( is it ‘run’ er no, but stop now!)
I like the French hooker with the Polish name who comes off the bench - (gawd this is getting worse! goodbye)
Only in rugby…
sheek said | November 17th 2008 @ 5:43pm | Report comment
Stuff happens,
Thanks for asking me, but I don’t have the concentration for in-depth analysis anymore. Nor am I a scrum doctor. Haven’t seen the game, but here are some general thoughts.
1. Why reset the scrum if the ball has come out behind the rear to one team or the other. Isn’t that the purpose of the scrum? To either win your feed, or a strike against the head?
2. I thought there was a limit on resets? Was it 3? I would make it only 2, then a short-arm penalty.
3. Is there too much over-regulation? Sometimes having TOO MANY restrictions or rules can be just as counter-productive as having TOO FEW.
4. I understand the 3-4 word phase was brought in for safety reasons, but I think the front-rowers find it off-putting for their concentration & timing. Anyway, I think teaching correct binding & engaging technique is paramount. Studies show the worst injuries happen in games where the technique is poorer.
When players get to senior level they ought to know how to scrum. Having another adult (referee) tell them how to pack must be terribly off-putting. That’s all I can come up with for now.
Jim Boyce said | November 17th 2008 @ 5:58pm | Report comment
Andrew - Good summary and great to see a Wallaby pack doing a full 80 minutes with no replacements. Lineouts were strong . Scrums and rocks solid. I think the English pack were expecting something else and could not adjust. I think the English crowd were also in that state which added the pressure.They do have some interesting backs, Armitage (F/B) looks good . I thought the Half Back and Cipriani look promising although that field goal was horrible. It reminded me of Rob Andrew in the 1991 RWC where he did the same thing with Gascott and the backs ready to go over wide out and the game vanished before their eyes. The English will be a testing proposition next time but the forwards need to realise that that they not playing some version of the Eton Wall game where you graft down field, get penalty goal and repeat exercise.
As for our guys, the backline is not quite the answer. I thought Burgess was OK but Giteau is more an I/C but will do until better comes along. Mortlock does the freight train bit and destroyed the confidence of the relatively new backline but that would not work with an experienced backline. Cross had a mediocre game and Mitchell always provides a challenge.
The referee was generally good but the Wallabies were lucky that the try was not awarded under the posts, although they scored shortly after . Good result and France could be anything, depends on the referee.
stuff happens said | November 17th 2008 @ 6:10pm | Report comment
Sheek, thanks for responding; I agree two resets & then a short arm penalty.Simple & I suspect will fix almost everything.Note to IRB problem solved.Next..
Howi said | November 17th 2008 @ 6:53pm | Report comment
Jim, agree with you about the backs but I actually thought Burgess was a little less than OK. It’s hard to tell because you don’t really know whether he is being fed enough information at the back of the ruck, but so often he seemed to be getting the ball clear and THEN thinking about where to deliver it. This seemed to give the opposition too much time to sum up the backline with each phase. I was also disappointed with Cross in the opening minutes when he ran diagonally across field for about 30 metres in a perfectly straight line; it appeared as though we were about to out-number them by three to two, possibly even four to two, and he got tackled without giving off the ball. I’m certain that all of their hours of training would have provided Cross with a few more ideas about what to do in this situation. But I really like the look of Hynes when he has the ball in hand. He reminds me so much of Chris Latham when he was at his most brilliant. I expect to see some real dazzle from Hynes in the near future. He was very composed for this, his first Twickenham, as well he should’ve been. Too early maybe to try big risks, but I can’t help thinking of Latham when I see him run the ball up. Maybe Latham gave him plenty of good oil at the Reds. Hynes in the coming Super 14 will be really interesting.
Jim Boyce said | November 17th 2008 @ 7:43pm | Report comment
Howi - I think Burgess suffers from ” where the hell is Giteau”, but you may be right. As for Cross , I don’t know what he was doing on that diagonal run but it sure wasn’t trying to set up anyone. I have him down as a not spectacular journeyman when we haven’t got a better idea he will do.I am still out on Hynes. I hear what you say and will keep looking. I have him down as a good defensive winger at this time, but hell I can be way out. Regards Jim
Ian Noble said | November 17th 2008 @ 7:45pm | Report comment
wally
That attempt at the drop goal typified poor decision making through inexperience when England had five players outside Cips in a good attacking positions.
It is probable that Flood might replace Cipriani v SA. He has been playing well for Leicester and is probably a more reliable kicker than Cips. Not quite as fast as Cips but he is no slouch He is also more experienced with a number of caps although he is only 23.
bob said | November 17th 2008 @ 8:05pm | Report comment
Fair play to Australia, they did a job, and a good one on England. I have said for a long time that the Australian front row was ok, it needed confidence and locks, but the essence was all good… however, I also think the media hype over the new England set up and team has done them no good… they are new guys on the block and will take time to bed in, and as for Sheridan, he’s a converted flanker, and makes mistakes a 12 year old prop makes… he’s monster strong, but that isn’t enough at elite level, and all his major scrummaging triumphs were with people like Steve Thompson or other equally monster hookers under his arm…
The best thing about Johnsons time with England is that for the first time since 2003, the team will be a meritocracy instead of the old boys squad from elite schools… for that alone we need to be grateful.
So all credit to the ozzies, and to the front row, to regather their self belief and come back and do that to England is awesome… in truth I never care much about the score, I care about whether my team wins the forward battle, the scrums especially… if your backs run in more tries, who cares? I want to see my pack roll all over the opposition…. I was sick to see England bested in those areas… but honestly, bloody marverlous effort from the convicts… well done… you’ve got to hand it to them and know when you see real metal… Spiro still sucks though…. and we’ll be back… not for a while, but we’ll be there.
tarpo said | November 17th 2008 @ 9:46pm | Report comment
Sheek, I enjoy many of your insights & you obviously love the game, so I am perplexed as to why you haven’t seen the game, even a replay a day after the fact! I have been looking forward with great excitement to this match & wasn’t disappointed.
sheek said | November 17th 2008 @ 10:07pm | Report comment
Tarpo,
It’s hard to watch a replay once you know the result, & have read all the stories around it, & seen the highlights. Kind of makes you think you’ve seen the match anyway.
As I get older I’m getting fussier about what excites me. Delighted the Aussies won, & would have enjoyed watching the Aussie scrum dismantle their English opponents.
But…..one try apiece & 7 pens to Oz, that’s not my kind of rugby. I mean, there are occasional games worth watching when only one try apiece is scored. But those penalty goals are a blight on the game.
Rowdy said | November 18th 2008 @ 2:39am | Report comment
I’ve got mixed feelings really - immensely annoyed at us losing to the Wallabies, obviously, but then, there’s real promise for the future.
Cipriani came off a poor second to Giteau, but he’s had about 60 fewer tests, so perhaps that’s not surprising. His attitude after the game was sh*te though - “Enjoyed it” - really ? You enjoyed losing ? Didn’t matter ? Not gutted ? Then go back to Wasps and help them get promotion next year. I’d be happy to see Flood at 10 next week.
The scrums were fairly even, I think, which wasn’t unexpected to anyone but diehard twits on either side; whether Al fooled the ref again or monstered Sheridan doesn’t really matter - in the end it’s down to who gets away with most - Sheridan wasn’t binding, and maybe Al collapsed a couple, but neither fact was decisive. I still have grave doubts about Sheridan - he’s kind of like Joe Bugner - looking at him you’d think he’d be a human wrecking ball in the loose, but he just doesn’t punch his weight, and he seems technically lacking. Stevens too; they both need some injection of dog, as someone else noted.
England positives though, were Armitage, who seems nailed-on as 15 (unitl he has a bad game, when the English press will be calling for head), Cips’ breaks, Rees. Negatives were stupid penalties, but that can be tightened up with experience. We just need Hartley in for Mears, Kennedy for Powderpuff Palmer, Mad Danny for Borthwick, and my granny for Noon. This lot in the 6N will go pretty well, I think.
The Wallaby scrum can build on that confidence-booster against France. They’ll always have decent backs, and the only worry might be how long Smith’s going to last.
Bob McGregor said | November 18th 2008 @ 3:59am | Report comment
Great article Andrew and most of the posts have added to it. I recall a similar article after the win over the AB’s whereupon the Wallabies won the next two. Hopes it’s contagious for the remainder of the tour.
As great as the result was, we Aussies should not get too carried away as it was a mistake ridden game played with extreme intensity. Our application was good but I could not help but wonder how we let the early lead virtually disappear at half time by poor execution of field kicking. AAC misses clearing kick for the line - drop goal in reply. Mortlock had kick charged down and ensuing turnover resulted in England pressing our line and rewarded with a “mauled” try. Better execution of clearing kicks may well have averted 8 of England’s initial 11 points.
Our inability to execute the sliding kick remains a worry and to see AB forwards accomplishing same confirms we are lacking such skills.
It galls me to say it but the English backs showed real promise and it’s hard to accept our forwards have improved markedly from 1 to 8 while some of our backs have failed to achieve similar improvement. We appear dysfunctional from 9-10-12, a zone where we cannot afford to be off the pace.
Without Barnes we have reverted to use Giteau at 10 but his tendency to get lost at times in the backline could be reason Burgess was off the boil. Perhaps Cooper or O’Connor could be considered at 10, Giteau revert to 12 and Mortlock to 13. Back three to remain the same but with AAC to be put under the microscope re his field kicking and bombs. Too often he fails to execute. Such changes MAY spark our backline. Let’s hope so as the team is definitely showing meaningful progress.
Terry Kidd said | November 18th 2008 @ 5:57am | Report comment
I agree that Burgess looked lost at times, but not his initial move when he picked up the ball, how often did he go to pass only to find no one where he thought they were? In this I mean Giteau, he is on the move in the backline and Burgess has no certainty where to pass quickly virtually without looking …. right now he has to look to find Giteau which slows his pass and puts him under pressure. Think back to Larkham …. he would be in position early …. his half back knew where to find him …. if he was moving he had communicated early so that his half knew where he was going and could still hit him with a pass.
I agree with Bob McGregor we are disjointed at 9-10-12 but I think the problem lies with Giteau at 10 …. he must not be communicating early enough, or is changing his mind at the last minute. I would like to try Burgess at 9, Barnes at 10 and Giteau 12 …. fast, certain ball and then lets see if the backs are a little more settled and if the line breaks come.
mcxd said | November 18th 2008 @ 6:49am | Report comment
Just chiming in in regards to Burgess, yep he did look lost at times and suffered becasue of it but not for the first time in a game this year in an international it has happened. Who is number 10 when it happens ? Gits…I agree with alot of the above comments regarding Burgess playing “wheres Giteau ?” . Compare his form against a tahs game for example. Yep i do realise its alot slower a different kettle of fish, but the thing is I cant remember Burgess looking lost very oftern at all, he was always able to find Beale. Im not saying that its all Giteaus fault as yep burgess did have a few shocking passes especially the one the wallabies scored the try, lucky for guiteaus speed and quick hands that got it going out the back line..
Re: Cross he certainly cost the wallabies a try, i think it was just after Mortlock did his run away train impersonation, i think Cross thought i can do that too, but no, he got done by two english when all he had to do is pass and there hynes and AAC whre outside him and either would have been over..thanks god he did eventually pass it when they did score..
im still worried about AAC. at least there were no pointless up and unders going no where.
Terry Kidd said | November 18th 2008 @ 7:29am | Report comment
Agree mcxd …. I haven’t seen Burgess look lost at any other level, he’s always seemed to know where the pass is going, but not at Twickenham, which suggests to me that Gits is at fault.
I agree with Cross he seems to have a healthy dose of white line fever, or a very big set of blinkers, such that he can’t spot support players outside him. His 30m diagonal run should have resu,lted in a Wallabies flanking movement that may have led God knows where and he did fail to pass with a certain try on offer after Mortlock’s run. I don’t think he is the answer at 13.
ACC on the other hand is worth persevering with in my humble opinion …. he seems to have improved test on test … with more to come hopefully …. and we can’t really say that his work in progress has actually cost us a test win as yet.
Rolling Maul said | November 18th 2008 @ 7:43am | Report comment
God I love scrums… could watch them all day… obviously in 7 a side they do away with the tight five… why isn’t there a broken down comp with just forwards? Keep the breakaways… and just have lineouts, scrums, mauls and rucks up and down the field. Do away with the backs and their fumbling, kicking and forward passes.
Just focus on the important stuff!
Terry Kidd said | November 18th 2008 @ 8:04am | Report comment
Ah Rolling Maul … you cracked me up !!! Long live the Piggies and keep the handbags on the sideline !!!!
Rolling Maul said | November 18th 2008 @ 8:15am | Report comment
Just think Terry - without backs we wouldn’t need to have mirrors in the change rooms, hair product would be banned from the ground (as with other various grooming products), there wouldn’t be any bickering, no premaddonas, no useless kicking and handing over possession, no scissors moves that never come off….
more rucking and grunting….
and end to poverty and world peace thrown in.
… and I’ve got my perfect world.
Terry Kidd said | November 18th 2008 @ 8:21am | Report comment
Lol …. and no poofy drinks in the eskies in the change rooms either !!!!
Would love for Greg Martin on MMM in Brisbane to read this.
Rolling Maul said | November 18th 2008 @ 8:32am | Report comment
I’m a bit of an ideas man!
They have these competitions at half time when they find the ‘fasts player’ and the put the backs against each other and run over 100m… They bring out the bowling machine and fly balls into the air to see which full back is safest under the high ball.. the have full weekends of 7’s rugby festivals…
… how about a weekend just based around the push over try. Each team bring their pack and get 3 sets at 5 meters and see how many push over tries they can achieve. Packs are in pools and the top two progress into the round robin stage… culminating in the best two packs pushing off in front of a packed stadium of scrum lovers.
I’d pay admission for that!
Terry Kidd said | November 18th 2008 @ 8:36am | Report comment
or for tv …. how about the best hit by a piggy on a hand bag trying to run the inside line …. should make for great comedy tv
Rolling Maul said | November 18th 2008 @ 8:44am | Report comment
I remember when Phil Kearns used to go on about the DVD he was putting together especially for Mothers Day… 100 Best Scrums of All Time.
My mum went without a Mothers Day present that year as I waited to get her the DVD that never eventuated.
I think he may have been joking but the prospect of the DVD had me very excited.
bob said | November 18th 2008 @ 9:02am | Report comment
Benjamin, the imbalance in the England team in favour of private school boys has been ridiculous in recent years… until Woodward it was almost complete, and post Woodward you’d be hard pressed to find a state educated player in the ranks at all… now some will have gone to the private schools under scholarships, and some private school educated kids become great players, I’m not arguing from a socialist view point… I’m not attacking private education, but I do take exception to any establishment (RFU) that is supposed to be a meritocracy and yet allows Cambridge University a permanant place on the England selectors panel! Look at the people Johnno immediatly brought in… prior to Johnno, the coach couldn’t pick the team (Woodward excepted)… now with the demands Johnno made, he has control, and that’s going to make a difference.
The academy system will make a massive difference too, but I suspect that is more to do with the realities of the pro game than a real desire amongst the die-hard old schoolers to modernise. The clubs need to bring on talent… but it will be a while before they make the top flight.
Andrew Logan said | November 18th 2008 @ 12:01pm | Report comment
Rolling Maul - you would no doubt be a fan of Ross Turnbull who, in his role as Wallaby manager talked to the Wallabies in 1978 as they were about to play the All-Blacks at Eden Park. On the morning of the match, stand-in manager Turnbull talked to the team, then asked the backs to leave him with the forwards. It was just Turnbull with the pigs.
“Look,” he said, waving an airy hand at the just-departed backs, “these Phantom comic swappers and Mintie eaters, these blond-headed flyweights are one thing, and we will need them after the hard work’s done. But the real stuff’s got to be done right here by you blokes.”
The Wallabies went on to a famous win.
“Phantom comic swappers and mintie eaters”. Priceless.
ohtani's jacket said | November 18th 2008 @ 12:13pm | Report comment
Ali Williams uses product and won Man of the Match. Go figure.
Terry Kidd said | November 18th 2008 @ 12:15pm | Report comment
Ali Williams uses product ….. on that melon? The ‘product’ he uses must be cement then.
ohtani's jacket said | November 18th 2008 @ 12:16pm | Report comment
Ali William’s melon is very fragile.
Rolling Maul said | November 18th 2008 @ 12:25pm | Report comment
Andrew Logan - Love it and never heard it before.. brought goosebumps!
Tarpo said | November 18th 2008 @ 1:19pm | Report comment
Ali Williams is a back in a forwards body!!
Nick (KIA) said | November 18th 2008 @ 4:10pm | Report comment
A Williams used to play 10 I think - and was a fusball goalie. He’s clearly an abberation.
DaniE said | November 18th 2008 @ 4:16pm | Report comment
Ali’s grown since he was a fusball goalie then - fusball being the soccer game played on the little board with the little men :D. Maybe you’re talking about futsal - indoor soccer?
Rowdy said | November 18th 2008 @ 10:28pm | Report comment
bob, I’d like to see some figures illustrating this ridculous imbalance in favour of public schoolboys. Perhaps you could prove that RU in Aus is not the overwhelming preserve of private schools while you’re about it !
I see that MJ has made only one change for the SA match - Haskell in for Croft. So we still have an underpowered front 5 and a hopeless 13. I hope MJ isn’t going to turn into Andy Cklueless Robinson and start claiming we’re just about to click, whilst persevering with manifestly wrong selections.
Benjamin said | November 19th 2008 @ 2:02am | Report comment
Rowdy, I would have made changes at 2, 3, 4 and 6 but it is too easy to make wholesale changes. I think it’s necessary for Johnson to give the players a chance to redeem themselves. The problem lies in the selection of the whole squad, and not just the matchday 22. However the genesis of that lies within the EPS agreement.
I don’t think the Johnson team is taking the same route as Robinson’s teams. You must have forgotten just how bad that period was. Johnson’s comment that some players were reverting to type was IMO a clear barb aimed at Robinson and that pod forward system. I have complete faith that Brian Smith is going to help England develop.
Bob, I can’t imagine that being a factor at the club or test level. I can name plenty of state-educated England players over the past few years.
Nick (KIA) said | November 19th 2008 @ 7:50am | Report comment
Danie,
No I meant that weird game with the round ball and 11 on each side. Popular in some countries I gather. He was an age group rep I think…
bob said | November 19th 2008 @ 8:28am | Report comment
Ok Benjamin, I have to ask you to name them… and bear in mind that less than 6% of the UK are privately educated, then measure the stats against football (soccer) and league, and you will see my point. I never suggested it was a factor in the club game, but it was too evident in the internationals… partly for the obvoious reasons that for a long time the game was almost the preserve of the private schools, but in this day and age it is not acceptible that the imbalance is not revealed. It can’t be addressed with social engineering or tinkering with selection, but it is something that should need to be ignored, and in time it with the academy system, it will end… but it is real, and not reverse sobbery to point it out. Personally it doesn’t worry me… just like it doesn’t botehr me that 6% are privately educated, but 80% of the judiciary, senior civil service, military, and politicians, are from the private schools…. it’s just the way it is… but when a team runs out in my colours, I want it to be the very best possible, and I believe Johhno will ensure that, as will, in time, the academy.
OldManEmu said | November 19th 2008 @ 8:45am | Report comment
I quite like backs becasue when they knock it on or kick the ball out we get to have a scrum or a lineout.
One great story, probably BS, but sources close to the truth swear by it. 1985, all conquering St Josephs College 1st XV come up against Kings who have done nothing. Coach drops his 10,12 and 13 to the seconds and brings in three breakaways. Kings score a famous victory. No doubt I’ve got some detail wrong here but even if half true this is Boys Own stuff - and show the backs for the useless disgrace to their parents that they are.
This is why I like the look of Toby Flood - he aint hiding anything, he is a big girl and proud of it. He is the type of bloke that would just be infuriating to play, not the least because he is probably pretty tough - bring back pretty No 10’s.
Kearnsy and Marto a few years back had each other in stitches talking about “great beardless five eighths” - exhibit A, Andrew Mehrtens - it was great stuff.
Rolling maul - more power to you.
Andrew Logan said | November 19th 2008 @ 11:08am | Report comment
Speaking of moustaches, try naming as many All Blacks as you can who sport the dreaded ‘tache. You can stop when you get to 50.
Rowdy said | November 19th 2008 @ 11:12pm | Report comment
Ben, you’re right that the problem starts with having to name the squad 6 months before the games. Is any other of the top 5 or 6 unions labouring under this sort of burden ?
On the other hand, I actually quite like the idea that the game is orientated towards clubs and grass roots here, rather than being driven solely by what is deemed as good for the national team.
Andrew, the Hard Man number 1 all-round haircut seems to be popular in England rugby circles - I see Mortlock’s sporting a shiny bonce lately, so maybe that’s the current trend.