By James Mortimer -
December 2nd 2008 @ 1:28am
Get a Roar profile
Loading ...Related coverage
Wallabies advance, but work to be done
If Robbie Deans and John O’Neill had said at the beginning of the season that they would record nine Test wins at season close, both men would have been content.
The fourteen test match season was the most games played outside of a World Cup year, and only losses to champion teams (World, Tri and Six Nations champions) indicates a better than average season.
It also must be taken into perspective that new coach Robbie Deans – as feted as he is by the Australian media – only took control of the national team just days after his focus was on Canterbury in the Super 14.
Australia seems able to compete with both New Zealand and South Africa, but admittedly won when opposition played poorly.
But the Wallabies have shown a tendency to compete inefficiently for an entire match, either switching off and losing (as they did against the All Blacks in Brisbane) or only switching on when the game is already lost (ergo the game versus the Welsh).
Equally, when the All Blacks and Springboks have fired complete broadsides at the Wallabies, they have had no answer, with heavy 29 and 45 point losses respectively.
Against weaker opposition, the Wallabies have shown a tendency to struggle to dominate structure against their foes. Italy and France outplayed them in the set piece, and only a poor final ten by Italy and a shocking display by French fly half David Skrela allowed Australia to win.
How could the team that competed in the Tri Nations struggle against second tier opposition?
It is easy to say that the Wallabies are re-structuring and re-building, but no more so than any other team in world rugby.
First, the appropriate credit must be given.
Back to back wins over the World Champions, inflicting one of the All Blacks heaviest losses in years, losing just one game at home by four points to the world’s best team, and conquering their historical bete noire, the inability to win away.
But while Deans is a results man, and would reflect on such as 2008 being a successful season, these achievements cannot mask some lurking problems in this Wallaby team.
It could be said that the Wallabies have made progress on their great Achilles heel, the scrum, but while optimists could state that they subjugated a nightmare by beating England and dominating their scrum, the same eight were embarrassed by France and Italy, and at times suffered problems against both the All Black and Springbok packs.
While Stephen Moore has developed into one of the world’s premier hookers, it is the lack of a class prop that is hurting Australia. Al Baxter and Matt Dunning are adequate stop gap players, but neither will ever dominate, and should give way to players such as Benn Alexander and Ben Robinson – both of whom need more development.
Ideally Deans will scrutinise Australia’s propping talent in the Super 14, and must select the form fatties. He needs players who will scrummage, not players who will plot to mask their deficiencies like Baxter and Dunning.
The locks and loose forwards, suffer from inconsistency. In George Smith they have the world class player to build around, and with players such as Hugh McMeniman, James Horwill and Richard Brown, they have burgeoning talent that will improve over time.
To rule the breakdown is to win the game, but a breakdown is not just governed by a man like Smith. A large part of Richie McCaw’s effectiveness is that he has 14 players who contest the breakdown with him.
The Wallabies must remember that every tackle initiates the contest for the ball at all times – not just for periods of the game.
The real hangover of Gregan has surfaced this year. He played in national colours for too long, and as a consequence, Australia is bereft of a class halfback. Luke Burgess has had the game time, but is lacking in high level skill. If he does not perform in the Super 14, a new man – such as Brett Sheehan – should be selected.
Wallaby halfbacks must stop taking steps before linking the ball to their back lines.
The outside backs are far from settled, with the value of Berrick Barnes shown in his absence. The 10/12 axis must be explored thoroughly by the coaching team.
Giteau belongs in the team no doubt, but is his ball playing brilliance better suited in the middle of the field?
He is individually one of the best players in the world – but it must be asked, can he control a game in the manner of a dictating fly half?
Stirling Mortlock, as good as he is defensively and as a ball carrier, does not have the playmaking skills to do the Wallabies justice. Furthermore, Deans has spent years playing his teams with two genuine playmakers in the 10/12 bloc.
His coaching is suffering have two crash runners in the centre positions.
As paradoxical as it may sound, for every strong point the Wallabies have, the same area has a glaring weakness.
Perhaps Deans would do well to watch the natural structures of Australia’s Super 14 teams, for before he tries to mould his team into the “Australian Crusaders” he must remember that he has players very different in style to what he has had with New Zealand footballers.
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...
(13)
Greg Russell said | December 2nd 2008 @ 11:26am | Report comment
I find this a very balanced article. It irked me that a journalist as good as Wayne Smith wrote in yesterday’s Australian that the 64% record of the Wallabies under Deans this year was no better than what John Connolly achieved. As the above article makes clear, the team had a much harder schedule this year than it did under Connolly, and it had some major achievements under Deans that it never notched under Connolly. There is also the point that Deans had no preparation time. It probably is true that on average the team looked no better under Deans than under Connolly, but what did change was that it was able to win with a poorer level of performance on some occasions.
I would like to address points made in the final two paragraphs above:
1. “As paradoxical as it may sound, for every strong point the Wallabies have, the same area has a glaring weakness.” The answer here is to make the strength work. For example, a lot of New Zealanders are still uncomfortable at having Nonu rather than a playmaker at 12, and at times one got the impression that the coaching staff was also uncomfortable. But the point is that Henry and co. have made a success out of Nonu at 12. It is impossible to have a player at 12 who is both a playmaker and a “banger”, so it is pointless to wish for the ideal world of having both.
2. “Perhaps Deans would do well to watch the natural structures of Australia’s Super 14 teams, for before he tries to mould his team into the “Australian Crusaders””. I agree that Australia is not New Zealand, however it is not too different, and rugby is rugby. If Australian teams had a record of great success in the S14 then one could recommend sticking to such a blueprint, but the Brumbies are the only team with such a record, and the era of their championship style of play has passed. So I don’t have a problem with Deans trying to tweak the style of Australian rugby, in fact I would probably say it’s part of his job. However, he must be sure to play only to strengths that do exist rather than ones he wished existed, and he must also be sure to update his “Crusaders” style of play, because that will not remain a successful template indefinitely.
Rah Rah Rahsputin said | December 2nd 2008 @ 12:20pm | Report comment
I strongly agree with a lot of what you have said. Despite a lot of progress there are still some glaring deficiencies in the team. I suspect (or atleast I hope) that the changes undertaken by Deans won’t come to full fruitition until later next year. Grand slam maybe.
I think the criticism of Giteau as a 5/8, which has been a regular beef of some bloggers,is largely unwarranted. This is his first full season at 5/8 and he is still coming to terms with the intricacy of the position. That being said, he has never shirked responsibility. I would suggest that the team and the backline in particular may be still coming to terms with the Deans philosophy, which has put additional pressure on the Giteau. I therefore think it would be wise for Deans to watch the, as you put it, ‘natural structures’ of our teams.
Burgess was in terrific form coming out of the Super 14, which he took into the early tests but this was interrupted by injury. The increased pressure of test rugby highlighted the glarring deficiency in his kicking game. While some of this website that the loss of Barnes has put additional pressure on Giteau, I think the same can be said for Burgess. With the loss of Burgess and the lack of a strong option from inside centre or fullback, the wallabies have be come far more reliant on Burgess boxing kicking to relieve pressure. I suspect there has been a domino effect in the 9,10 and12 area with the loss of Barnes communication and kicking skills.
Lastly, the criticism of Baxter and Dunning (who we have barely seen this tour) is unwarranted. Troubles in the scrum against France largely to due with Alexander not handling to french tightend continually coming across on Moore. Alexander for all the potential he has is still a greenhorn. As for Wales, a lot of scrums went down and the benefit of the doubt always went to Wales which was how the ref called the rest of the games. It was absolutely ridiculous the way he talked to the Australian front. It was patronising to say least and not appropriate behaviour for a referee. Moore would not of been out of line telling him to piss off.
There is some talent starting to come through in the front row but most of it is at loosehead, robinson, alexander, kepu, holmes and cowen. We are extremely light on tightheads, which is typified by the selection of baxter and dunning who the two tightheads for NSW. Shepardson went backwards this year in the Super 14. The Reds with Blake on his way out played Dayna Edwards, a kiwi backpacker who decided to have a run around at Rabdwick and ended up with Super 14 contract. The Force have continually struggled to find tighthead. Fitter lasted what? A season! They Taikari but have been scouring SA for a frontrow, missing out on the Du Pliess brothers.
The situation is not much better in the second row, though Sharpe has had somewhat of a second coming, the only other true Lock of international standard is Horwill. McMenimen and Mumm have potential but are more blindside flankers cum Locks. Chisholm was given a massive opportunity on this tour and in my opinion pissed it up against the wall. If Kimlin couldn’t better his efforts then that’s not saying much.
Ben C said | December 2nd 2008 @ 12:44pm | Report comment
As a bit of a left field suggestion, how about Giteau to 15 and Barnes to 10? This would give Giteau the ability to chime in to the backline and use his ability to find gaps and also move one of our better tactical kickers to fullback where AAC and Mitchell have struggled with the kick-chase game. Giteau is a mercurial player and is perhaps better suited to creating his own opportunities in broken field play/kick return and coming into the backline at an angle rather than the structured backline play where he seems to be struggling.
Robbie may like this approach as, with the Crusaders, he has often gone for playmakers at 10 (Carter) and 15 (Macdonald) and possibly 12 (Brett) as well. In the long term perhaps Barnes (10), O’Connor (12) and Giteau (15) might be a small but potent backline particularly when paired up with bigger players at 11, 13 and 14.
ohtani's jacket said | December 2nd 2008 @ 12:50pm | Report comment
I think you have to accept that Deans’ coaching record was the same as Connolly’s. If you don’t accept that, you can’t address the key areas where the Wallabies keep coming unstuck.
How many of the Wallabies’ problems did Deans resolve over the course of the season? Are they better now than they were at the beginning of the year? Can you expect them to win the big away games in 2009?
Next season, the Wallabies start the Tri-Nations with an Auckland/Cape Town away leg. After that they have a three Test homestand. This presents the Wallabies with the classic NZ method of winning the Tri-Nations title — split your away games and win all your home games. Can they get a split?
Ben C said | December 2nd 2008 @ 1:02pm | Report comment
OJ
We are weak at tighthead prop, lock, five-eighth (until Giteau settles or is moved), outside centre when Mortlock brains himself again and fullback. Deans has started work but if the cattle isn’t there, its time for a tofu-burger rather than a steak.
But by far the biggest weakness is still between the ears of just about every player with a few exceptions (Horwill, Barnes, Hynes – all Queenslanders, is adversity over the last few S14 seasons character building?). Deans has made a little headway (acheiving some better away statistics, winning close games) but there is still a long way to go.
At this stage it is incremental rather than revolutionary which is all that can be expected, despite the prophecies of some journalists that, as an encore to winning the Tri-Nations and Eurpoean tour, Deans would walk across Sydney Harbour.
Harry said | December 2nd 2008 @ 1:10pm | Report comment
OJ,
Q.1 Deans resolved the problem of never winning away from home. Forwards improved and several new players were succesfully introduced. the team recorded some great wins – agianst NZ in Sydney, SA in Durban and Engalnd at Twickers. Things are better than they were with Connollly.
Everyne, including Deans, knows that we lack depth – aprticuarly with barnes injutred – in the inside backs. Burgess started well but disappointed in the 2nd half of a long season.
Q2. Yes, undoutedly.
Q3. We’ll see but we are due a win in NZ, one in every about 8 isn’t it historically?
ohtani's jacket said | December 2nd 2008 @ 1:25pm | Report comment
Fair enough. The important thing is that Wallaby supporters are happy with the direction the team’s heading in.
MarkH said | December 2nd 2008 @ 1:38pm | Report comment
I recon theyve come miles. Deans is changing minds which is good. He needs others to back off a bit when it come to selection. Being the coach, for mine, he is the decider. Just a bit more agression in attack and who knows.
Sam Taulelei said | December 2nd 2008 @ 2:16pm | Report comment
Nice article James. Your second paragraph sums up the Wallabies season very succinctly and accurately.
It’s a fascinating time for the 3N teams as they are all at similar paths of development. Many would say that the All Blacks results prove they are well ahead of the rest. I believe that this is true of them as a team, but looking at the future development of individuals in the starting team and wider squad they are on a similar trajectory as the Boks and Wallaby players.
Graham Henry is the most experienced international coach in the game and he’s learned as much as he’s taught this year. That I believe gives the All Blacks their edge at the moment. For all their previous successes and talent the likes of Deans, Gatland, de Villiers etc are mere novices in the international game compared to Henry and just as it is for the players, test rugby is different to any other level of rugby.
If Deans was offered 9 wins at the end of the season, a record defeat of the All Blacks, a first win on SA soil, Twickenham and in France as a measure of success when he started, I doubt whether he would have rebuffed it. There have been more highs than lows for Wallaby fans this year and that is another measure of improvement. Deans has been embraced not only by the rugby community but also the wider community and in doing so has given rugby union in this country a much needed boost in profile and image.
There should be general contentment with what has been achieved this year by the Wallabies but also a steely determination that they can and must get better, play with greater consistency and transfer what they learn and practice on the training field into the game. This may surprise the fawning Aussie rugby press but Deans will improve as a coach over time and this should be directly translated by the Wallaby performances, through their selection, fitness, skills and tactics.
The big 2011 question will be though, will Henry still be there for NZ? and which team has the greatest capacity for improvement, development and sustainability.
Who Needs Melon said | December 2nd 2008 @ 2:50pm | Report comment
Sam: Yes – I think the All Blacks are building nicely. Very nearly at their peak… right in between two World Cups as usual!
Sorry. I’m not one of those AB bashers. I think they are a great team. I just couldn’t help myself. The devil made me do it.
Homer said | December 2nd 2008 @ 3:04pm | Report comment
I think the tour, although successful, has pointed to some deep issues. A shortage of TH props as Rhasputin said but also in depth on other key positions..
AAC is not Chris Latham and never will be. Fullbacks need genuine pace, leg drive and a big boot. Latham and Burke were fantastic players because their pace allowed them to return to their support players and make valuable ground before taking the tackle, catching the advancing defence lin as they are staggered, and if they were caught early both had tremendous leg drive to keep the ball up and gain a few extra yards, Latham scored several tries this way. Cullen was another who benefitted from this. Latham and Burke also could kick the ball to next Christmas as well. AAC can not kick it out let alone down field. When he pushes for extra distance his accuracy dives.
Gits is an option from Fullback but his attacking talent at the line would be missed. Conner is very small for an inside centre and has a long list of 5/8’s in front of him.
Horne is another player who may prove to be a tour bolter next year as Mortlock and Cross age. However, there isn’t much behind him. When Mortlock retires the Wallaby backline will lose its attacking thrust to get over the gain line. None of the current crop are anywhere near his size or strength and the best OC’s have that (Umanga, Mortlock).
Hooker is the biggest worry. I am a big fan TPN but his throwing is a real laibility and has held him back. Can we turn him into a tight head prop? He is massively strong and amazing around the paddock so he could be a good investment for 2011 and 2015. Otherwise the cupboard is bare for hookers around the country.
2nd row is ok with Elsom coming back Mumm and Mcmenimum will fight to pair up with Horwill. Also young Hockings from the Force is coming through and is a massive talent at a young age. The is another very big young lock in QLD whose name escapes me now, but got a s14 cap last year i believe and is in the Horwill shape.
Leroy Houston is also another bolter to join the top No.8 ranks. In his first season back he performed quite well and made some very strong runs and hits. I think he will make a hugely strong combination with Horwill, Braid and Mcmenimum to make the Qld pack one to be feared in the S14. With slick service from Lucas (should have gone on the tour instead of Sheehan) feeding Cooper and Barnes the reds could be awesome.
Harry said | December 2nd 2008 @ 4:25pm | Report comment
OJ I am generally satisfied but I have to say that our backline play is currently pretty poor by historical Australian standards. As I’ve harped on elsewhere we need another playmaker apart from Gits in the backline, and I’m unconvinced blokes like Cross (no sense of drawing a man), Turner (still making mistakes and his 1st season zip missing), AAC (still learning how to play 15) and Ioane (can’t kick, drops the ball too much) are truly well rounded, complete test backline players. But there is a talented batch of youngsters coming through to solve this problem and to my mind Deans is a clearly superior coach to Connolly and Eddie.
Forwards wise, we still lack depth and a decent batch of tightheads. Improving though.
bennalong said | December 3rd 2008 @ 10:50pm | Report comment
Apart from the Babas, the season’s over and I for one feel pretty chuffed about our overall improvements.
Still can’t understand the criticism of the scrum against France and Italy. It seems we have to dominate before a lot of you can be happy. Scrummaging is much more technical than many of you seem to understand. You can’t pick who’s going down by whose ball it is. If the other team gets a better hit most teams will bow out and go for a reset. Until it was decided that this wasn’t good for TV it was in fact part of a true Rugby contest. Too many of you still believe its always us. ! Suckered.
Another gripe is that next year the backline choices will be entirely different so why not accept that we’ve done what we’ve done without many options. Like it or not we’re still are in a rebuilding phase and 5/8 is not decided. So we have Barnes and Beale in contention against Giteau (who, by the way, the rest of the world thinks is pretty hot)
The inside centre position is then up for grabs but I can tell you Mortlock, another great player being written off PLAYING OUT OF POSITION, will not be in that picture. He’s still a magnificent line breaker given a bit more time (3 seconds?) to build speed. He will be OC and Captain
The forewards have been greatly improved. Again we have Horwill back next year and I think he’s really stepped up so it will be significant gain. If you include Vickerman you’ve got a great tight five. Baxter is still getting a bashing but his general play has equalled that of most of his front row competition. Give him a break! Moore’s throwing has improved mightily. (Which International hooker should I be watching to see how it’s done) Ben Robinson has fantastic hands and causes immense problems for any front rower he packs against due to his natural tendency to pack lower.(Again unfairly told to pack higher by frustrated refs who can’t figure the scrum out!)
Phil Waugh has also copped a hammering but those who criticise aren’t watching. His tackle counts are still exceptional and although he’s not the great pest that George is ( and hasn’t the attacking ability) he gives fewer penalties and makes breaks in every game.
Likewise Mcmeniman is a great player and young Dean Mumm always puts in and is coming ahead with each game.don’t forget Elsom will return, and Homer is right to include Leroy Houston in the back three.
Look, Robbie Deans has the makings of a great team but Giteau I think is still problematic at 10 and causes all sorts of problems for Burgess standing so far back and not marshalling second receivers in his place. Barnes or Beale will add options that can get us that extra level in attack and free up Gits as a linebreaker in the dancing mode as we expect him to be.
I for one can’t wait !