There were two plangent moments during the ACT Brumbies – Stormers match, an emotional event that will become known as one won for Shawn Mackay, rather in the Notre Dame tradition of winning ‘one for the Gipper.’
First, instead of a minute’s silence for Mackay there was a minute’s heartfelt applause which continued on for more than 60 seconds. This was a touching and relevant way to farewell a player who simply loved rugby, from playing it, to practicing it relentlessly (apparently his bleep tests were phenomenal) and to coaching the World Champions Australian Women’s Sevens side as a self-described ‘one of the girls.’
Second, after Patrick Phibbs scored the match-winning try for the Brumbies late in the second half he looked up to the heavens as he ran back to the Brumbies half, there were tears in his eyes, as he made his ‘this one was for you Macca.’
Phibbs was close to Mackay. They were part of a very good Waverley First XV in 1999. The side also included Stephen Hoiles and Morgan Turinui.
As it happened I live close to Queens Park where Waverley play their rugby. In 1999 I made my way there to see the home side play St Joseph’s. One of the Waverley coaches strolled across to me and said: ‘Watch our inside centre. He’s a great talent.’
The inside centre was Turinui. He played splendidly and scored, from memory, a couple of tries as Waverley defeated Joeys (I think).
The point is that Mackay was probably playing that day. And while the best of his team-mates still have years to go in their professional careers, he’s been taken away from us.
My ancestors, the ancient Greeks, explained the seemingly unexplainable of why some people die young with the parable of Achilles who was given the choice of a long and boring life or a short and vivid life. Achilles chose to seize the day. In a sense, Mackay will be forever young in the memory of his friends. Whenever we think of him it will be the image of him striding towards the tryline in his Australian Sevens colours, looking somewhat like a runaway Viking …
On to rugby, now. The Brumbies lifted their points on the table to 22, with six teams in front of them and two others, the Crusaders and the Highlanders also on 22 point.
The Brumbies are only 5 points behind the fourth-placed Waratahs who like the Sharks (on 30 points) are the only teams in the top nine who are yet to have their bye.
The Brumbies were helped by one piece of really dumb play by Shalke Burger. Late in the match Burger was charging towards the Brumbies tryline, about 10m out and with only Mark Gerrard (who had missed Jean de Villiers in a similar situation earlier in the game0 to beat.
Burger put in a chip kick! Gerrard could hardly believe his eyes. There was no one chasing the kick and even if they had the dead-ball area at Bruce Stadium is designed for the thin rugby league format.
With minutes from time the Stormers had a penalty from about 40m out. One of the threads on The Roar is critical of the Stormers for taking the penalty shot. But on reflection this was the right decision. The points were actually there on offer to take. There was still time to score a try, if the kick was successful, to win the match in the same manner of the Hurricanes in the last play of their match against the hapless Western Force.
As it happened, Peter Grant, missed the penalty and the theorising became academic. There is talk of Grant being offered a job with the Force next year. Say it isn’t so, John Mitchell. How can Australian rugby develop five-eighths if overseas players take the position from locals?
The Force as it happened did everything to win their match against the Hurricanes, except actually win it. They scored four tries to three. They led by 11 points with about 10 minutes to play.
Then the Hurricanes kicked a penalty. Shortly afterwards they scored a try and Willie Ripia took a lot of time to ensure he converted. This meant that with only a minute or so remaining, the Hurricanes had to score a try (but not a converted try) to win.
The Force rather conveniently gave away a full-arm penalty. Again Ripia was precise with his kick. From a lineout just inside the Force’s 22 the Hurricanes smashed forward and then released Corey Jane, a neat stepper to cut inside Nathan Sharpe to score the try their season needed.
The tournament is so close that if the Force had won they would have been on 23 points and only 4 points behind the Waratahs (with their bye round still open).
The Reds scored a try virtually from the kick-off against the Highlanders. For about an hour their backs looked like ripping the Highlanders apart every time they got the ball. Unfortunately, that was not often enough.
The Reds have to learn that expansive rugby depends on tough, grinding, ball-winning rugby from the forwards.
Then towards the end of the match they started to rely on Digby Ioane for every attack. The Highlander double-teamed him and the breaks he made so effortlessly in the first half dried up.
At the end of the match the Reds needed a try to snatch a victory that should have been there’s if they had played a smart game. The whistle sounded as they were awarded a penalty on the halfway mark. They had no option but to run the ball. But on the second phase Mark McLinden, who played pretty well aside from this mistake, grubber kicked the ball down field where is was joyfully taken in and belted over the touchline.
Why did McLinden put in this kick? James Horwill, after the game, conceded that the wrong option was taken. My feeling is that McLinden was in his rugby league mode. Did he feel that play would be over when the next tackle was made?
Or perhaps he’s being watching too much of the Waratahs who have definitely caught the kickitis disease. I talked with a noted rugby man before the Waratahs match and he told me that the level of skill of the players was incredibly low.
‘Why don’t they practice the skills at training?’ I asked.
He shrugged his shoulders.
At the beginning of the game against the Bulls, the Waratahs made a succession of mistakes that endorsed the criticism of their skills deficiency. Then Ben Mowen broke away. He only had to draw the fullback and pass to the winger for a certain try.
The pass was not given. Mowen was tackled ball and all. Miraculously, however, the Waratahs won the ruck and seconds later there was Mowen with the ball and charging into the Bulls 22 with virtually no defence to beat.
And what does he do? He kicks. Can someone explain to me why fast monsters like Mowen and Burger try a fancy kick near the tryline instead of barging through, over or around a flimsy defence to score?
I got rang up after the game and told: ‘After that terrible display by Waratahs, you’ve got to admit that the ELVs are ruining rugby.’
I told the caller that the opposite was the case. The rugby over the weekend was exciting and generally skillful, EXCEPT for the Waratahs. And the proof of that contention was the final match of the round when the last-placed Cheetahs thrillingly demolished the top-placed Sharks.
The Cheetahs did it with some terrific rugby. Their lineout, particularly, and their scrum were solid. Their loose forwards were everywhere, making tackles, winning the ball and then making charges that threatened to over-run the Stormers, which happened at the end.
Best of all, though, was the way the Cheetahs moved the ball along the line with a sequence of thrilling and menacing backline movements. The two flyers on the wings, Jonji Nokwe and Bjorn Busson, scored three tries between them and exposed the limited, defense-oriented, break-out game that has so far taken the Sharks to the top of the table.
The other aspect of this game that I found intriguing is that Nathan Pearce, the young Australian referee had a splendid game. Three times in the first four phases of play by the Cheetahs he warned the Sharks to move back to behind the last feet in the ruck.
With the Sharks about half a metre further back than what they’ve been allowed this season, the Cheetahs were able to get their wide game going, something that other opponents of the Sharks haven’t been able to do.
Without pushing this matter of non-neutral referees too much, it was interesting that Stuart Dickinson started to hand out full-arm penalties to the Western Force towards the end of their match against the Hurricanes for continual infringement at the ruck and maul.
This was something he did not do when the Waratahs played the Hurricanes at the beginning of the tournament at Wellington and conceded 19 short arm penalties and only a warning about a future long-arm penalty.
The Waratahs crowd, too, after having Dickinson and James Leckie refereeing two home matches against the Chiefs and the Highlanders (both won by the Waratahs) did not enjoy Jonathan Kaplan, an excellent South African referee, handling the match Bulls.
To be fair, though, to the crowd, it was sometimes difficult to work out if the booing was for the referee or for the Waratahs. If it was for the Waratahs, it was well-deserved.
If they want to be title-contenders they have to start playing title-winning rugby, which means more skills and brainpower being applied, and much less kicking.
Are they capable of this type of rugby? If the bottom team in the competition can play so exuberantly and aggressively, surely one of the top teams can do so as well.
Next Saturday’s match against the Force which is to be played at the Sydney Football Stadium (where a run of 11 straight victories for the Waratahs is now over) could provide an answer to the riddle of the Waratahs on why they are so high on the table when they are playing ordinary rugby.
- Brumbies V Stormers team huddle, photo by Darrell Wallace
Recommend this story.
- Explore:






April 13th 2009 @ 3:09pm
ohtani's jacket said | April 13th 2009 @ 3:09pm | Report comment
Please, it’s not even a quick tap. When the ref isn’t busy telling the opposition why he’s giving away free kicks or calling the attacking player back, all it does is restart the game. Take the tap, form a ruck… Anyone who thinks it’s sped up the game or lit up backlines is kidding themselves. The only thing it’s led to is dumb play. They should’ve just changed the law that only penalties in the 22 were kickable at goal. The fact that you can’t take the lineout option is weak. No wonder teams are becoming so lousy at lineouts.
April 13th 2009 @ 4:49pm
van der Merwe said | April 13th 2009 @ 4:49pm | Report comment
Two or three random stoppages per minute is not rugby.
April 13th 2009 @ 4:58pm
Spiro Zavos said | April 13th 2009 @ 4:58pm | Report comment
Cliff Bishkek your view from Kabul is very accurate. in general referees are not policing the offside line properly. I noticed, however, in the Cheetahs – Sharks boilover that the referee, Nathan Pearce, an Australian who did an excellent job, three times told the Sharks to move back their defensive line in the first four phases of the match when the Cheetahs had the ball.
This instruction to give about half a metre of space to the Cheetahs meant that the attack had some momentum before the defence crunched in. As a consequence the Cheetahs were able to mount a number of rousing attacks.
It’s been a bugbear of mine for years that referees have not policed the back foot line as stringently as they should.
The Sharks and the Bulls (Bakkies Botha in particular when he is not thugging players) invariably stand mid-way between the their last feet and the centre of the ruck in their defensive line. And just as invariably they get away with it, and stifle opposition attacks.
Hopefully other referees will follow Nathan Pearce’s example and allow the attacking team that extra little bit of space that makes all the difference in setting up attacks.
April 13th 2009 @ 6:42pm
Harry said | April 13th 2009 @ 6:42pm | Report comment
Strongly strongly agree that the offside line is appallingly policed to the detriment of the game. What is also a blot is the “lazy runner” getting in the way of all-too-rare attacking play in a broken field – these players ahe are alledgedly just innocently joggin back into position once a break has been made. NZ and Australian teams are particuarly bad offenders. Immediate yellow cards for players anywhere near the ball, erring on the side of over-penalising for a few weeks will I’m sure make the spectacle greatly enhanced- it needs to be.
April 14th 2009 @ 10:09am
Shocks said | April 14th 2009 @ 10:09am | Report comment
NZ and Australian teams may be particularly bad offenders of the “Lazy Runner”, but the South Africans well and truly perfected the art form in the late 90′s and early 00′s
April 14th 2009 @ 10:19am
Harry said | April 14th 2009 @ 10:19am | Report comment
Indeed Shocks, remember the Saffa efforts in the 99 RWC semi v Aus when some carefully timed lazy runners prevented Australia from scoring at least 2 tries. Fortuantely justice in the form of Stephen Larkham’s boot was waiting …
But its the area of the rules that is abused by the modern professional player that I hate more than any other. Bet you there won’t be any change however as coaches and senior influencers hate anything that lets free-flowing rugby (by definition harder to manage and coach for) prevail. This same group are the ones clamouring for reintroducing the rule that states you can’t pull down a rolling maul – a tactic beloved of unimaginative coaches and teams the world over as it legitimises blocking.
April 14th 2009 @ 3:13pm
Greg Russell said | April 14th 2009 @ 3:13pm | Report comment
Here is a comment that I made with an earlier article over the weekend but which is probably more relevant to Spiro’s one, because it touches on issues that he raises:
Although each loss occurred differently, I find a strong common theme in the Reds and Force matches this weekend: while the Australian teams more than matched their opposition in terms of the rugby played, what each team lacked was the nous and experience to turn this into a win.
This sort of ability comes purely from playing matches at a level like this. How are the rank-and-file (i.e., non-Wallaby) players at the Reds and Force to acquire this ability when they play just a dozen or so matches at this level per year, and otherwise they have nothing? What took the Hurricanes and Highlanders to victory this weekend was purely the experiences of their players, collectively and individually, from the Air New Zealand Cup. Until Australia’s rugby players are playing high-level rugby for 6 or more months of the year, they will continue to fall just short in the ways seen this weekend.
It is interesting that John O’Neill seems to have abandoned all notions of a high-level Australia-wide competition, and instead he is hitching his tent to the idea of expanding Super Rugby to a half-year competition. If he can pull off this coup, then great. But this is a big if, because the South Africans are certainly making things difficult. And who can blame them? Their Currie Cup is going gangbusters, so why should they imperil this just because Australia can’t get its own first-class rugby competition going?
Finally, I would once again like to vent my spleen about bonus points. It is ridiculous that the Brumbies, with a 5W/3L record, sit behind 3 teams on the table who have only won 4 out of 8. This is pure rubbish, and violates the fundamental principle of professional sport, which is that the W counts above all else. I completely despise bonus points!
April 14th 2009 @ 4:05pm
AndyS said | April 14th 2009 @ 4:05pm | Report comment
And even if J’ON does manage it, just how much will that further widen the gap between S14 and club? The other element I feel has crept into Australian rugby is a lack of competition for spots – with say 40 players in a squad, how much choice is there if a player isn’t pulling his weight? It is not like you can just go find a ready made replacement in the clubs, or frankly even one that is close. Bringing a new player up to physical and mental scratch is a two year exercise, so instead you just get musical contracts. Compare that to NZ and SA, where all the players are aware that there are any number of players getting high level game time and experience and would love the opportunity…