Wallabies wilt under All Blacks pressure
By David Beniuk, 19 Jul 2009
- Tagged:
- All Blacks, Bledisloe Cup, Eden Park, Rugby Union, Tri Nations, wallabies
106 Have your say
Related coverage
- Rugby Union news
- Wallabies news
- Tri Nations Tournament news
- New Zealand All Blacks news
- Wallabies v All Blacks news
The Wallabies’ Eden Park hoodoo will extend into a 24th year after the Australians wilted under a second-half onslaught from the All Blacks to go down 22-16 in their Bledisloe Cup opener.
Australia could not replicate an impressive first-half attacking performance in a tense tactical battle that finished at one try apiece on Saturday night.
New Zealand five-eighth Stephen Donald booted four second-half penalty goals to ram home the All Blacks’ territorial advantage as the Wallabies struggled under pressure at the breakdown and at scrum-time.
The Australians had led 13-10 after a bright first half in which centre Berrick Barnes scored in just the fourth minute before All Blacks captain Richie McCaw countered in the 26th.
Australia have not won at Eden Park since a 22-9 victory in 1986 and have not won in New Zealand since 2001.
“I thought we built a lot of pressure, created a lot of opportunities, didn’t come out of it as well as we would have liked in terms of turning that into points which kept the All Blacks close and allowed them to … grind it out,” bitterly disappointed Wallabies coach Robbie Deans said.
“There was some good play from our lads, we’re much better than this time a year ago but still frustrated to be short.
“We’ll just keep going and it’s a habit I guess we’ve go to acquire, but it’s coming.”
The Wallabies had got off to the best possible start when Barnes sliced through to score in just the fourth minute after good work from Giteau swooping on a loose ball.
Giteau’s conversion and a 10th-minute penalty goal extended Australia’s lead to 10-0 before Donald got his side on the board with a 15th-minute penalty.
The Wallabies should have gone further ahead but absolutely butchered a try when they had the Kiwis’ defence cut to shreds in the 18th minute.
Unfortunately it was Test centurion George Smith who dropped the ball with the line wide open, although Barnes probably should have passed to Stirling Mortlock a moment earlier.
“If I had my time again I would have passed it, but you don’t get that,” Barnes said.
Running with a helpful breeze, Australia would have been disappointed with their slender lead and the New Zealanders were back on level terms just a minute after the break through a Donald penalty goal.
The No.10 put them ahead for the first time in the match three minutes later before Giteau got the Wallabies back on level terms with a penalty of his own in the 46th minute.
But the momentum swung the New Zealanders’ way and they reclaimed the lead 19-16 with a 61st-minute penalty goal to Donald after a Giteau clearance had been charged down in the danger zone.
Giteau had the chance to draw level again but hooked a 64th-minute penalty shot from 30m out to the left and Donald booted another three-pointer in the 75th minute.
Deans expressed his frustration at several scrum penalties against tight-head Al Baxter, who he said had “good reason” to be upset with the refereeing.
© AAP 2012Recommend this story.
- Explore:
- All Blacks, Bledisloe Cup, Eden Park, Rugby Union, Tri Nations, wallabies
July 19th 2009 @ 7:30am
Matt said | July 19th 2009 @ 7:30am | Report comment
What a frustrating test.
The good:
*Sharpe and (and the forwards in general) who were certainly not dominated by the All Blacks.
*Giteau’s kicking for goal
*The back ability to create opportunities early on
*Some of the link play between forwards and backs
*Defence
The bad:
*Getting rattled and playing poorly
*Not having enough back reserves so Burgess could be hooked
*Much of Burgess’s decision making, kicking and passing
*Lack of composure at key times
*Lack of leadership, when it was needed to calm the more inexperienced players down
*Kicking in general play
The All Black deserved to win this, but boy, did the Wallabies blow it!
Pressure can make you do dumb things.
The positive is that (hopefully), in the future many of these younger players will realise the AB’s are not that much better, and that they can win if they have self belief.
July 25th 2009 @ 1:23pm
gavin said | July 25th 2009 @ 1:23pm | Report comment
Get rid of Dean and return Jones and Evans. Given the record of the St Joseph’s brothers they could coach a Wallaby side. I’m not kidding
Sorry but deans isn’t working out. Dunning should return, that take no nonsense attitude is required
July 19th 2009 @ 8:17am
Who Needs Melon said | July 19th 2009 @ 8:17am | Report comment
From the article “George Smith who dropped the ball with the line wide open”. That’s a bit rough! The ball never went anywhere near his hands – it was a hard pass from 3 feet away with both players moving in opposite directions and thrown straight at and into George Smiths head. Not Smiths fault – Barnes bad decision-making.
From Mike’s post “Sharpe and (and the forwards in general) who were certainly not dominated by the All Blacks”. I’m interested to see how many others share this perception. I felt the opposite. The Wallabies certainly didn’t dominate the All Black forwards.
I posted a list of things I was interested in seeing before the match in the form of 8 questions. Here are my observations/answers to my own questions:
Q1: The absence of Carter.
A1: The Wallabies really tried to pressure Donald and succeeded a couple of times. You have to wonder how much better the All Blacks could have gone with Carter in there.
Q2: McCaw vs. Smith.
A2: Smith was one of the few Wallaby players to have an above average game. McCaw was a little rusty – especially early on. I think this is one of the few occaisons I’d give a points decision to Smith. Well done on you 100th Smithy.
Q3: Our scrum.
A3: The result was terrible The Wallabies were NOT pushed around all over the park. I actually think the Wallaby scrum was probably stronger but you’d never know it from the results and result is all that counts.
Q4: The lineout.
Went suprisingly well.
Q5: Our backrow.
I think it was telling that two of our guys with the most ‘mongrel’ – Brown and Horwill – spent a fair bit of time injured and/or off the field. Sharpe and Mumm did their jobs but rarely seem to go above and beyond to my untrained eyes.
Q6: Will any of the backlines for any of the teams fire all do the teams all know one another too well by now and, like local derbies, they all be low scoring arm-wrestle affairs?
A6: Nope. Aside from the first 20 from the Wallabies, it was an arm wrestle.
Q7: Our newbies.
A7: JoC had a shocker. Genia I thought looked REALLY good in his short time on the field. Why he wasn’t brought on earlier to replace Burgess (who was clearly having one of his worst ever games) is beyond me. Pocock seemed to do ok when he came on late.
Q8: Who will end up in the number 8 jersey? Which Palu will turn up? Will Brown make the most of his opportunities – I’m betting he WILL get some.
A8: For me, all you seem to get out of Palu in a game is a couple of good-ish hit-ups and maybe one or two big tackles. None of them lead to anything. And he seems curiously absent or late or ineffective in rucks and mauls. A bit rough expecting too much from a guy his first game back perhaps but he ALWAYS seems like this to me. I’d be going to Brown from now on… only I’m betting he is injured now.
As Kearns said after the game, about the most heartening thing I can take out of the game was that, even though most of our players played well below their own personal bests, we still came pretty close. Both teams are only going to get better.
*sigh*
July 19th 2009 @ 8:20am
Yikes said | July 19th 2009 @ 8:20am | Report comment
Well I thought the All-Blacks absolutely murdered us at the breakdown. That’s where the game was won.
The Wallabies have never had a big clean out and counter-ruck culture, and it’s always been something of an Achilles heel.
July 19th 2009 @ 8:28am
fred said | July 19th 2009 @ 8:28am | Report comment
matt,yes composure,leadership and bench stand out as weaknesses.
isnt this responsibility of deans;what he gets paid for?
no progression;no belief;dress it up however you want,its more of same
come back carter
July 19th 2009 @ 8:59am
CraigB said | July 19th 2009 @ 8:59am | Report comment
can anyone explain how when woodock doesn’t bind, how the penalty goes against Baxter? Happened at least twice…
July 19th 2009 @ 9:00am
Mitch O said | July 19th 2009 @ 9:00am | Report comment
Matt,
The AB forwards completely dominated the Wallabies. Sure it didn’t look like it during the first 25 mins when they managed a few lineout turnovers and the game was at its most expansive. But test rugby is about the 15 mins before half time and the last 20 and in both of those periods the AB’s forward dominance was total.
Just how long are Deans’s Wallabies gonna be ‘building to it’? I mean the law of averages says they’ll win a game eventually but overall they continue to underwhelm.
July 19th 2009 @ 9:06am
katzilla said | July 19th 2009 @ 9:06am | Report comment
‘*Sharpe and (and the forwards in general) who were certainly not dominated by the All Blacks.’
Take away the Lineouts and yes they were dominated, comprehensively.
Breakdowns, Scrums, Tackling.
The All Blacks added more sting to every thing they did.
And NZ without depth showed that they still have more then OZ when Subs came on and the ABs just got harder.
Did Oz get an NZ lemon? Deans results aren’t much to crow about.
This ‘Group’ doesn’t seem to be ‘thriving’ as first thought.
July 19th 2009 @ 9:08am
CronullaKiwi said | July 19th 2009 @ 9:08am | Report comment
Matt you are seriously deluded mate. Watch the game again without your yellow glasses on and you will find the wallabies were smoked at the breakdown. The AB’s made excellent ground around the fringes and their clean out was first class. The very unlucky not to have a 7 pointer after Smiths blatant penalty. The scrum doesn’t need commenting on, the name Al Baxter says enough.
July 19th 2009 @ 9:13am
CronullaKiwi said | July 19th 2009 @ 9:13am | Report comment
CraigB, when one prop is bent over double and the other is sprawled out forward, what do you think is happening?
July 19th 2009 @ 9:26am
sheek said | July 19th 2009 @ 9:26am | Report comment
Melon,
Good observations. My thoughts.
Does the ref penalise Baxter on what he sees, or simply because it’s Baxter?
Does Burgess understand the fundamentals of scrumhalf play?
A new dawn occurs every day for 365 days a year, every year. No doubt we can expect the Wallabies ‘new dawn’ anytime soon, in the next decade would be nice!
Anyway, where are we? Is this 2009, or 2006, or 1997, or 1988, or 1972, or 1957, or 1946, or 1938, or 1925, or 1914, or 1903???
The more some things change, they more they stay the same………