Wallabies: fifteen players, but not a team
Roar Pro
By ozxile, 21 Jul 2009 ozxile is a Roar Pro
- Tagged:
- Rugby Union, wallabies
Roarers have collectively analyzed, and variously moaned about and defended almost every aspect of the Wallabies’ recent games – the one played last week and all recent vintage. I say almost every aspect because we have overlooked one – I’ll argue the most important one.
No Wallaby side in recent memory has really played like a real fair dinkum team.
Wrong you say? I don’t think so.
Yes they have won some tests and on occasion looked the goods. However, can you really point to any evidence that this collection of players – some great, some good, some indifferent, really appear to care about each other in a way that translates into cohesive and purposeful behavior and a sense of collective honor and pride?
Having all the best players does not make a great team – often just the opposite.
Great teams do not need to have all the best players – occasionally they have none. The Waratahs prove the former year after year. The early Brumbies proved the latter.
In recent years the only obvious things in common to the 15 Wallabies on the pitch were the color of the shirt and the direction they were facing.
I will leave it to someone else to run the ruler across the greatest teams Australia has produced to support or offer rebuttal on my contention. Note that I am not arguing that only those with winning records were great teams. I am referring to those that stood up and represented Australia well, earned the respect of everyone,and made us proud.
In recent years, win or lose, I have not found Wallaby rugby to be really satisfying. Even on good days it was always rather like the light beer commercials ‘tastes great – but (inevitably) less filling.’
The lack of a true team phenomenon translates into many of the current side’s pathologies – lack of commitment, lack of concentration, inability to finish off an opponent, inability to dig deep and come from behind with conviction.
Perhaps the most compelling proof of just how big a problem this is can be seen in the almost obsessive spotlight on the triumphs and failures of individuals.
Rugby at its best is a team game. That is when it is most satisfying to play and when it is most enjoyable to watch.
Not surprisingly this accounts for why we most often find matches decided by kicks to be rather devoid of real substance. We want to see rugby played by a team. We know the difference.
All of us have watched grossly over matched teams play with a true team spirit, a band of brothers, to the bitter end and come away with their heads held up, proud in the knowledge that as a team they may have been outpointed but they were certainly not defeated.
In another thread one of you noted that Mortlock was nowhere to be seen when the Baxter was being penalized over the weekend. Clearly nothing he could do about the penalty – but what about the team?
Yes, we see a fair amount of ‘teamlike’ celebratory milling around when a try is scored. It dates me, but in my school days that would have got us a dressing down later – win or lose. It was always a team try and in the end a team win or loss. If a teammate was having a bad day we all worked on the problem – with two subs for injury only, there was no choice. We were on the mountain roped together for better or worse.
Today we have lost something. The talk is about someone losing the game by missing a tackle, a pass, a kick at goal.
What happened to the team?
The Wallabies as a team didn’t lose last weekend. It was a loss by a collection of 15+ players who showed up in the same kit for a match.
When they had the ball they showed some basic social skills such as sharing the ball and agreeing to meet in small groups. They also seemed willing to try to get it back from the group in the other shirts when they didn’t have it. As long as they didn’t have to commit too very much it was great – and they got a nice shirt.
What was conspicuously absent on Saturday was a palpable sense that they were all in something together for better or worse.
This has nothing to do with individual anything, so comments about lacking mongrel or killer instinct miss the target set up here. I also don’t see this as having much to do with professionalism (professionalism, pride and commitment aren’t mutually exclusive, or with the charisma of captaincy – yes, Mortlock is devoid of it, but even McCaw would have trouble with this bunch.
So, what is missing? where did it go? Can we get it back?
Enjoy sports? Enjoy a bargain? All Sports Online has your favourite sporting brands at up to 70% off. Online only, premium quality sporting goods and merchandise at discounted prices. Get a deal now.
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Rugby Union articles
- Will Super Rugby crowds continue their slide? (201)
- Will South African rugby force a Super 21 by 2018? (173)
- The real story of how John O’Neill turned Manchester City down (70)
- Dan Parks and the unsolved questions of expat rugby (65)
- Australian teams at Super disadvantage (58)
- Pocock set to be named new Force skipper (56)
- Can the ‘Tahs win the battle after losing the Waugh? (51)
- France turns to Parra and Trinh-Duc
- Rebels look to lift for formidable Blues in rugby trial
- Mr Fix-It Lucas wants to nail down No.10
- Force roost loses ‘Mother Hen’ Sharpe
- Victory beat Mariners with Kewell winner
- Waratahs romp to 83-5 trial win over Samoa A
- Quade Cooper’s return to the Reds goes up a gear
- Wales show Southern Hemisphere how to play running rugby (29)
- What opening matches of Six Nations taught us (19)
- Will Super Rugby crowds continue their slide? (201)
- Clinical Chiefs cost rusty Rebels in Corio (9)
- Six Nations shows rugby is a parochial game at heart (5)
- Goose’s Super Rugby up-and-comer XV for 2012 (29)
- What does the future hold for the Six Nations (50)
- Explore:
- Rugby Union, wallabies
LeftArmSpinner said | July 21st 2009 @ 8:52am | Report comment
Hmmmm. I see a team when I look at the Wallabies. They play as if they know what the other is doing. Are they a team in the sense that they would die for eachother? They will go a long way for eachother but in the end, not as far as is needed in the competition that they play in. Their defensive efforts suggest a team spirit but they can go further.
sheek said | July 21st 2009 @ 9:05am | Report comment
Another poster has presented an article on Brad Thorn. A man of immense personal character & goodwill. He’s as tough as nails on the pitch, but a great man of society off it. People like him are the glue to a team, their moral & spiritual compass.
Richie McCaw is another. And I wouls also suggest Mils Muliana. Who of the Aussies would fit that bill? Stirling Mortlock & George Smith are decent people, but I don’t see them as thinking much about the world beyond rugby. Empathy is perhaps another word I’m looking for.
An understanding that being a professional athlete isn’t to be taken for granted. It’s a massive honour, carrying huge responsibility. But maybe I’m reading too much into this.
But look at the 1999 Wallabies. Guys like John Eales, David Wilson, Tim Horan, Andrew Blades, Jason Little, Steve Larkham (not george Gregan) appeared to possess massive moral fibre. George was too much of an antagonist, a shop steward.
WLN said | July 21st 2009 @ 10:59am | Report comment
The problem in the Wallabies that Deans never had to deal with in NZ is that there is a class structure. It’s one of the main reasons why leaguies don’t really gel into the team. Back when Andrew Walker was in the Wallabies and even the Brumbies he always felt like he and George Smith were second class citizens. So where were all the players willing to die for Smithy’s 100th on the weekend? Jim Williams appointment was an attempt by Deans to overcome this. But as the time for him to deliver results is fast running short it may be one hurdle too high to overcome.
matt said | July 21st 2009 @ 12:07pm | Report comment
I am not sure you could turn any of the current crop of Wallaby forwards into the type that hurls themselves into rucks and mauls like a Botha or Thorn. I hope there are some young up and comers with a bit of mongrel, but I am not holding my breath.
Robinson- plays too loose.
Moore – a possibility, but needs to work tighter and harder
Baxter – nuff said
Alexander – just like early Dunning, we need trench warfare workers more than we need try scoring props.
TPN -As above
Horwill – Showed early promise, but a French beatiing seems to have seen him lose his sting a bit.
Sharpe – The Lazarus of the pack, but hangs too wide waiting for a run rather than doing ther hard graft.
Kimlin – Like to see him given a shot, but once again, more in the athletic mold than the brute.
Mumm – You hardly notice him on the pitch.
Brown – Could be a goer if he go hard for 80 (or 60) mins
Pocock – A hard worker but too small for the Kaino/Thorn type role at the breakdown
Smith – A freak, imagine how little pill we would have without him, and precious turnover ball at that.
Elsom – Did not see a lot of NH footage, but he seems more a runner than a wrecking machine in tight.
Waugh – yesterday’s man, but who knows, could he be given instructions to wreak havok in close at No7 while Smith plays looser at 8?
So what does that leave us with?
Caldwell – at this level?
Hoiles – wrong style, too small and loose
Mowem – ?
What’s Rodney Blake up to these days?
Bonza said | July 21st 2009 @ 2:24pm | Report comment
Rodney Blake is playing at Bayonne in France without any fanfare – not a solution. Again where is the depth that the roarers were lauding only a few months back???? I suggested it was thin and it is
One Wise man said | July 21st 2009 @ 2:37pm | Report comment
The sad fact is we have not progressed at all from last year.
We keep patting ourselves on the back for beating a second rate France and Italy the Queensland reds team of test rugby.
On Saturday we came up against possibly the weakest AB side in the last 3 years and managed to just lose.
There were no big hit, no passion, in fact the Wallabies reminded me of the NSW blues in the first state of origin. Some good players occassionally doing some good things but didn’t want to smash the player with the ball or get stuck in at the break down.
De Villiers might say a few stupid things in the press but boy do we need the attitude the Spring Boks had in the First and second Tests against the lions.
Less talented players that play with Passion and a genuine urge to succeed (GUTS) generally win big games.
Justin Harrison had that attitude against Martin Johnston in the Lions last tour of Australia and who won the battle and the game?
Justin was just a fill in Wallaby at the time and Johnston was the master lineout player.
Spencer said | July 21st 2009 @ 2:39pm | Report comment
The Wallabies have just lost a test in Auckland by 6 points. Many teams have done this (and worse), including the mighty Wallabies of 99-2002. Let’s check back at the end of September.
Geez some of the guys on the Roar are fickle. Relax guys – it’s only sport!
Bonza – mate your glass is always half empty, and your posts are snipping, but without substance. No depth? Do you mean just like Rugby in Australia for the past 100 years (master of the bleeding obvious). Got any solutions ?
JB said | July 21st 2009 @ 2:45pm | Report comment
Interesting point and one that no reporter wants to go near as the next time he has access will be in 2019. This a similar issue to the captain to which the same rule applies. If there was a team in the real sense and a captain where were they when Baxter got penalised and where was the captain re Lote. There is a team there but you get the sense it will be developed by the coaching staff rather than evolving. From my somewhat distant experience, teams start to coalesce , a bit like the current English cricket team. They recognise individuals in the team for strengths and weaknesses but there is a captain and a spirit. There are too many shots being called off field and too many times the Wallaby captain is given an early mark. There are too many meaningless events which are supposed to demonstrate they are a unit.The other element is the team could be called the All Blands, where is its personality. Defence is terriffic but attack is what stirs the hearts of men. Regards JB
ohtani's jacket, said | July 21st 2009 @ 3:03pm | Report comment
I think it’s worth pointing out that Deans doesn’t always get the team dynamic right. From all accounts, he’s a hell of a guy and the Crusaders certainly have a great team culture, but there were prickly moments as there are with any coach/player relationship. Remember this is the guy who wanted to drop Tana Umaga for his boy Scott Robinson. The same Tana Umaga who went on to become the most influential captain since Fitzpatrick.
One day when rugby writers look back at Graham Henry’s tenure with more of a balanced view, I hope they realise the signifiance of Henry picking players from throughout the five major provinces and the way that he got the most out of Wellington guys and Auckland guys, many of them Maori or Pacific Islanders. I’m not trying to insinuate anything here, but there is a part of the NZ populace who believe that Henry picks too many Islanders and so on. I sincerely believe that Henry has strived to pick the best players regardless of stereotypes about stamina and mental toughness. In general, I think he’s done a lot for the team culture, because under Deans and Mitchell there was a drinking culture and a closed circle towards the media and that ended up being Mitchell’s downfall.
That’s not to ignore the number of All Blacks who’ve run foul of the law in recent times, but I think the overall team culture is solid and Henry & Co. seem far more open than people make out, even if Henry sometimes crosses swords with journos. Some expert of something or another mentioned by surprised at how eager Henry & Co. were to learn new strategies at a recent seminar they attended.
Past players are often brought in to help motivate or instruct the All Blacks, whether it’s Robin Brooke coaching the lineout or current player Dan Carter giving tips to Donald, so while there are some in the NZ rugby fraternity that would love for Henry & Co. to fall on their swords (as exist with any AB coach), there is still a collective will within NZ rugby to win. Look at the number of former All Blacks who attend Eden Park Tests every year, even without the capping ceremony than the NZRU organised this year.
A lot of ex-Wallabies are eager commentators on the game, but I still think Australian rugby could be more galvanised in their efforts to win back the Bledisloe Cup. Now that the All Blacks aren’t that crash hot a side anymore, Henry brings the actually Cup out for the players to get a look at what it is they’re trying to retain. Why not bring in ex-Wallabies who win the thing to inspire the players a little more? They need a bit of Dave Brockhoff-ian spirit. A bit of Phil Keanrs inviting Fitzy for a BBQ. Instead you get Deans openly praising McCaw and attesting to how much he loves beating the Wallabies.
Deans was an All Black. He played in BC Tests for the All Blacks. I have no doubt that he’s desperately trying to beat the All Blacks, but part of him has got to admire what McCaw, Thorn and Read did on Saturday. In some way, he played a part in the All Black victory as he has done for years now.
So get some other guys to come in and motivate the Wallabies. Back when I was a kid, in the late 80s, the All Blacks had it all over the Wallabies and it didn’t change until guys like Sam Scott-Young said “stuff this, I’m taking Fox’s precious little head off.” There were NO big hits from the Wallabies in that Test. That’s a problem in my view when backs like Nonu are putting in the biggest hits they can muster.
It may take some more time for Deans to understand the Australian psyche, because I think the Wallabies need motivating when they play the All Blacks. Jones used to always refer to us as New Zealand, which used to get under everyone’s skin, but it was a psychological ploy and it worked for most of his tenure. Connolly tried the McCaw’s a cheat angle, which wasn’t so successful, but what is Deans’ angle gonna be?
He kinda needs one, I think. “Playing what’s in front of you” is OK, but remember the Crusaders were for the most part a provincial team. Their fans needed no motivating when they took on the remnants of Henry’s Auckland side or any other team that fell outside the borders. He needs to find a way to instill that in the Aussies. Insead of the Wallabies being reasonably entertaining, it should be us All Black fans griping about the ref, the scrums, the offside line and the rucks and mauls.
He really needs guys like Gregan and Finegan and Roff who torment the All Blacks and operate behind guys like Horan and Eales, who have so much class it just makes you feel even worse.
This is a major ramble, but things won’t change until the All Blacks become more than just competitively afraid of the Wallabies.
Jack of said | July 21st 2009 @ 3:05pm | Report comment
Bloody hell! I’m as filthy about the loss as the next bloke but it all needs to be kept in perspective. Berricks dumb act alone cost 7 points. Score that try & suddenly the criticism dies away.
Having said that, even if we had of won (and it really was just sitting fat and plump for the taking) I reckon I’d still give ourselves a big fat F for our efforts at the breakdown. Too slow, no numbers and no insensity.
Trouble now is that (in my assessment) the All Blacks have more room for improvement in them than we do. At least with our existing troops anyways. Still there’s not a lot we can do about that and better we get on with fessing up (good on Barnesy for coming straight out and saying that he was a tosser) and getting on with improving skills and desire. We need to want to win it more than the other team.
Therein is the challenge for our Robbie. he needs to turn our blokes into silent assassins.