Robbie, it’s time to be bold with your selections
Roar Guru
By LeftArmSpinner, 27 Aug 2009 LeftArmSpinner is a Roar Guru
- Tagged:
- Bledisloe Cup, robbie deans, Rugby Union, Tri Nations, wallabies
Related coverage
- Rugby Union news
- Wallabies news
- Tri Nations Tournament news
- 2011 Wallabies squad news
- Wallabies v All Blacks news
New Wallabies signings James O'Connor, Quade Cooper, coach Robbie Deans, David Pocock and Sekope Kepu at ARU headquaters, Sydney. (AAP Image/Dean Lewins)
The reality is that both the Tri Nations and Bledisloe Cups are gone for another year. The Springboks have been dominant in the Super 14 and the international season.
This is unlikely to change without some clever tactical and selection rethinks.
These re-thinks will also re-energise the players to believe that they have other options with which to crack the Springboks game plan and dominance.
The possession of the ball needs to become the first priority. Consider it as “Mother.” (With thanks to coach Mal Fraser of Hunters Hill for this tag!)
The playing tactics need to change subtlely.
1. Attack the breakdown with newfound ferocity all game. Bully the bully boys. They need some of their own medicine.
2. Keep the penalties to a minimum, and allow the Boks to have the slower ball from phase play. They will kick to the Wallabies anyway.
3. Reduce the amount of kicking. It has not worked and we are not good enough often enough. Also, our best out-of-hand kicker, Barnes, is out injured. Kick when in in your own 22.
4. Prepare to counter-attack from the Boks kicks. This requires more back row and back three support for the catcher.
5. Run the ball more and move it wide with plenty of dummy runners and support play. By moving the point of attack, the bigger Boks forwards will eventually tire, physically and mentally. Keep it in hand and move it progressively wider as you advance down the field.
6. There needs to be changes to the current 22. Some, such as Baxter and Sharpe, have already had their last chance and not taken it. Others need the chance to prove whether they can play at this level. My assumptions on availabilty are: O’Connor, Sharpe, Elsom and Barnes not available.
So 12 of the 22 are first choice, five are development selections.
My team:
1. Robinson (1st Choice)
2. Moore (1st Choice)
3. Alexander (1st Choice)
4. Horwill (1st Choice, when in form but not yet)
5. Mumm (Time to stand up)
6. Pocock (A chance to prove himself)
7. Smith (1st Choice)
8. Brown (no silly mistakes)
9. Burgess (1st Choice, but must keep improving)
10. Cooper (Development time, Giteau experiment has not worked, must find other solutions if and when Barnes is not around in the future)
11. Turner (1st Choice, but needs to get more involved)
12. Giteau (1st Choice, reflects the decision that he is not a 10)
13. AAC (1st Choice)
14. Hynes (1st Choice, in form and showing other wingers up)
15. Mitchell (Time to make 15 his own, if he can)
16. Fitzpatrick (development selection, but can throw straight)
17. Kepu (development, playing the house down at Randwick)
18. Chisholm (his experience gets him another chance, would have preferred Kimlin or Caldwell or Hockings)
19. Waugh (1st Choice) (or Hodgson: much of a muchness)
20. Genia (1st Choice) (Development more game time than last week’s 5 minutes)
21. Cross (safe utility for 11, 12, 13 14)
22. Beale (development and time to taste the big time, could do something special)
The bench also needs to stand up.
All players need to be ready to contribute positively to the Wallabies performance, rather than make up the numbers. At the same time, Fitzpatrick, Kepu, Genia and Beale need at least 20 minutes on the field, no matter the situation in the game, to give them a chance to show what they have at this level.
I don’t expect that Deans will make these decisions, but he should for both the immediate and longer term future.
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:
- Bledisloe Cup, robbie deans, Rugby Union, Tri Nations, wallabies
Knives Out said | August 27th 2009 @ 2:36am | Report comment
Does anybody else think that such a callow team would get a little bit of a beating? Very callow, LAS. It would not make for good viewing.
LeftArmSpinner said | August 27th 2009 @ 9:21am | Report comment
Knives, callow, no. inexperienced but full of youthful confidence and exuberance. If they have chosen well, the young guys shuould be capable of rising to the occasion with every senior game they play.
Conversely, the incumbents are declining and their good games are becoming rarer and rarer. You could get a few good games out of Sharpe by dropping him again. But, you shouldnt need to motivate someone to rep their country, and get paid 6-800k a year to do so.
The viewing would be very good. could the youngsters make it? the comments, even after a loss would be, “well worth giving the young guys a chance and they will only get better.” Look at the recent history: Burgess, Barnes, Pocock, Cooper, Alexander, TPN, Hodgson, Brown, Genia, O’Connor, Turner and Hynes.
Ben J said | August 27th 2009 @ 8:44pm | Report comment
LAS, the Wallabies have a wealth of youthful exuberance…but so do the Boks, also a young team in a few positions, Spies, Steyn(s), Beast, Brussow etc but yes this is a Wallaby team that can and should go out and go great guns because noone expects them to. I expect a cracker.
Knives Out said | August 27th 2009 @ 9:15pm | Report comment
You have this bloody obsession with money, LAS? Do you need to talk to somebody about it?! How do you know that Sharpe is not motivated?
Anyway, back on topic. Exuberance is fine but let’s recall England during the Autumn/Spring series. Johnson picked possibly the least inexperienced England team ever (for a major test series): Delon Armitage, Monye, Flutey, Cipriani, Care, Croft, Rees, Palmer and Payne. He told the team to play what was in front of them. Against NZ and SA they were shown up.. badly. When the 6N had come around Johnson introduced senior players like Cueto, Tindall, Ellis, Worsley and Shaw, and the results were astonishing. An aimless looking team had a direction and guile forced upon it by senior pros.Suddenly England’s laissez faire policy looked concise, accurate and dangerous. I was initially for giving the young guns a go but I now realise that emphatically it does not work. There has to be a balance.
LeftArmSpinner said | August 28th 2009 @ 8:12am | Report comment
The way he plays is a good indication. Despite all the obvious reminders, he still fails to get up for a game of footy. Robbie agreed and dropped him. Bingo. when he got his chance, he came back bigger and better, but it should not be necessary………
CraigB said | August 27th 2009 @ 7:59am | Report comment
enthusiasm can trump experience KO – Its amazing what you can do when you don’t know you can’t. Some of the current crop seem to be limited by their own baggage rather than any physical limititation. How else do you explain the ability to play well and slowly be brought back (aside from fitness, which I don’t believe is an issue).
Knives Out said | August 27th 2009 @ 8:21am | Report comment
That is true, but match skills are developed through experience, and a mature skill set will always trump a youthful (ergo skill-free) exuberance. That’s my opinion, anyway.
Technically the pack lacks balance. Horwill and Mumm are undersized, as is the back row. That automatically hinders the lineout, the scrum, the ruck contest and the forwards carrying game. It’s all well and good playing two opensides but if the front five is going backwards you might as well be playing Sonny Liston and George Foreman in the back row. And then there is Fitzpatrick and Kepu… Hell no, sir. In the backs the centre partnership looks good but Mitchell is the last man I’d trust at full back.
TommyM said | August 27th 2009 @ 1:53pm | Report comment
Horwill undersized? 200cm and 117kg? Wow KO, you must be a very large man yourself. There’s not too many players around I know of bigger than that…
Knives Out said | August 27th 2009 @ 9:16pm | Report comment
Don’t trust match stats, Tommy. Mumm does not look like a starting test second row. There’s some big boys out there, and then there is the issue of which side both locks prefer to scrummage given the inexperience of Alexander at 3.
LeftArmSpinner said | August 27th 2009 @ 9:27am | Report comment
Craig, spot on, and you must add to it, doing nothing is no longer an option. Sharpe, Baxter need to move on, Giteau is not a 10. face the issue head on, it has been tried for long enough. Other options need to be explored and given sufficient time.
Dave said | August 27th 2009 @ 9:38am | Report comment
The players need to be practicing their skills out on the field in a match situation.
As a Brumby supporter for over a decade, it pains me to watch how they have abandoned the philosphy that made them so successful. That is, they appreciate the ball, put the phases together, build momentum and pressure, and eventually the point and win follow.
Why was Larkham such a genius with ball in hand? Yes it was natural, but it was also practice. The brumbies almost refused to kick, and as a result, he was constantly given use of the football.
Does anyone think Mortlock would be anywhere near the player he was/is had he played for the tahs??? Of course not. He would never have seen the ball. His headlong charges at the opposition time and time again made him the incredible presence that he is.
Gits also benefited from this style of play (and playing between Larkham and Mortlock). He is completely lost without those two now however. He never once stepped up whenever Larkham was injured, and I see no signs of that improving.
Thankfully we have some great young 10′s to choose from. Barnes is the complete player. Cooper is a fantastic talent in the mold of Carlos Spencer (though is prone to erractic play too). Both have passing games that FAR exceed any other players of note in the world (Jones showed for the lions how excellent he is too though).
The wallabies need to us the ball. They need to build the pressure. We have 10′s with the vision and skills, gits with his fast feet and offloads at 12, a Mortlock like figure in AAC at 13 (and Digby waiting in the wings), pure pace on the wings with Mitchell and Turner, and a star of the future at 15.
We do have the players. We need to use them. Run the south africans around the field like the brumbies of old would do and we will but a cricket score on them. There is no way their big forwards are able to play 80 mins at such intensity.
Brendo said | August 27th 2009 @ 10:17am | Report comment
Fair point Dave, we’ve got some great cattle in the backs (and swapping Barnes and Giteau at 10 and 12 is probably a good call), but I don’t think anyone believes we’re struggling because of numbers 9-15.
The real problem is that we don’t seem to produce any monsters in the pack. The only world class lock we’ve had since Eales was Dan Vickerman, and even he was an import. I don’t know if we’re losing the really physical juniors to league and AFL or are simply failing to encourage them to continue into senior footy, but until we’ve got blokes that can dominate – no, let’s settle for compete – at the set piece and breakdown, then we’ll continue to get pushed around. I think the competition rugby gets from the other codes in Australia plays a big part – if you’re a big strong kid at school and the choice is to run at little kids on the fringes in league, play in the ruck taking marks and getting plenty of kicks in Aussie Rules, or jump in lineouts and pack down in scrums in rugby… well, I can empathise with the choice the big kids are making!
Dave said | August 27th 2009 @ 11:39am | Report comment
Brendo
You are not wrong at all. Our forwards are lacking there is no doubt.
Thats why I argue that its stupid to atempt to beat SA up front. We just dont have that abilty. We should be realistic and attempt parity in the set piece so we can at least get possession. We obviously must greatly improve at the breakdown.
In the past we have relied on Mortlock to get us 10 metres over the advantage line so that we are moving forward. Then our more mobile forwards would feed off that.
If I was to devise a gameplan, it would be to copy the tactics of the lions. They moved the ball away from the SA forwards, and had their back run at gaps which got them over the advantage line.
Its suicide attempting to out kick the Steyn’s or make metres up front aganinst their forwards. We have to be much smarter
Brendo said | August 27th 2009 @ 2:39pm | Report comment
You’re right mate – but what worries me is this: how long is it since you can remember us losing so much possession at the breakdown? How can we run at oppositions when we’re giving the ball away at every ruck?
Dave said | August 27th 2009 @ 8:30pm | Report comment
I cant remember… I keep losing my voice yelling at the TV as Sharp and Mumm stand there watching the opposition swarm over our ball runners…
Campbell Watts said | August 27th 2009 @ 4:37pm | Report comment
Dave I don’t think the Wallabies can play at that pace either!
Didn’t you notice how they fell off the pace against the AB’s last week – too tired to get their hands on the ball resulted in the AB’s getting something like 80% possesion in the second half and running away with the game!
Pace alone won’t win them a game – smart heads and great skills will be needed also.
Pity not much of that has been shown thus far in the 3N by the wallabies!
Dave said | August 27th 2009 @ 8:40pm | Report comment
Certainly correct, but thats why I advocate a return to the brumbies tactics of old.
It was ironic that the All Blacks played like the vintage era brumbies – while we played like the old Crusaders sides! . NZ’s passing and skills were ordinary, but they just kept attacking waiting for us to tire – while we kept defending with the hope of a quick turnover and penalty within kicking distance in a rare visit to their half. In fact, I almost expected to see Andrew Mehrtens step up to kick for us!
You simply cant defend for that long and not be exhausted. Thats why I indicated earlier my preference for the ball in hand tactic. Make the opposition tackle, make them tired, and wait for the inevitable breakthrough. How many games in the past did we see the brumbies and wallabies win in the final 5 minutes. That was because the pressure was being applied all through the 2nd half. The crack would almost always come.
Brendo is correct though that we cant win our own ball at the breakdown at the best of times at present! Sadly, I have no answer to that:(
Even looser said | August 27th 2009 @ 10:22am | Report comment
LAS is right “doing nothing is no longer an option”. When is the best times to make changes? For some people it seems the answer is never.
I’m not one for putting up the white flag but with this battle lost (Bled &Tri Nations) we need to look ahead to other campaigns such as the end of year tour. Otherwise when that arrives we will be equally ill prepared.
Surely this is THE moment to try new things with a view the future. In the process we may uncover some real talent and a better way to play.
LeftArmSpinner said | August 28th 2009 @ 8:16am | Report comment
and a change of tactics. my son and I go through the ABC summary of grade rugby (in the intro to each ABC Shute shield game) to learn how to attack. the subtleties….. lots of tries, lots of intent……….great rugby. I recommend the same for teh wallabies coaches and players.
Hammer said | August 27th 2009 @ 10:31am | Report comment
Lack of depth is the problem and the complete lack of world class talent – throw in the fact that the test players are surrounded by dross at the S14 level and are poorly coached – so they feel they can cruise through the S14 with zero ramifications – adds up to the current malaise …
This tri-nations was always going to happen – I’ve said from the outset that they’d finish a distant 3rd – and that’s based solely only the poor S14 teams … wallaby rugby has survived on a group of quality professionals for a considerable time – but now the last 1 or 2 can no longer keep the ship afloat … and when injuries occur Deans has no meaningful 2nd tier upon which to draw – Shute Shield is zero assistance so it’s back to moving the stools around …
you only have to look at Bearle’s presence in the greater squad – this bloke has shown over the last 2 seasons he’s not even up to handling S14 on a regular level … yet he’s being considered – and in fact touted by some as a meaningful bench option – Cooper ? – same as Bearle – far, far to inconsistent to be playing test football …
Australians pump up their young talent way beyond their actual ability … a classic example is this “Barnes is the complete player. Cooper is a fantastic talent in the mould of Carlos Spencer (though is prone to erratic play too). Both have passing games that FAR exceed any other players of note in the world” … that is absolute rubbish I was no Carlos fan but to compare Cooper to him is a joke … Barnes isn’t a complete player … and neither have a passing game “FAR exceeding” any other players of note in the world – that just ludicrous
Dave said | August 27th 2009 @ 11:16am | Report comment
Hammer
Im talking more in the context of the potential of some of our young players. Look at how Barnes perfomed in the world cup against wales. Put into the side at a moments notice at such a young age, and he calmly did his job beyond all expectations (and I was a fan of his while he was not being picked fro Australia). Ditto with Gits.
My point is that Barnes and Cooper are perfect examples of young talent that needs to be tested and given that opportunity. Maybe they are not yet ‘complete’, but you cant argue that Barnes is not a cool head who had handled himself well – especially given the lack of forward packs he has had to deal with at the Reds and Wallabies.
Cooper for my mind is very inconsistent. He has great talent though. Surely I am not the only one to notice his ability to throw those long passes in front of a player? In the Super 14 at least, I have not seen anybody stand out in that regard. Certainly not Beale or Gits. That was Larkhams real strength, and I believe Cooper given the opportunity to develop over time, will be a great asset. Its a shame he cant continue to develop with Barnes at the Reds. They compliment each other well. The spontaneous Cooper, with the controlled Barnes
Cracker said | August 27th 2009 @ 10:49am | Report comment
Here here Dave!
Nashi said | August 27th 2009 @ 10:56am | Report comment
Sorry LAS, can’t agree with your team, its not adventurous, its downright scary. We need only to look back at game 2 against the Boks last year to realise how badly we would get flogged. However we can experiment a bit in the pack. I would not play two loosies against the boks unless you can be confident of lineout parity at least. Mumm and Horwill? fat chance of that happening.
We always knew the hardest player post 2007 to replace was going to be Larkham. Like all great players he always seemed to have plenty of time and space. That is where our attention needs to focus. Gits needs to go back to 12. Barnes is OK at 10 when fit but we still don’t have any other options. So lets try something at 10 but for god’s sake not Beale! I just wish I had someone to suggest……..
Jack of said | August 27th 2009 @ 10:56am | Report comment
Lack of depth is one of the problems, along with fitness, skill levels & mind set.
A strong indication of lack of depth was Rocky & Hynes being called-up after injury, together with how well they went compared to others in the team. If depth & quality was good, these blokes would have a while to wait to get back in as someone else would have grabbed their opportunity with both hands.
Are alarm bells ringing at ARU HQ?
cookie said | August 27th 2009 @ 11:38am | Report comment
Wouldn’t do any harm giving Rob Horne a run either. Caldwell may at least put some pride and effort into it too.
Brett McKay said | August 27th 2009 @ 1:57pm | Report comment
Cookie, Horne would cover 11-13-14 as well or better than Cross does (defensively speaking, at the very least), and would be an investment in the future.
It’s a good call..