Clueless Wallabies lose again
By Jim Morton, 30 Aug 2009 Jim Morton is a Roar Pro
- Tagged:
- Bryan Habana, John Smit, robbie deans, Rugby Union, Springboks, Tri Nations, wallabies
269 Have your say
Related coverage
- Rugby Union news
- Wallabies news
- Tri Nations Tournament news
- South Africa Springboks news
- 2011 Wallabies squad news
A clueless Australia has slumped to a record 32-25 Tri-Nations loss to South Africa on home soil to virtually hand the Springboks the 2009 Tri-Nations title.
The Wallabies were blown away from the opening whistle at Subiaco Oval as they suffered a fourth straight loss this series, and a sixth successive Tri-Nations defeat dating back to last August.
The rampant world champions ran in four tries for a bonus point which puts them nine points clear of New Zealand with two matches each to play.
Australia scored two consolation tries to Matt Giteau and Lachie Turner in the last five minutes to add some respectability to the scoreline but nothing could hide the fact they were completely outmuscled and outplayed.
The unbeaten Springboks shelved their effective kick-chase game to run the ball and dominate the first half with quick phase play and set up their fourth straight win with a 22-6 halftime lead.
South Africa were simply too quick, too strong, too smart and far more precise and clinical than the home team.
By contrast the Wallabies willing game was mistake-ridden, particularly at the key moments inside both 22s.
A solid scrummaging effort – reaping three penalties – was well and truly offset by more turmoil in the lineouts.
Three times Australia paid dearly for poor throws to the back within a five minute period early in the second half after a jinking Giteau try had put them back into the contest at 22-13 down.
Hooker Stephen Moore paid the price for two bad throws which eventually resulted in Bryan Habana crossing for his second try and the Springboks securing a four-try bonus point.
It gave them a 16-point advantage and sealed just their third win from 17 matches in Australia since the Tri-Nations kicked off in 1996.
Their 32 points was their biggest score away to the Wallabies, eclipsing the 28-9 win in 1921.
Rookie fullback James O’Connor stood up to the pressure of the challenge while Rocky Elsom and Benn Robinson were also strong for Australia and replacement five-eighth Quade Cooper added spark in the last 15 minutes.
Springboks halfback Fourie du Preeze, who opened the scoring by taking a quick tap and catching Luke Burgess napping, was a deserved man of the match.
No.8 Richard Brown set the tone for the Wallabies by dropping South Africa’s first kick over the touch line. From the lineout, centre Jean de Villiers broke the defensive line.
The Springboks shot to a 12-0 lead after just 10 minutes when Jaque Fourie crossed untouched after Giteau was terribly exposed in defence from a midfield scrum.
Making matters worse for the Australians, five-eighth Giteau also missed two penalty goal attempts before finally landing one in the 28th minute for a 15-3 deficit.
Giteau finished with a personal haul of 20 points but the Australian attack looked more dangerous when he moved to inside centre and the elusive Cooper was injected into the playmaking role.
South Africa need one more point on the competition table to ensure they win the Tri-Nations but it will take a gargantuan effort by the All Blacks to sneak to a fifth straight title.
Wallabies coach Robbie Deans denied he was surprised by the Springboks’ effective change of tactics.
“They’ve always been a side that’s been capable of playing any which way they choose but their first priority is to win the Tri-Nations and they have done it and they have done it convincingly,” he said.
Deans defended some of his team’s basic errors due to the pressure brought onto to them by South Africa.
“Springboks don’t make it easy … and they punish you when you turn it over.”
Deans was particularly upset the Wallabies conceded two tries from scrums and blamed poor talk in defence.
“It shouldn’t happen.”
While Deans was disturbed at conceding the tries to Fourie and Habana’s second, both from Du Preeze passes after scooting off the scrum, the Springboks were baffled why they were often penalised at the set piece.
Captain John Smit described the treatment they received from referee Bryce Lawrence, who awarded Australia 15 to just four for the Spiringboks, as “bizarre”.
“It was a bit of a lottery out there to be honest and sadly the numbers weren’t coming up for us,” Smit said.
© AAP 2012Enjoy 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? (198)
- Will South African rugby force a Super 21 by 2018? (172)
- Brumbies 2012: New coach, new players, new attitude (128)
- Dan Parks and the unsolved questions of expat rugby (61)
- Pocock set to be named new Force skipper (56)
- Can the ‘Tahs win the battle after losing the Waugh? (51)
- What does the future hold for the Six Nations (50)
- Wales show Southern Hemisphere how to play running rugby (27)
- What opening matches of Six Nations taught us (18)
- 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:
- Bryan Habana, John Smit, robbie deans, Rugby Union, Springboks, Tri Nations, wallabies
Gerrard said | August 30th 2009 @ 7:02am | Report comment
On a positive note to the wallies, they never gave up.
sheek said | August 30th 2009 @ 7:19am | Report comment
Gerrard,
That’s how the British Empire began to become mediocre….. by finding consolation in any loss.
Daniel said | August 31st 2009 @ 10:50pm | Report comment
yeah sheek…u tell him!
and Gerrard be proud that you’re still from the SH man!
the worst team in the Tri-nations(the Wallabies) WILL beat the top team in the NH and thats pretty much it for the positives i think…
so to the Wallaby supporters pls dont let any NH mate talk smack to you
Green And Gold!!! (Springbok)
Gerrard said | August 30th 2009 @ 7:24am | Report comment
Mate, i’m only telling it like it was.
sheek said | August 30th 2009 @ 8:24am | Report comment
No Gerrard,
If you were telling it like it was, you would be demanding to know WHY & HOW we fell behind 0-15 in first 15 minutes; 6-22 at half-time; & 13-32 with 5 minutes to play.
You would be demanding to know how we could make such childish mistakes like turning our backs on the opposition to allow a soft try, or why we were continually out-muscled & out-enthused at the breakdown. And that’s just two examples.
Scoring two late tries is poor consolation to wear like some badge of honour. We were pathetic when it mattered most.
katzilla said | August 30th 2009 @ 2:04pm | Report comment
Sheek I think hes trying to be a gracious winner.
fred said | August 30th 2009 @ 6:36pm | Report comment
yep exactly ;we are turning our backs on opponents and we are supposed to be playing whats in front of us;
guess deans aint coaching it too well sheek
Michael Lee said | August 30th 2009 @ 7:28am | Report comment
Can’t wait to hear about this one. We’ve had Springbok thuggery, incompetent refs, ridiculous union rules, and the recent negative play by the Boks ie. their 1 dimensional kicking game – unattractive rugby. Oh and their try scoring, only capitalising on the opponent’s mistakes ie. accidental tries. what is this weeks excuse??? can’t wait to hear…
Ziggy said | August 30th 2009 @ 7:32am | Report comment
I was not a forward so can someone explain to me (and the Boks) why they were penalised so heavily for the scrums – loosehead and tighthead? Two of their tries came directly from set scrums and thereafter they were penalised at just about every one. Just as well as the scoreline may have been above 60 plus. Wayne Barnes is the ref next week and I bet you won’t find a repeat of this.
DanielJ said | August 30th 2009 @ 7:32am | Report comment
What a complete disgrace.
If these jokers think that it is ok to play with the gold jersey like that sack em all, who cares i am sure there are players out there who would give a damn and attempt to play with some passion. Right now, Burgess, Turner and Brown have all played their last test’s, how much longer will a coach’s/selector’s continue to pick these jokers who cost the team points….consistently. And another thing, all i read and hear every week is how god damn special all these players are, they are learning, this is good for them, they are almost there… This is bullshit, if anyone else was on salary like the players are and performed the way they did last night, you would get sacked or at the least you would not get paid the full match fee.
People will protest this and say “but if you don’t pay them then they will leave for Europe”, fine. Let them flee, the ones who stay would be the ones who gave a damn about the jersey and not the bucks, and that is what’s missing from a few of the players. I don’t mind seeing the wallabies lose, as long as they do it trying their guts out. Seeing Luke Burgess turn his back and walk back to the try line while his opposite number tapped the penalty and ran past him and scored is indicative of the “who cares we are losing again attitude” that prevails amongst some of the players. Remove these bad apples quickly and find more players who want the jersey and what it is meant to represent.
fred said | August 30th 2009 @ 8:16am | Report comment
yes a slow witted wallies who came back into game when bok had lost interest;what spin will deans serve up for this crap.deans should sack some of his “finds”
DanielJ said | August 30th 2009 @ 10:03am | Report comment
Not even slow fred, just a poor attitude amongst the group have a look at their general demeanor. it smacks of excuse’s. I really feel sorry for the small group of people that turn up to play. However, i do not think you can blame Deans, it’s the players that ultimately go out onto the field, all i am saying is that there is a lack of passion amongst the group you can see it, they are pathetic, they have given up after the game in Sydney when the time is now to step up, that’s a true sign of a team, even when there is nothing to play for they will play their guts out regardless. Something that is lacking in this Wallaby side.
P.s And forgot all this advertising campaign crap, like “its our game” “it comes from in here” its an embarrassment that’s what it is.
Bonza said | August 30th 2009 @ 2:14pm | Report comment
Dan – if there is “a lack of passion” what is the underlying cause for this?? Is it confidence in the playing style, direction or are the players inadequate. If this is the case then what are the players doing on the field? Who is picking them if they are not motivated or up to it? Chisolm was the only new face so this is deemed by someone to be the best group available to represent the Wallabies so who is making that decison? Why is morale obviously low? Is there a flow on from the way Tuqiri was exited? Lots of questions but we need to look for the deep rooted problems not just the surface symptoms – the game v the Boks is only symptomatic of the real problems
Mick Gold Coast QLD said | August 31st 2009 @ 1:35am | Report comment
“Is there a flow on from the way Tuqiri was exited?”
In what “way” was he “exited’? I do not understand any link between $otsa’s sacking and remaining player attitude, nothwithstanding RUPA’s attempted beat up that the players were uncertain of their own job security. Mortlock himself scotched that myth.
The bloke obviously did something that offended a contract condition and was sacked for it by his employer. Quite apart from the fact the ARU is not given to stupidity in its conventional business management (as distinct from its strategic decisions) events since make clear there was substance to it ($otsa discontinuing legal action and not pursuing league, which requires prior explanation by him of the reason for his sacking). And he had form, lots of it.
It’s drawing a long bow to link that bloke’s departure to the team’s poor performance. If it were so then they are more childlike than hitherto revealed.
Like $otsa and any other employee on an enormous salary, plus sumptious travel expenses, all they have to do is observe their contract conditions and the (no doubt) numerous written codes and earnest player code promises to be good for teacher. It should be obvious to them by now they do not even have to be good rugby players to continue receiving their big bucks.
wannabprop said | August 31st 2009 @ 10:54am | Report comment
Mick
Irrespective of whether you or I (and the ARU) believe Tuqiri deserved to be shown the door, do you honestly believe that a long-serving ‘mate’ that was sacked from the team, a decision that was publicly supported by the head coach (unprecedented), wouldn’t have an effect on morale, particularly with the senior players? Despite the talk in the media about progress etc from players and staff they haven’t looked like happy campers for some time now (coincidentally about the time that Tuquiri was dumped). This should in no way be construed as an excuse for their performance btw – I think they are indeed quite ‘childlike’ in their behaviours/attitudes (and not so different to the Leaguies as many want to believe). IMHO the Wallabies are, and have been for some time, the most pampered (until Deans took over) and over-paid of all Australia’s sporting teams.
fred said | August 30th 2009 @ 6:32pm | Report comment
coaching/leadership is what deans is not bringing to these players he is selecting;yes i totally blame him
MM said | August 30th 2009 @ 8:46pm | Report comment
Dan – I agree with Bonza. There’s a root cause and whilst I can empathise with you Fred, as was pointed out in a recent article on Roar, it’s likely to be a combination of both.
Deans’ comments of late have had stings in the tails at his own team and that’s out! It’s demoralising and demotivating. Deans has to take ownership as part of the team and not merely from a coach’s pedestal which is seemingly what he’s doing. In fairness, there was some great play by the Wallabies but who do they look to for a pat on the shoulder? I doubt to Deans. Albeit maybe harsh, my interpretation of Deans’ body language and facial expressions during the match were those of an “I” situation and not a team one. Unless he gets together with his team developing a win-win approach, the state of affairs will only get worse.
The same is equally true of the players who needed to support Deans and bring him into the fold immediately with a solution driven approach – the question here is, could they have been allowed to do that? Let’s not assume either way for now – clearly these are signs of what the root cause could be.
Yes, despite what goes on behind the scenes, the fans deserved far more than the players were willing to give – the nation deserved more honour and at times, these two primary principles seemed to be lacking in the conscience of the players. It is after all the players who take charge of the game. If the lack of discipline had been addressed long ago as it should have been, the results may have been entirely different.
The loss however shouldn’t be a shock abstaining from how the game was played as the Boks are a formidable force in toto. It’s doubtful the Wallabies would have made much difference if they were indeed prepared for the type of game the Boks played – the world of rugby has been crying about previous play and calling for the play which the Boks bombarded the Wallaby pack with. It has to be borne in mind that this Wallaby team comprise of a largely young pack who would naturally lack in the required experience to play whichever game comes their way in the moment.
Matt Giteau needed to come down to mother earth – it is the prevailing attitude of superiority which is not a recipe for success as was proven.
DanielJ said | August 31st 2009 @ 9:07am | Report comment
Bonza & MM
I am not suggesting that Deans is completely fault free as he is the one selecting, but can you blame the guy if he is told by players that they will do their best before the game and fail to show up during it? Even you guys cannot deny the evidence of the game on Saturday night that at least 3 or 4 key players did not turn up and did not show enough determination or put in a complete error prone performance –
Turner – Past 3 games conceded 3 tries (yes, the one on Saturday was a complete fluke for Habanna)
Burgess – Past 3 games – consistent and dreadful passing
Moore – Past 4 games – Has conceded the most penalties of all the team.
Brown – Past 3 games – Conceded 2 yellow cards, put the ball out 2 twice giveing boks field position where the result was a score for the boks
Yes the Boks played wonderfully and they ran the ball, and won the match, and applied pressure to the wallabies to create these errors. These guys are elite athletes, and are on good money, they are young yes but have played enough tests now to warrant the kind of scrutiny they are getting.. As i stated, i don’t mind seeing the team lose as long as they do it by playing their guts out, like the previous match against NZ. To see players laughing whilst shaking the hands of the Boks (whilst goods sportsmanship) to me, at least shows a poor attitude within the group. That’s all i am saying, yes Deans needs to account for some poor selection but you cannot blame him for giving the players the opportunity to make good on them putting their hands up on past performances. Now is the time for change, Brown, Burgess, Moore and Turner need a clip under the ear, replace them.
Rocky for Captain
peace.
JP said | August 31st 2009 @ 10:02am | Report comment
You are right of course – Professional athletes have to perform or face the music. The ARU and the coaches seem to focus more on how much they are playing this group than dropping them out of the 22 and bringing in players who are hungry. As for Deans I was and probably am a fan, but a mug could have coached Australia to our current level.
They need to flick the underachievers and start looking at who is playing well in the Shute Shield.
Front Row – Is OK – Scum Penalties are a lottery
Second Row – I thought they were OK – Not a Sharp fan
Back Row – Hoyles at 6, Smith 7, Rocky at 8 – Waugh on the bench
Half Burgess has to go and I mean right out of the 22, Brett sheen is playing great rugby and would have loved last nights game.
Quade or Berrick at 10
Gitts at Inside
Cooper at 13
Mitchell back on the wing
Pay structure needs to be changed to Test Payments and winning incentives. If the current crop of losers don\’t like it send to league or OS – Australia does not need them!!!
Thats it for me
JP
DanielJ said | August 31st 2009 @ 4:19pm | Report comment
JP – My thoughts exactly on the selection, however today Deans has hinted at a not so drastic line up change… pity it would appear he will need a new analogy to describe awarding mediocre performances. It is his prime opportunity to do this….
BennO said | August 30th 2009 @ 7:40am | Report comment
The boks played superb rugby last night. I hate losing to south Africa more than any other team, but that changed last night. They were thoroughly deserving winners playing such skillful, clinical running rugby. Very impressed. And on theback of a scrum that got monstered.
I disagree that Elsom was solid for us, he knocked on three times during the game. Burgess’ passing game was apalling last night but sadly genia wasn’t much better. Still that swap must be made.
So many poor performances from us, I’ve dramatically lowered my expectations for the future.
anopinion said | August 30th 2009 @ 8:23am | Report comment
Genia’s passing was a lot better than Burgess. Try doing this, pause the game and click the forward button. How many clicks does it take for the ball to be readyat the back of a ruck till it touches the flyhalfs hands. Genia beats Burgess by about 4 clicks consistently.
reds fan said | August 30th 2009 @ 8:35am | Report comment
yeah the speed with which he gets it out of rucks was very obvious. the other thing i loved is that when he saw they were couner rucking and that possession was in jeopardy he stuck his head in there and sured it up! he didnt stand there waving his arms about while the ruck fell apart in front of him.
anopinion said | August 30th 2009 @ 8:43am | Report comment
He did get stuck in to rucks a bit. Secured us a couple of ruck wins.
Dexter William said | August 30th 2009 @ 1:50pm | Report comment
I thought I was the only one who saw the arm waving! Thanks RF.
I was screaming at the TV when Burgess just stood there waving his arms, rather than to shore up the ruck himself. We lost a few rucks because of his dim wittedness. He must not only be out of the team, he must go back to grade footy to learn his trade.
Deans are you blind to all this. This is not the first time that Burgess is doing this. He also cannot pass and his timing behind the ruck is dreadful.
joeb said | August 30th 2009 @ 8:29am | Report comment
I don’t really think we played as poorly as some critics are suggesting – can’t really understand why Turner is being criticised; as Marto called it, it was just one of those freakish things that happens in rugby when the ball is coming at you as well as two opponents all at the same time, a slight fumble, Habana snaps it up ‘like a thief in the night’ and is gone.
We need to reinforce our faith in Deans and the team – it’ll all come good yet. When Cooper came on and went to 5/8th late in the game and Matt Giteau went back to his rightful inside centre position our backline started to look dangerous as the Seven commentators made mention. We still need a little more grunt in the forwards, maybe it’s time to rest Brown and call up Hoiles to No.8, and where’s Waugh these days when Smith tires?
For next weekend it’d be great to see Cooper start at 10, Giteau at 12, AAC at 13, keep the same two wingers, and try Genia at 9 from kick-off though he doesn’t have Burgess’s defensive ability. Also having a slightly taller 5/8th, i.e. Cooper might improve Burgo’s passing accuracy… Matt’s a little too short for the 10 position, but is a hell of a fantastic inside centre!
anopinion said | August 30th 2009 @ 8:50am | Report comment
I do agree Joeb in showing faith in Deans and the Team. We are all just beating Deans to the punch by naming his changes. Brown, Burgess. I think Giteau should have a few more games with Genia’s service before we call for him to be moved to 12. He should also be paired with an experienced in centre.
I respect Deans showing faith in the players he has chosen. They seem to be getting every chance to perform or fail. Those that fail shall have no excuses, when they get dropped it shall be for good.
Corvus said | August 30th 2009 @ 7:53am | Report comment
Thw Wallabies started to look very threatening as soon as Giteau went to inside centre. Genia’s service which while still slightly wayward but was much quicker than Burgess which gave them momentum. Quade did well but who knows which Quade is going to turn up on the day. Barnes at 5/8 has to be a reality.
The Boks are almost unbeatable at the moment but the same cannot be said for the AB’s. The only way to salvage some sort of pirde out of this season is to win in Wellington. Hopefully they can also do it Brisbane. If the wallabies put on a performance in Brisbane like they did in the first 65mins in Perth then I’ll be asking for my $140 back.
MikeN said | August 30th 2009 @ 8:10am | Report comment
This was one of the most diappointing loses that I can remember. Tonga being the last one.
This ne showed we are going backwards and while I have been a great supporter of Deens, this one has started to put doubt in my mind.
First, selections. Two crash bang centres, replacing an undersized number 8 with a small open side flanker when you are under pressure in the lineout and you have a superb jumper (Mumm) on the bench, keeping the incredibly shrinking talent of Burgess on so long,
Secondly, strategy. Why have we gone with this lining up stationary forwards next to the ruck, waiting five minutes so the opposition can prepare their defence and then pass it to those flat-footed forwards who duly run into the opposition defence. Worse, we do it 13 times until we hand the ball over. Where is the counter attach we saw from previously Denn’s coached teams. In the second half, the Bok’s chase was not as intense but we still kicked the ball back to them. Why do we have back rowers trying chip kicks. Smith’s one in the first half completing killed our momentum (like his cut back last week) and we wound up back in our 22 as a result. Where is the depth of attach, we just pass across the line (the few time the stationary forwards weren’t used), with no-one coming from depth and/or a different angle.
This was, except for the scrum, grade f all round, coaches and players.
anopinion said | August 30th 2009 @ 8:27am | Report comment
Many years of coaching and playing have taught me. Replace a winger with a winger, number 8 with number 8 and so on. Do not try to teach AAC to play in centre he will not master it in time. Did we learn nothing from the Tahu debacle?
Skip said | August 30th 2009 @ 8:14am | Report comment
Despite the loss wasnt it great to have a competent referee.
The scariest part of this game is that we now know the Boks can paly attacking rugby are they unstoppable?
fred said | August 30th 2009 @ 8:18am | Report comment
gosh i love watching a competent ref but still enjoy a competent wallies more
QC said | August 30th 2009 @ 8:32am | Report comment
Hahaha wait til the NH boys arise they are not going to like that comment Skip
I do agree however, it totally changes the dynamic of the game and makes it a spectacle to watch.
Running rugby was great and look at the try fest it produced
pothale said | August 30th 2009 @ 8:53am | Report comment
QC, actually I agree it was great to watch a competent ref – just like the ones in the last few games.
It was also great to watch that the Wallabies and NZ are starting to learn not to give away so many penalties. A bit like England at the opening of the 6N, it took them a few games to get rid of the habit. But rid it, they did. And lo and behold, people starting running with the ball, and scoring tries. I think that’s 18 tries over 6 matches – glad to see the SH average is finally improving under the no free kick sanction.
It’s also great to see that you have seen the light and realised that rugby isn’t dead – just yet.
Skip said | August 31st 2009 @ 10:36am | Report comment
Sorry Pothole,
That was the first display of competent refereeing that we have seen durig the Tri Nations. The rest of ref’s have been over officious. I do agree Australia showed better discipline and reduced the penalty count.
The running rugby was due to,
1. A change of tactics by the Bok’s
2. Policing of the off side from the kick and chaser’s being outside the 10m
3. No blowing the whistle for evey minor infringement that had no bearing on the game. This allowed teams to have confidence that they could take a ball into the ruck.
pothale said | September 1st 2009 @ 7:37am | Report comment
Oh stuff and nonsense. There were plenty of penalties awarded in the game. The fact that tries had been scored earlier on made them less conspicuous.
Better discipline and reduction in penalties = ref has to be less officious and can let the game get on. It’s not that difficult to work out.
The running rugby was due to a change of tactics by the Boks – I absolutely agree. Which is what I have been arguing was still there in the game – and had been earlier in the year in NH comps and in the Lions series. All the doom and gloom that rugby was all about the kick and chase game, blah, blah. Suddenly all that baloney has gone now that the Boks have scored tries.