Deans makes changes to Wallabies on principle
By Jim Morton, 2 Sep 2009
Jim Morton is a Roar Pro
- Tagged:
- Adam Ashley-Cooper, Ben Alexander, Benn Robinson, Berrick Barnes, David Pocock, Drew Mitchell, George Smit, James Horwill, James OConnor, Lachie Turner, Mark Chisholm, Matt Giteau, robbie deans, Rocky Elsom, Rugby Union, Tatafu Polota-Nau, Tri Nations, wallabies, Will Genia
Robbie Deans has shown a surprise ruthless streak in banking on generation next opening the winless Wallabies’ Tri-Nations account.
In a further glimpse into the future, Deans wielded the axe for five changes to Australia’s starting XV and two more on the bench in a bid to “chase solutions” against South Africa on Saturday night.
While the injections of rookie halfback Will Genia and the return of Berrick Barnes to the No.12 jersey were expected in the backline, all were caught off guard by the promotions of Tatafu Polota-Nau and David Pocock to the starting pack.
Winger Peter Hynes also surprisingly paid the price along with Luke Burgess, Ryan Cross, Stephen Moore and Richard Brown from the 32-25 loss to the Springboks in Perth.
Veteran tighthead prop Al Baxter was cut from the squad completely and told to work his way back from clubland while second-row stalwart Nathan Sharpe was given extra time to recover from a shoulder problem all but fixed.
Coach Deans, searching for a first Tri-Nations win in 12 months after six straight losses, defended the changes, which also included punting on Western Force loosehead Pek Cowan to fill in at tighthead if Beast Mtawarira savages Ben Alexander.
“We tend to approach it from a squad perspective,” he said on Tuesday.
“This is by no means tokenism nor is it (wielding) a stick.
“Some of these blokes getting their first start have earned their right, it’s not something out of the ordinary, they have shown already (they are capable).
“It also shows there are no guarantees for the future.”
With the 2011 World Cup still more than two years away, Deans has shown extra faith now in the youngsters who are expected to feature prominently then.
After losing to the world’s two leading rugby nations twice each in the last five weeks, he admitted the selectors were looking for new “points of difference” to bring success at Suncorp Stadium.
“Because to go harder just doesn’t cover it,” Deans said. “We’ve chased some solutions and I guess the rest remains to be seen.”
One of the biggest “points of difference” appears to be Australia’s back-row composition with Pocock selected for his first Tri-Nations start and captain George Smith shifting to No.8 to replace the dumped Brown, who also missed out on the bench to Wycliff Palu.
The Western Force openside flanker grew up in Zimbabwe supporting South Africa and idolising Springbok No.8 Bob Skinstad before his family moved to Brisbane.
Deans described Pocock more as a blend of Smith and Phil Waugh and he’ll need to bring the best of both to help prevent the world champions getting the same quick phase ball they enjoyed at Subiaco Oval.
“We’ve got two blokes who are very good in that area so George can profit from the work of Poey,” the coach said. “If he drops a player, George will be on him quickly so there could be an opportunity there for us.”
Barnes (concussion) has returned in the No.12 jersey at inside centre despite calls for Matt Giteau to be moved from five-eighth to inside centre.
Deans, though, gave chuckling hints those wanting Giteau to run wider may be pleased come Saturday night.
“You will see them in both roles in the game,” he said. “We thought we’d keep the numbers the same so it doesn’t confuse them.”
In contrast, the unbeaten Springboks made just one injury-enforced change to their XV with winger Odwa Ndungane replacing JP Pietersen.
WALLABIES:James O’Connor, Lachie Turner, Adam Ashley-Cooper, Berrick Barnes, Drew Mitchell, Matt Giteau, Will Genia, George Smith (capt), David Pocock, Rocky Elsom, Mark Chisholm, James Horwill, Ben Alexander, Tatafu Polota-Nau, Benn Robinson. Res: Stephen Moore, Pek Cowan, Dean Mumm, Wycliff Palu, Luke Burgess, Quade Cooper, Peter Hynes.
© AAP 2012
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.
Ash the Prop said | September 2nd 2009 @ 9:18am | Report comment
Maybe Deans should make changes based on physics:
I am a seasoned prop and have played in the front row for 20yrs against some of the hardest customers you could imagine back in NZ including Richard Loe and Billy Bush. Robbie Deans is a back and not many people understand the physics of the front row. Did you notice in Perth that the scrum went better when the hooker was shorter than the props i.e. when Moore went off and Polatu-Nau came on. In fact a shorter front row overall with the hooker shorter than his props will do better against a taller opposing front row especially when one of them is a hooker (Smit).
This is because there is less chance of buckling under pressure. One just has to think about the second rowers trying to push onto an uneven platform (the backsides of the front row) the uneven surface area limits the total impact. How is the gripping sequence going? maybe this needs to be modified. I am a strong beliver that the game starts up front its where the spirit of dominance is set, when that changed in Perth so did the scrum and the Wallabies started scoring.
Putting Genie on is a good move why because his shorter and lower to the ground, however you need a taller 1st five to recieve passes propelling to him from a lower position, hence Giteau is a 2nd five build. I would not put george smith in number 8 because he is not a number 8 build he is proably better suited to number 6, Australia just needs to find a solid number 8, just teach Brown how to catch or get Palu to harden up!
submitted in the hope the Wallabies win in Brisbane, ps Physics is one thing, Having a big Heart on the day is another both are needed!
Viscount Crouchback said | September 2nd 2009 @ 1:03pm | Report comment
I’m not sure about that. The England front row has deteriorated rapidly since the midget Mears was let loose at hooker.
Mike Cron claims that taller front rowers use their legs more, whereas smaller chaps tend to employ their upper bodies. I have no idea if this is the case, but if anyone ought to know, it’s Mr Cron.
Knives Out said | September 2nd 2009 @ 11:49pm | Report comment
–
I thought that a smaller hooker was easier to split from his props, especially if they are particularly tall, as Sheridan and Vickery are – not that that detracts from what you’re saying ATP. Alexander is quite a tall guy, Ask the Prop?
Oh, btw VC. I had an interesting chat with Chilcott who confirmed that Vickery has always been a poor scrummager, even at club level. Hate to say I told you so.. but I did. It will be interesting to see if David Wilson can step up to the plate this season. Incidentally, I think that ATP is saying that a smaller hooker is good with smaller props not that a small hooker is good fullstop.
Knives Out said | September 2nd 2009 @ 11:50pm | Report comment
I thought that a smaller hooker was easier to split from his props, especially if they are particularly tall, as Sheridan and Vickery are – not that that detracts from what you’re saying ATP. Alexander is quite a tall guy, Ask the Prop?
Oh, btw VC. I had an interesting chat with Chilcott who confirmed that Vickery has always been a poor scrummager, even at club level. Hate to say I told you so.. but I did. It will be interesting to see if David Wilson can step up to the plate this season. Incidentally, I think that ATP is saying that a smaller hooker is good with smaller props not that a small hooker is good fullstop.
Viscount Crouchback said | September 3rd 2009 @ 9:34am | Report comment
Yes, I think you were right about Vickery. All the chat coming from inside the game since Durban tends to accord with your view that he is fundamentally a pretty ordinary (to use an Australianism) scrummager. That said, the weight he lost prior to Durban certainly will not have helped his performance.
I take nothing back about Mears, however.
Knives Out said | September 3rd 2009 @ 10:27pm | Report comment
I think a lot of people probably would think that Vickery is a decent scrummager based on the dominance of England’s pack during the 00-03. However, the eulogisation of that pack is pretty much a myth. England used to have some torrid times against the French and Italians, as I recall. They were a dominant force but not to the extent that people recall.
I suspect that Mears will be the bench option for England this summer, but given Johnson’s preference for Thompson over Hartley during the 1st Argentine test maybe he will start after all. He is a useful player.
Knives Out said | September 3rd 2009 @ 10:28pm | Report comment
–
I think a lot of people probably would think that Vickery is a decent scrummager based on the dominance of England’s pack during the 00-03. However, the eulogisation of that pack is pretty much a myth. England used to have some torrid times against the French and Italians, as I recall. They were a dominant force but not to the extent that people recall.
I suspect that Mears will be the bench option for England this summer, but given Johnson’s preference for Thompson over Hartley during the 1st Argentine test maybe he will start after all. He is a useful player.
Terry Kidd said | September 2nd 2009 @ 10:28am | Report comment
Well said Ash. I was a loosey and never had to listen too much when our coach spoke to the locks about binding and shoving, but your words struck a memory cord when I remembered that the same coach preferred a prop who was shorter than his team mate rival but in our eyes was an inferior player …. but I also recall that our scrum was pretty formidable and rarely got monstered.
I do wonder how Pek Cowan gets the call up over Sekope Kepu though. Am I right in saying that Kepu is probably more experienced at either side of the scrum and Cowan isn’t? Physics wise they are both about the same height.
Harking back to my words in another post. The players are now selected, so how are they going to play to win? I don’t expect Deans to openly state his plans in the media but I do want him to be planning to win, not be planning to counter whatever the Boks serve up.
Judging by last week we can expect 50% of the ball and should expect to win our set pieces. Therefore we should be expecting to attack off our set pieces. I think Barnes will play 10 and Giteau will play 12. I hope we will only kick as a last resort and that the backs will be standing deep, expecting the ball, and expecting to run onto it. I hope we run, and run, and run, and run …. but in doing so not get isolated and recycle possession.
Blinky Bill from Bellingen said | September 2nd 2009 @ 10:39am | Report comment
Interesting reading about physics and the front row. Cheers for that.
The idea of having a running game in Brisbane is the right one. So many have commented about our backs being small, so let’s spin it and attack them at every chance. I dream of one of our boys attacking the line and off load after off load until we’re over the line. Am I asking too much?
At present there’s just too much one off individual stuff going on IMHO. Where’s the Aussie idea of backing up your mate?
LeftArmSpinner said | September 3rd 2009 @ 9:25am | Report comment
Kepu is way ahead of Pek, and pek is also going well in grade.
yea, lets attack of set pieces and hope that barnes is at 10. take the boks defence on and get some quick ball and support play. it is such an obvious way to get an overlap and yet, so rarely used these days. very effective if the team is going forward.
cookee said | September 2nd 2009 @ 10:46am | Report comment
JIM ,’DEANS showing a ruthless streak is bs;he stubbornly played his selections and dumb tactics and now is forced to change on the hoof what everyone was crying out for from beginning;;another excuse for failure if wallies lose.
we will see barnes take half the park at ten(left side )and gits the other;major genius.
Jolly Jupes said | September 2nd 2009 @ 7:20pm | Report comment
Cookee – what i find interesting is that post the test v SA Deans lectured the press about not sacrificing the young players for the long term gain and he was not going to wield the axe etc now we have 6 changes (sharpe, baxter,waugh seem to gone for good) Ok there needed to be some action but I wonder what was the trigger for the about face in strategic thinking. We certainly have taken a massive gamble on the tighthead prop situation and we seem to be drifting back to the multi openside strategy which I thought had been disbanded. I wonder if someone has been tapping Deans on the shoulder or he is getting the hang of the media pressure that exists here in oz
Justin said | September 2nd 2009 @ 11:07am | Report comment
Agree cookee… its hardly ruthless to drop a bloke who has been abysmal in his critical skill since he started with the team. Its long overdue Burgess was dropped. Jim is having a laugh surely!!!
Jameswm said | September 2nd 2009 @ 12:54pm | Report comment
I’d always understood it to be a French theory that all three front rowers should be of roughly even height.
Worlds Biggest said | September 2nd 2009 @ 2:07pm | Report comment
Why isn’t Rocky Elsom tried at No 8 ?. I think he is just the guy to fill this glaring hole since Kefu retired. Elsom has the alround game and would handle No 8 on his ear, why he isn’t considered is beyond me ?. Yes this move would create another headache as to who will play Number 6. Dean Mumm has not taken his opportunities and isn’t a Test player IMO. What about giving Scott Higginbotham a run at 6. Changes had to be made for this game. It will be interesting to see how Pocock goes starting. Deans has finally run out of patience with his pet Burgess. I would have liked to have seen Barnes at 10 and Gits at 12.
Bob McGregor said | September 2nd 2009 @ 3:55pm | Report comment
Not sure that Deans has ‘shown a ruthless streak’ as he has done what was bleeding obvious. Certain players needed to be dropped from the 22 for a well timed reality check/think of other alternatives, while others were brought back in after a time cooling their heels on the bench reflecting on prior indiscretions/brain explosions. Nothing like a massive reality check for some swollen heads to get minds refocussed and BRAINS engaged.
With such a limited talent pool in some critical positions and overlooking certain injured players, the selectors have just about got it right for this Test. It’s now up to the players to deliver at the best Rugby Stadium in OZ. I’m expecting a much better showing and would not be surprised to see them win PROVIDED that all our players keep their eyes on the ball from start to finish.
Rah Rah Rasputin said | September 2nd 2009 @ 6:35pm | Report comment
I think your refering to leverage, a principle derived from newtons laws of motion. Essentially, for the purpose of a scrum, the longer a props back is, the more force (or strength) is needed to counter the weight of the opposing prop. Anyway, I remember Mick Cron comparing a props back to a broomstick, the longer it is the easier it is to break.
AndyS said | September 2nd 2009 @ 6:45pm | Report comment
Charming analogy and mental picture…!
jools-usa said | September 3rd 2009 @ 12:04am | Report comment
What took him so long?
His adherence to Burgess was a disaster.
Jools-USA
bennalong said | September 3rd 2009 @ 8:20am | Report comment
Deans is trying to build a team. You don’t do that by constant change.
Burgess is not as bad as many here make out. His delay getting the ball out last game was his downfall. But his contribution in defense is enormous.He is no disaster.
Still, Genia deserves a go……………..but he’ll need more than a crisp pass or you blokes will be saying HE’S hopeless if he has a poor game
Last Saturday the god’s were unkind with two tries, and two others went through a hole between 10 and twelve that opened up when Barnes was unavailable.
We can win and we need to win. You can’t build a team by giving in to constant criticism and changing. every week
LeftArmSpinner said | September 3rd 2009 @ 9:45am | Report comment
I’m with you completely on Burgess. He’s made of the right stuff and the team is short on this stuff………..
Justin said | September 3rd 2009 @ 10:02am | Report comment
Burgess has had virtually 2 years. I’ll happily judge Genia by the end of next year (in reality we will know perhaps by the end of the Spring Tour this year though).
Ben C said | September 3rd 2009 @ 10:48am | Report comment
While Burgess’ passing has been eratic and he needs some down time to get his act together, it is not entirely his fault. I seem to recall when Giteau was binned in the SA match and Barnes moved to fly-half, Burgess’ passing looked better. I don’t think Giteau makes it easy by constantly shifting around in the 10 channel. It is the half’s job to find his fly-half but the constant movements means either: (1) the pass is fast but may not be in the right spot for the fly-half or (2) the half pauses a moment to confirm the position of the fly-half, giving an accurate pass but slowing the ball movement.
Justin said | September 3rd 2009 @ 10:54am | Report comment
Valentine didnt have any problems at the Force finding Gits, although I do agree he moves his starting position a little bit.
Ben C said | September 3rd 2009 @ 12:03pm | Report comment
I can’t recall too many of the Force matches so I can’t really comment but it isn’t all Giteau just like it isn’t all Burgess. Burgess’ passing is wayward and he needs some time to work on the mechanics. I am just getting sick of Burgess copping all the blame.
It will be interesting to see Genia get a full run so we can get a better comparison.