Selectors must choose attitude before ability
Roar Guru
By LeftArmSpinner, 21 Sep 2009 LeftArmSpinner is a Roar Guru
170 Have your say
The Wallabies selectors have consistently chosen the most naturally gifted 22 players to pull on the Wallabies’ jersey and represent their country, including those with the biggest reputations.
This became apparent with the aging team that represented Australia in RWC 1995 and was best evidenced in the selection of Gregan and Larkham for the RWC 2007.
Since then, the Wallabies’ selectors have also ignored those players failings in the most critical department, attitude.
The Wallabies naive selection approach, choosing ability ahead of attitude, has been evident for many years and extended the playing careers of the chosen few. Messrs. Gregan, Larkham and Sharpe should count themselves lucky.
This approach completely ignores the fundamentals of selection and team building. It also disregards the reality of life. Success is 98% perspiration and 2% inspiration.
I define attitude to be the mental approach and strength of a player, in terms of things like desire, determination, motivation, fearlessness, selflessness for the team cause, competitiveness, ability to intimidate and not be intimidated by opponents.
A naturally gifted player, male or female, is easily seduced into believing the hype and becoming more selfish and less team orientated as they rise through the ranks. But, there comes a point, and in the Australian Rugby players’ case, it is usually at Test level, that everyone has the equivalent natural gifts and what makes a difference is attitude and the ability of the team as a unit at critical times.
Last Saturday, the Wallabies showed that, with a few exceptions, individually and collectively they do not have the necessary attitude to be selected as a Wallaby and represent Australia. This game was a crucial one.
The Wallabies had the chance to build more momentum and self belief after a good win against the World Champions, while also exerting massive pressure on their greatest rival, NZ, when the All Blacks were already vulnerable and after being savaged by their own angry media.
Matthew Hayden, in saying “give me attitude over ability any day,” argues that attitude is superior to natural ability at every level of competition.
The adage of a champion team always beating a team of champions is as valid today as ever. Champion teams triumph because they are greater than the sum of their parts at the critical times of the contest.
The Australian Rugby Union realised that there are cultural problems in the team and made this part of the brief for Robbie Deans. It is clear that he has underestimated, and been too patient with, both the selection process and the players selected.
I have assessed the Wallabies XV that was selected for the game in Wellington, reviewing their attitude across their whole careers:
Benn Robinson: He is brave at the set piece and works hard around the field: Acceptable attitude.
Tatafu Polota-Nau: His tackling against the Springboks in Brisbane told his teammates “come follow me” and the opposition “it will hurt when you try to run the ball”: Acceptable attitude.
Ben Alexander: Has been a revelation at tight head; has a very good work rate around the field and will get better: Acceptable attitude.
James Horwill: After an explosive first year as a Wallaby, Horwill has gone missing, but could be due to a serious injury earlier in the season, worth one more chance: Attitude Unacceptable.
Mark Chisholm: Inconsistent performer over a long period – Drop and never to return: Attitude unacceptable.
Rocky Elsom: Tireless worker in attack and defence, passionate about the job, but showed signs of fear against the AB’s in Wellington: Attitude acceptable.
David Pocock: Invisible against the AB’s, but worth one more chance because he is young: Attitude unacceptable.
George Smith: playing on reputation – Time to go: Attitude unacceptable.
Will Genia: Courageous throughout both his starting games: Attitude acceptable.
Matt Giteau: His effort cannot be faulted but he is mentally weak under pressure such as the yellow card in 3N this year, and hence not a 10 – not up to a decision making position: attitude acceptable.
Drew Mitchell: After one wake-up call earlier in his Wallabies career, he has failed to produce in the big games – Drop and never to return: Attitude unacceptable.
Berrick Barnes: Courageous in attack and defence and shows signs of a cool head under pressure in 3N when Mortlock was injured: Attitude acceptable.
Adam Ashley-Cooper: Courageous in attack and defence and has been a true team man as he struggled with 4 different positions in 3N this year: Attitude acceptable.
Lachie Turner: Inconsistent performer, but worth one more chance as he is young: Attitude unacceptable.
James O’Connor: Tough and courageous and his effort cannot be faulted, but makes silly mistakes that he needs to eliminate from his game: Attitude acceptable.
In summary:
Acceptable attitude: Robinson, Polota-Nau, Alexander, Elsom, Genia, Barnes, Ashley Cooper, O’Connor (8)
Acceptable attitude, but not in a decision making position: Giteau; (1)
Unacceptable attitude, One more chance: Horwill, Pocock, Turner; (3)
Unacceptable attitude, Drop and never to return: Chisholm, Smith, Mitchell; (3)
I have used the term “Acceptable Attitude” to emphasise that there is only one standard acceptable when a person represents their country in anything: 100% physical, emotional and mental commitment at all times, on and off the field.
To emphasise the essential point of this article, O’Connor has been assessed as having an acceptable attitude, despite a poor game last weekend. It is not that you won’t have a bad game, its how you react to a bad game. He kept trying.
Deans and his selectors can simplify their selection criteria for the future Wallabies’ squads: identify players with the necessary attitude and develop the skills and abilities they need.
Get this attitude to take hold in the Super 14 teams also. Look at players like Tom Carter, Tim Davidson, Stephen Hoiles, Brett Sheehan or Dave Harvey.
Apologies for not including more non Sydney based players. I just don’t know them well enough to comment.
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
- Waratahs romp to 83-5 trial win over Samoa A (2)
- Quade Cooper’s return to the Reds goes up a gear
- Chiefs continue to wait for SBW (7)
- 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? (202)
- 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:
- Australian rugby, Australian Rugby Union, Rugby Union, wallabies
DanielJ said | September 21st 2009 @ 8:02am | Report comment
Good Article,
If only Nick SA could read, i am sure he would agree to.
LeftArmSpinner said | September 21st 2009 @ 11:26am | Report comment
thanks. Nick SA is one thing but Mitch O is another. He is a AB fan who thought it was game on until Nonu’s try…….oh, and he hadnt ever heard of David Pocock. Weell, after Saturday evneing, he will be none the wiser on that either.
Sluggy said | September 21st 2009 @ 10:05am | Report comment
LAS, Deans has overcome the (other) selectors’ entrenched views and got rid of Baxter, Waugh & Sharpe. Tuquiri maybe partly in the same category. And it looks like Sir Sterling is on the way out – but is (rightfully) getting a softer landing.
We are seeing a gernerational change and it shouldn’t be a surprise to see some of the players Deans has been watching in club games make the EOYT. It will also not be a surprise to see a new captain next up. Horwill was once feted, but may not command a place in the XV.
Elsom or Barnes to get the ‘c’ perhaps?
zzz said | September 21st 2009 @ 10:42am | Report comment
Why don’t they just put everyone on annual contracts?
Wouldn’t that be a more scientific approach towards detecting “attitude”?
What? They’ll just head overseas or to league?
Newsflash: YOU CAN’T STOP THAT ANYWAY.
One whole year – thats way more job security than many of us on a fraction of their wage.
No sporting code in Australia has a god-given right to dominate the others – if it can’t attract the best athletes then maybe it should stop snivelling and be content building a community with integrity and mutual respect.
I’m not speculating about any particular player’s attitude because I simply don’t know them or how they see their situation.
LeftArmSpinner said | September 21st 2009 @ 11:47am | Report comment
I like it, the one year contracts. But currently, the remuneration is based on the players doing their bit on the field, and assumption that has been found to be flawed.
So, the players put more of their package at risk and limit the duration of contracts. But, the players can always just move on anyway, if it all gets too hard with the wallabies. Get released from their contract like Tahu did, he had the option built in.
Of course, your selection methods and criteria on the way “in” will help limit the duds. Put them through a massive physical and mental bootcamp that weeds out the weak ones and leaves them in S14.
Sam Taulelei said | September 21st 2009 @ 12:35pm | Report comment
Understand everyone’s anger, frustration and desire for accountability but geez putting players on one year contracts will only result in a mass exodus of players for overseas clubs and what will that achieve for Australian rugby?
Forgetting for a moment that these men are rugby players and are getting paid a very healthy salary comparative to most people. They still want the same things as all of us do when we get a job – security. In order for players to receive their full paycheck they have to remain injury free and continue to get selected at Super rugby level and for the Wallabies. Two things that are outside of their control and on top of that you want them to commit to a one year rolling contract. It doesn’t make for a great environment to get the best performance out of someone.
Dean Pantio said | September 21st 2009 @ 1:06pm | Report comment
If I performed at work like they have for the past year, I wouldn’t be employed.
LeftArmSpinner said | September 21st 2009 @ 11:40am | Report comment
Captain is a critical role in a team’s culture. George Smith was honest in saying he didnt want it. I dont personally get that but at least he was upfront……..and he hasnt done much of a job of it either.
from the article, there are only 8 who you could even consider because the captain needs to be selected in the team:
Robinson, Polota-Nau, Alexander, Elsom, Genia, Barnes, Ashley Cooper, O’Connor
Polota-Nau and Alexander, O’Connor and Genia are too young and inexperienced and dont have the respect/gravitas required. I think robinson has more than enough on his plate with a young front row. so, that leaves elsom, Barnes and AAC. Barnes and elsom have been forthright in their post match comments and accepted the appalling effort for what it is….That is a good sign. AAC seems a little scattie for captain but his performances are always 100%. Barnes is only in his second year of Wallabies rep footy and is struggling with all the losing. His intensity reminds me a bit of Mr Cricket. That intensity can be a strength and a weakness. for m=now it is a weakness and he needs to just concentrate on gettting the backline going from 10, not 12. So, a process of elimination leaves Elsom as the last man standing. he is an intelligent, experienced and passionate player, and still youngish.
So the new leadership team is:
Elsom: Captain (Lead by example; get players heads right; reset their heads when things go wrong)
Robinson: forwards captain: Own the front row and set pieces, demand the Locks give grunt to the Scrum and win lineouts
Barnes: 10, playmaker and backline leader, leaving Giteau and AAC to use their abundant instinctive natural ability to flow
Congrats and welcome aboard.
Vented Relief said | September 21st 2009 @ 12:23pm | Report comment
Not entirely sure about Giteau’s attitude. A good attitude means you make your tackles no matter who’s running at you – you make the effort because the team is relying on you, especially in his position. He must have slid off at least 3 tackles on Saturday and for mine needs to be dropped for such an effort. Either that, or get someone in who can teach him how to tackle properly – Ben Tune would be a good start – a bloke who put his whole body on the line every time someone ran at him, a bloke who knew the next tackle could be the one that ended his career through injury and yet still went at it 100%. Tune could teach the boys (particularly giteau and mitchell) in gold a few things about playing with heart and sticking by your mates.
LeftArmSpinner said | September 21st 2009 @ 12:51pm | Report comment
vent, yep, dropping giteau would send a real message. He is not a 10. defence is a reflection of Attitude. sure, but sometimes, no matter what you try, nothing works, but you have to keep going Tune was a 100%er, as was Melon……
Who Needs Melon said | September 21st 2009 @ 3:43pm | Report comment
Too right!
Hoy said | September 21st 2009 @ 4:01pm | Report comment
God love Ben Tune. Stopped Lomu more times than missed.
Had some passion that one.
Shahsan said | September 21st 2009 @ 4:52pm | Report comment
Yes, but watch Tune again in the Wellington 96 game and you’d think this guy was not much chop. Drop and never to return, to quote teh author of this article.
So maybe we shouldn’t be too hasty in dropping the young players.
I suspect Deans and his team are the ‘empowerment’ type of managers ie we think you are responsible grownups so we will concentrate on mechanics and you guys just turn up with the right mindset.
But i think what this team really needs is a ‘kick up the backside’ type of management team ie micromanage the players until they are ready to make their own decisions. And that comes after humiliation, hard work and haranguing. and experience.
Dean Pantio said | September 22nd 2009 @ 12:57pm | Report comment
Isn’t micromanaging what the players complained of under Eddie’s tutelage?
Shahsan said | September 22nd 2009 @ 1:45pm | Report comment
Yes, because that was an experienced crop of players who by then didnt need micromanagement: Gregan, Larkham, Latham etc. This current crop is young and needs it. All this is management 101.
Big Steve said | September 21st 2009 @ 12:37pm | Report comment
Tim Davidson is playing his last game in Australia for a while on Saturday in the Shute Shield GF. He is the perfect example of what this article is about. Captaining a team to 5 GF wins in a row is pretty special, whether your a sydney uni fan or not. Its a shame he never made the Super 14, especially as we really seem to be short of good players at 6 and 8. Size isn’t everything!
I would give Giteau and O’Conner a fail.
LeftArmSpinner said | September 21st 2009 @ 12:57pm | Report comment
davidson is a classic example of heart. I remember in last year’s one sided GF against Randwick, with about 7 minutes to go, ratu took off with the ball down the side line from his own 22. Davidson, standing about 10 metres inside the other side lineset off after him on an angled run. Ratu, a winger was clear favourite to get to the intersection point of their respective runs before davidson an 8. And Motivation was with Ratu, not Davidson. Davidsons team had already won the game. But, nope. Davidson nailed him before he got to the half way line, copy book tackle and into touch. Thats attitude and thats leadership and thats captaincy, but he cant get an S14 start anywhere in Aust.
rob mccourt said | September 21st 2009 @ 4:41pm | Report comment
Left Arm Spinner
I recall writing to the Roar 3 or 4 years ago when Eddie Jones was still coaching. That year Sydney University played Eastwood in the Grand Final. Davidson was Number 8 for Uni. A young boy by the name of Leroy Houston played Number 8 for Eastwood. Uni of course won and Davidson had a wonderful game showing intelligence and leadership as well as football ability.
Shortly after Leroy got picked by Eddie to go on the Spring Tour. The better Number 8 wasn’t even on the radar. He eventually got a contract with the Western Force. I don’t know what went wrong there but John Mitchell never gave him much of a look in either. So back to grade he came and perhaps he is now off overseas or maybe focusing on getting a real job.
Another rugby talent lost. There is something seriously wrong with selection in Australian rugby. I am not suggesting that Davidson had the ability to be a number 8 for Australia. He is probably 10 kgs too small. But he sure as hell was better than Leroy who is still running around, looking unfit and clueless for the Reds.
AndyS said | September 21st 2009 @ 7:57pm | Report comment
This would be the same Tim Davidson that was in the inaugural Force squad but bailed on the opportunity ‘cos he missed his family and friends, then got a gig with the ‘Tahs but made no impression? I would have said that, at best, he is a clear indication of why we are where we are with the best of an underlying club scene nowhere near the level required to provide any meaningful support to the national side.
LeftArmSpinner said | September 21st 2009 @ 1:00pm | Report comment
I have seen Giteau venting at players behind the goal line, (they have been there a lot this season) but it appears to be personal vitriol rather than leadership, ideas, motivation and “strongly worded encouragement.”
I also hear that some are glad to see the back of him at the Force. Who knows?
Dean Pantio said | September 22nd 2009 @ 1:00pm | Report comment
I’ve noticed that too LAS. I’m surprised they haven’t told him to STFU or just give him a fat lip at training.
stillmissit said | September 21st 2009 @ 1:00pm | Report comment
Leftie agree with the thrust of your article and the attitude scores at the end. The part that brings your house of cards down is the unpredictability factor. In Tokyo with absolutely nothing to gain the forwards, Giteau and O’Connor could play the house down.
The hard part is getting a tough attitude every time they pull on the shirt not whenever they feel ‘up for it’.
Maxxy said | September 21st 2009 @ 2:03pm | Report comment
LAS – what I find hard to understand is this third person you talk about “selectors” Please name them and tell us where the evidence is that Deans is not picking the team himself with some consultation. I am not aware of any Wallaby coach being told who to pick and not getting the team he wants – this is not the state of origin rugby league. Deans picks the teams
Sluggy in true roar style you have manged to blame the other selectors for the continued selection of Baxter and absolve Deans
LAS/Sluggy if Deans is not picking the team then who is? Why are we giving Deans the credit for the hyped up new faces that have been introduced in the last 12 months if he is not picking the team – you cant have the arguement both ways (although many try on this site)
mother teresa said | September 21st 2009 @ 2:11pm | Report comment
mxy its jono ;hes the convenor of selectors and they share the same philosophy and agree on selections.
no seriously who are the selectors;please advise
LeftArmSpinner said | September 21st 2009 @ 3:02pm | Report comment
Maxxy, I dont care why they are. i just want them to do a good job and so I have offered some “advice” at their time of need. I think it is probably Nucifora, Deans and A.N. Other. I am sure that he has the team he wants. Heaven forbid that I would want it both ways…………….Never.
mother teresa said | September 21st 2009 @ 3:35pm | Report comment
gotta be big jim williams
LeftArmSpinner said | September 21st 2009 @ 2:17pm | Report comment
SMI, that is exacly my point. The cricial element to look for in selections is attitude. Those with acceptable attitude will strike back in Japan out of sheer pride and competitiveness.
I distinguish between Performance and attitude. attitude is always there. you will see it because it is the almost illogical (to mere mortals) component to a players performance, TPN’s tackling in Brisbane is a good example. That determination to win, at all costs, never say die, no matter what. Bradbury. Lynagh in Dublin. etc. Faldo against Norman at Augusta.
Performance can but doesnt necessarily embody attitude. Tahu looked great against the Samoans (I think in last years pacific cup), but could not deal with the pressure in real matches. Graeme Hick was a bully batsman who got lots of county runs but not in test matches. etc.
So, for me it is not about playing the house down, nor whether you have a bad game, we are human and these thingswill happen from time to time. Its how you play when it is all falling down. O’Connor kept going, no matter what and I respect that. He gave everything he had and it was well short. Chisholm didnt give everything, nor did Smith, Horwill, Mitchell or others.
Elsom, gave the effort but was clearly scared and scarred by what would happen to him when he ran the ball. remember when he came back in support for a kick return, took off through space, (probably should have passed it wide again), but as he went on his own, and got to the defensive line, he slowed down and Donnelly got him from behind, turned the ball over and the rest is history.
The question is whether he can come back from this. others do. League forwards do it week in week out. get toasted one week and then come out and smash the opposition the next week with straight hard running. mind over matter!!!
you can expect the attitude every week, but it might not be enough to get a good performance or a win. I dont care, I just need the attitude…………………… and it was sadly missing last saturday evening
Dean Pantio said | September 21st 2009 @ 2:37pm | Report comment
It’s not an either or issue. You can have players who will never give up but don’t have the skill. The question is finding both as ‘All Blacks assistant coach Wayne Smith said a number of players had been given a number of chances but not produced.
“We have to raise our standards and if that means changes in personnel that is what we will do,” he said.
“I don’t think there is anything wrong with the attitude, I think that’s fine but that is not all that is required.
“You have got to be composed, make good decisions, execute under pressure and we did not always do that,” he said of Hamilton.
“You have got to earn the jersey, you have got to earn the right to be out there and that’s not just about attitude,” Smith added.
“You have got to be able to be out there on the big stage against the best teams in the world and you have got to be able to win those games and you are not going to be able to do that if you are not able to execute your set piece platforms or catch and pass.”‘
Despite the injury toll to the All Blacks squad, they still had sufficient depth to make this transformation between tests. Australia doesn’t.
LeftArmSpinner said | September 21st 2009 @ 3:14pm | Report comment
Sure, you need both, but we know that this bunch of players can play skill wise.
Earlier in the junior selection, i would look for a minimum skill/athleticism set that you can then build and develop. I’m not counting on building attitude or ticker. You either have it or not. And it will be displayed at training, and as they develop the skills.
Smith was correct about their attitude. they had belief and commitment to the Jersey and eachother.
Dean, don’t blame the depth thing. In a country of 20+ mill, there are more than enough tough, skillful players with the necessary attitude and pride to make up a great rugby team. They just dont turn up on the door step.
Its a pyramid. McKinsey and Co, the premier global consultancy had a 1 in 7 pyramid. So, working backwards, if you wanted 5 partners in an office, you needed to have 35 managers and 245 grunts below them coming through. etc.
So too the Wallabies. I think we have enough data on player number requirements. Here’s a thought, get the Wallabies number for the last bloke to be capped, and divide it by the number of years the Wallabies have been around and then refine it from there.
Dean Pantio said | September 21st 2009 @ 3:52pm | Report comment
The McKinsey pyramid is debunked twaddle. Just quietly, I’d refrain from mentioning that bunch of gits as an authority on anything.
The truth of the matter is the current setup in Australia is a league below that of South Africa and New Zealand. So despite Australia’s population, the actual percentage of players who are able to make the step up are slim. Given professionalism, this will only get worse if the status quo is maintained.
The Wallabies have had an averaged turnover rate of approximately 9-10 capped and uncapped players per year since 1908. This is comparable to New Zealand, but they have the benefit of a rugby nursery. The quality of their depth is miles ahead of Australia’s.
In all honesty, perhaps it may be time to consider that the Wallabies have over achieved for nigh on two decades?