Comments on: Wallabies re-set their sights on undefeated tour

By: AndyS

AndyS — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 03:13:20 +0000

Perhaps, but think of it this way – this group of players was given the opportunity to attempt something that no other players in the last 25 years have had the chance to try, including those that comprised some great world cup winning sides. It was a shot at the history books and, inevitably, for some of them it will turn out to have been their one big shot. So whether it was likely or not, they blew their chance. Personally, I can’t help but feel sorry for them and suspect that it would have been a much easier pill to swallow had they been flogged by 30 points by a much better team. Frankly, in some respects it is only going to be worse if they do win the next two matches.

By: prowling panther

prowling panther — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 10:58:38 +0000

Why do they have to win all four games? Is it just for promotion because theyd have to be world beaters to win four away games in a row.

By: Stash

Stash — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 05:10:35 +0000

Umm…AAC – a draw is a result…and that result is NO grandslam, end of story, period.

Glossing over that, and trumpeting undefeated is rubbish.

Australia did put in a good all round performance (at times I questioned how the ABs managed 4 games over them this year). Periods of aimless kicking were frustrating for the fan base.

Still a bad habit of leaking tries is costing Australia… particularly frustrating as the defence can be steel for long, extended periods. Was O’Driscoll even touched as he went under the posts!!? When Ireland did eventually lift, the Wallabies were left wanting.

Good enough for Deans to save face – Scotland will make the Wallabies look better than perhaps they are.

By: pothale

pothale — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 02:04:25 +0000

Was just thinking that, OJ.

Or else SA retribution gets stored up big time for as the 6 Nations champs. PdV reckons he’ll get by easily enough with Italy and then if they can play a stormer against Ireland, then all in all it won;t be a bad, end-of-year, developmental tour that left a few key players behind, and he’s had a chance to see and experiment with the depth of the Bok Squad in preparation for the WC ‘11.

Or something like that.

By: ohtani's jacket

ohtani's jacket — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 01:59:50 +0000

Ha, the unimaginable comment would’ve been that you’re having a better tour than New Zealand. There was always a chance the Boks would fall apart. They’ve done this so many times over the years. If I were Pothale, I’d be worried if Ireland don’t beat them.

By: Brett McKay

Brett McKay — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 01:46:59 +0000

OJ, I don’t imagine you thought you’d be making that comment a few months ago ….

By: ohtani's jacket

ohtani's jacket — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 01:38:30 +0000

Things could be worse for Australia. They could be having a Springbok-like tour.

By: pothale

pothale — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 01:32:09 +0000

““That’s probably what you saw. It’s obviously not an approach that we would have applied in front of an Aussie crowd, but something that’s very important up here (in the northern hemisphere).”

What did this comment mean – I’m perplexed.

What would they have done differently in front of an Aussie crowd, but was so important to do in the NH – because they knew teams would be good in their half, so field position was important?

By: ohtani's jacket

ohtani's jacket — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 01:27:29 +0000

Yeah, AAC, plays his guts out most times but man is the glass half full in your world… Who coined this red zone crap? Sounds like something out of Top Gun.

By: Terry Kidd

Terry Kidd — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 01:22:21 +0000

lol … just like Notso Sharpe …. he hits ’submit’ every time a would be tackler rolls into view.

By: Terry Kidd

Terry Kidd — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 01:21:23 +0000

Lol … just testing. Nah I made a blue and hit ’submit’ too early.

By: pothale

pothale — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 01:18:26 +0000

Are you trying to see if I’m paying attention?

Go on – Number one is….?

By: Terry Kidd

Terry Kidd — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 01:16:53 +0000

Lol … ahh Pothale, like minds?

For the life of me I can’t understand why someone like ACC who has upper body strength and good leg drive in the tackle does not run it back every single time ….. he makes plenty of breaks, or half breaks …. if he learns to run towards support so he doesn’t get isolated and the ball maybe recycled, and if he learns to off load to supports, then two things will happen ….
1. His forwards will be expecting the run back and will get into position to support him at the breakdown.
2. His supporting backs will expect the run and will get into position for possible off loads or to support the line break.

Either way, it is infinitely better than aimlessly kicking away possession, regardless of where you are on the field.

By: pothale

pothale — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 01:05:04 +0000

I was going to say that Terry, but you beat me to it. Kearney & Co returned them with interest every time. They over-kicked and should have run more. And as people have already commented, their chase wasn’t good enough either.

Neither was Ireland’s for that matter.

However, a kicking game might get more dividends for them against Scotland.

I hope Scotland turn up and make a running game of it, cos it might make for an exciting match, even if Australia should pull ahead by 15+ by the end. Scotland have some lovely runners amongst Edinburgh and Glasgow. And on paper, Scotland probably have the best front row that Aus have to face on tour.

By: Terry Kidd

Terry Kidd — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 00:52:07 +0000

Hmmnn … kicking was meant to limit Ireland’s opportunities, yet when the Wallabies ran the ball back they found they could make ground … and they wouldn’t have given the ball away …. and what of this plan when Ireland simply kicked it back with interest? Sorry ACC but your explanation just doesn’t make sense to me.

By: Geoff

Geoff — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 22:55:24 +0000

Wow – the wallabies must have short memories if they have already forgotten losing the first game of their tour…