Wallabies are on right path but not there yet
Roar Guru
By LeftArmSpinner, 19 Nov 2009 LeftArmSpinner is a Roar Guru
- Tagged:
- Rugby Union, wallabies
The Wallabies are building momentum but still coming up short. At this stage, two years into International Rugby’s four year cycle, I look past the results on the score board.
I examine the players’ commitment, courage, technique and development. I am also assessing the coaches’ decisions at the selection table and choice of tactics.
Three factors are constraining this team’s ability to overcome the benchmark teams against whom they will be competing in 2011 for the ultimate prize in rugby, the RWC.
1. The back line tactics, nay strategy, needs, to be further tweaked so that they kick less and kick better and use more complex plays.
Genia, Giteau, Cooper, Ioane, Hynes and AAC can all beat a man one on one. Together as a unit, with Giteau at 12 and some clinical back line moves, they can be devastating.
As for Mitchell, I would not have even selected him for the tour. While he is running straighter than earlier in the season, his kick and kick chase is poor. Against the Irish when he pretended to jump for the catch (like the “scaredycats” in the U10′s), he only succeeded in demonstrating his lack of real commitment to the cause.
This backline, and several of the backs waiting in the wings, (no pun intended) have the potential to set rugby alight. The space was there against the Irish. The Wallabies either didn’t see it or were mentally lazy in exploiting it.
So, it is logical to keep the ball and use it through the backs once the momentum has been established.
2. The Grand Slam tourists lack a lineout leader and two specialist locks, one for the the starting team to replace Chisholm and one for the bench.
Untimely injuries have been unkind to the tourists. Sharpe is not the answer. I hope that Vickerman will return, but I doubt it and if he does, will he still be able to play at the intensity required. Why does a player walk out of a career prematurely when they have such short careers anyway??
In the meantime, Kimlin, Hocking or Caldwell need to be given lots of game time once they have completed their respective recoveries. And other locks such as Thompson need to be tested so that there is sufficient depth to cover the predicted injuries.
The successful candidate/s needs to be able to organise and win lineouts, provide the grunt at scrum and breakdown time and carry the ball straight and hard from a deep running position rather than a standing start.
3. The squad is young. The team is young. The oldest Wallabies player last weekend was Chisholm at 28.
It takes time for even the best young players to produce their best rugby at international level. The exception is Adam Ashley Cooper.
Pocock hadn’t impressed me that much with his play in his first 13 games for the Wallabies. But, against Ireland, he was outstanding and, I suspect, will get better. I won’t give any other examples of young Wallabies players coming of age because it would be easier to just “cut and paste” the current team and delete Giteau, Chisholm and Smith.
Brisbane was a one off that did nothing else but show that “there is gold in them there hills.”
Tokyo, with a new squad, and some ring rust, was an improvement but poor discipline and Carter’s boot sealed the Wallabies fate.
Twickenham was another improvement on Tokyo and may have been the turning point for this campaign.
Croke Park was a a very good performance against the best in Europe.
I wait with baited breath to see if the Wallabies can continue to build their momentum. Their brothers in the ’84 team did exactly this, culminating in a massive win with great, open rugby at Murrayfield.
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:
- Rugby Union, wallabies
jools-usa said | November 19th 2009 @ 4:17am | Report comment
Hi Lefty,
Spot on, but here’s my take after Test against Ireland.
Positives: Scrum, back three, Elson leading by example, 1st at breakdown (until last 10 minutes)
Negatives: Giteau wasted at 5/8 – no room. AAC wasted at fullback – not enough ball. Lineout poor – surely there’s as Eales, Mattfied, O’Connell, somewhere in OZ? Quade often looked confused but will improve.
On balance, a constructive effort & good game from both sides after 1st 15 minutes emulating Aussie Rules.
Jools-USA
LeftArmSpinner said | November 19th 2009 @ 5:44am | Report comment
AAC is the best 13 in Aust but the problem is that there is currently no stand out fullback and so he will have to be 15. as for wasted, not if you run the ball back that has been kicked to you.
the issue with the lineouts is that the 4 and 5 have been thro the same process of nenewal as the other positions, but injuries have been cruel. this situation will recover.
Dexter William said | November 19th 2009 @ 10:04am | Report comment
Good read LAS. Thanks.
Completely agree that Mitchell is a waste of time. He has been pumping iron to look stronger, but he is a real softie when it comes to hard rugby. Very much a “preety boy.” On the positive note, he can sniff a try when the team is going forward. Perhaps that is why he is chosen by Deans. Overall, I am with you that he should not have been selected for the tour.
You are spot on with our locks stock. Mum is not a “Test” player. I suspect that he got selected because his father is in the ARU board. I can not see any other reason why Deans has continually picked him. When he got off the bench, he hardly made any impact.
All in all the team is looking much better than last year. An improvement IMO.
mother teresa said | November 19th 2009 @ 11:08pm | Report comment
ONE WOULD LIKE TO THINK SO,BUT NOT CONVINCED
Bob McGregor said | November 19th 2009 @ 12:03pm | Report comment
As usual LAS has the assessment of the current crop of Wallabies about right.
However, I have to say that the absence of Sharp has been noticed in the deterioration of our lineout control and securitisation of the ball from kick offs. Despite what most have to say about him I do not concur he is not worthy to be in the selected 22. Some might say I would say this as I played with his father Tony during my secondary school days and consider him a friend. I note that Genia opined the lack of ball securitisation as well in an interview.
As much as I also like AAC he is going to be typecast as someone who can make a break but virtually will never off load. Good defensive teams will store this in their memory bank and make sure they tackle him.
Mitchell continues to disappoint and I have to agree he needs a backbone transplant. Turner similar.
Perhaps Shepherd could be our long term answer at 15 but unfortunately he, like Barnes, is injury prone. IF we could get them all on the park then I think we have the squad that could positively surprise many going forward.
I continue to be optimistic.
Justin said | November 19th 2009 @ 12:13pm | Report comment
Good to hear someone else can see the lineout woes since Sharpe has been out. I am still amazed it hasnt been pointed out but some are always in denial.
TommyM said | November 22nd 2009 @ 5:36am | Report comment
‘securitisation’- GENIUS!
ohtani's jacket said | November 19th 2009 @ 1:43pm | Report comment
I dunno Leftie, it just seems like they’re running round and round in circles.
They were a much better side last year, to the point where a lot of NZ supporters thought after Brisbane that they could become better than us if we weren’t careful, but they’ve been weak this year. I don’t think you can overstate enough what a detrimental effect Robbie Deans has had on Australian back play. It started off with a drop in defensive standards and now they can’t even attack. I honestly don’t think he’s the right coach for Australia and if they’re to persist with him they need to bring in some better assistants.
There seems to be a feeling around here that if the Wallabies blow someone away in their remaining games that they’re firmly on the path to clicking, but if you ask me the rehabilitation of Australian rugby has to begin in the Super 14. Australian rugby needs to work hard on getting a team into the semis, because if you don’t have any players who are going well at Super 14 level, you’re not going to compete at Test matches. So I’d say next year’s Super 14 is a crucial campaign for whether or not the Wallabies can become competitive over the next two seasons. Otherwise, I stand by my comments that this Australia team, on present form, would struggle to make it out of the WC quarterfinals.
mother teresa said | November 19th 2009 @ 11:12pm | Report comment
ROUND AND ROUND ON A NEGATIVE DOWNWARD SPIRAL.MAYBE DEANS IS DIZZY
JamesB said | November 19th 2009 @ 2:10pm | Report comment
France are the best in Europe. Look, if the AB’s had drawn against the Irish it would have been seen as a disaster in NZ… that is the difference in standards. There is no evidence the Wallabies are improving, though it may feel like it playing northern hemisphere teams.
Hansie said | November 19th 2009 @ 4:57pm | Report comment
Sharpe is sorely missed for his lineout and leadership skills. I don’t understand why it seems to be flavour of the month to bag him. All in all, a draw against Ireland (in its first game of the season) is pretty unimpressive, and it’s hard to discern any improvement in the Wallabies over the last 2 years.
Campbell Watts said | November 19th 2009 @ 5:35pm | Report comment
I get sick of hearing all this about the Wallabies “building momentum” and “improving every game”
If that was to be true, just how bad was their game before, to have “built” so much as to be where it sits now??
They haven’t improved – just be honest and say it.
I think Deans has really struggled to come to grips with the Wallabies players attitudes – they’re just not as hungry/driven to be Wallabies as the kiwi players are to be All Blacks. I think he just can’t related to this playing group as he has to his past teams and it’s leaving him bereft of ideas.
I think a lot of the present malise comes from the Wallabies lack of attitude – they just don’t seem to mind when they lose!
Cameron Sheppard back at fullback, with AAC into centre and Digby back on the wing would be a big improvement in the penetration of the backs and kick return, but I did see him (Cam) on crutches the other day so suspect his bad ankle is still holding him back.
Dave said | November 20th 2009 @ 12:14am | Report comment
The scrum has improved. Thats the only plus we can take from the coaching of Deans.
Our defence was the best in the world – not anymore
Our lineout was the best (or close to par) – not anymore. In fact, we are lucky to win our own ball. I have never seen such a terrible lineout from Australian sides.
Our backline was the best – not anymore
Our breakdown against a dedicated and hungry pack- no different to the 2007 WC quarter final
Australia has always had an INTELLIGENT team. My goodness were are the days where we were feeding off limited ball, but still managed to score set piece tries with brilliant and creative backline moves????! You see more creativity at under 10′s level than the wallabies of 2009. Its simply pass the ball along the line to a player standing still..
The aimless kicking continues. When we used the ball we looked probably the best we have all season (which is not saying much mind you), but instead we just give the ball away…
I have been waiting 2 seasons to see the famous Crusaders counter attacks. I have seen it once – against the Barbarians last year when Turner scored.
This feels like 1996 all over again. Our side looks to be going nowhere. We need some creativity, and we need some direction. We are not getting it with Deans
Sportym said | November 20th 2009 @ 2:14am | Report comment
One would argue that playing England followed by an Irish team that is very rusty might be seen as an improvement by the wallabies. If we choose our opponents carefully for the next 10 games or so, we could really be looking good. Then the shite will hit the fan once the tri-nations starts again.
My biggest disappointment with Deans is that the Wallabies are playing dead boring rugby, I was hoping he would bring some crusader fair to the team…. still waiting.
Justin said | November 20th 2009 @ 10:33am | Report comment
Sport – The Crusaders played a very percentage based game. The myth is that they played ball in hand rugby etc etc. Carter kicked them into position and they relied heavily on turnover ball which was ushered to the wings IF they had a huge advantage in numbers out wide.
That and the fact they had McCaw Carter and Mauger who was the brains in the backline while Carter learned his trade.
Hansie said | November 20th 2009 @ 3:51pm | Report comment
I’m not sure that Deans should get the credit for the improved scrum. The poor standard of the Wallaby scrum was the reason for Jones being sacked, and Connolly put a lot of work into the scrum, and that work has continued. I think we are now realising the benefit of that work, so not all the credit should go to Deans. The drop off in lineout performance has happened under Deans.
AndyS said | November 20th 2009 @ 4:08pm | Report comment
So you are saying he is responsible for a drop-off in one aspect of forward play, but not a simultaneous improvement in another aspect of forward play. Tough job…
I’d've said the improvement has a bit to do with the involvement of Noriega, which happened on Deans’s watch. They may be focusing a little too much on one aspect though, or more likely at least one of their second row cattle are looking like place-holders.
Knives Out said | November 20th 2009 @ 11:49pm | Report comment
Crumbs… this is a very negative thread. I’m not sure LAS expected this sort of response.
LeftArmSpinner said | November 22nd 2009 @ 5:31am | Report comment
ko, I am happy with any response and given the loss just witnessed in Edinburgh, I am unsure as to whether it was more of the same from the Wallabies poor rugby or an awesome defensive display by Scotland.
I only saw the final 20 minutes and the amount of kicking was back up to the usual high quantities. It was inevitably poorly kicked zand just gifted the ball back to the scots. The exception was when George Smith carried the ball back after a kick. he went straight and hard, took out the first defender and set a good ruck as a result. My “friend” Mitchell continued his old tactic (as mentioned above) when he got into space late in the game half beating his opposite number on the outside, and then putting a woeful grubber in just as he entered the 22, in space and at pace.