By Spiro Zavos
November 23rd 2009 @ 5:47am
Related coverage
Scotland the brave: Australia the complacent
Australia's Peter Hynes, center, is tackled by Scotland's Alex Grove during the International Rugby Union match between Scotland and Australia at Murrayfield Stadium, Edinburgh, Scotland. Saturday, Nov. 21, 2009. (AP Photo/Chris Clark)
Usually I hate the cliche that ‘the team that wants it most will win.’ But, unfortunately, this is the summary that best makes sense of Scotland’s 9 – 8 victory over Australia at Murrayfield.
The Wallabies played complacently, as if they expected that sooner or later the dominant field position and their better skills would be rewarded with an inevitable victory.
Matt Giteau missed kicking 11 points (two relatively easy penalties, a field goal and a conversion). So hesitant, in fact, was Giteau with his kicking in the end that he nearly had his conversion charged down, even though he took it back to the 22m line.
Three tries were bombed by the Wallabies.
A halfback managed to turn Stephen Moore as he turned on his back over Scotland’s try line after being put into a big hole by a lovely delayed pass from Giteau.
Rocky Elsom tried to score from close range by turning on his back. He, too, was smothered with defenders. Quade Cooper tried a fancy, long pass, which spiralled well forward, when a shorter pass to the unmarked Ryan Cross would have done the trick.
What is it with this business of attacking the try line by diving backwards? As a coach of a C-grade school team in New Zealand many, many years ago I used to finish off every practice with the players running to the try line and diving across it to plant the ball. The point is that the technique of scoring a try has to be taught like the all the other skills.
I’d like to see this drill used for the Wallabies. They didn’t seem to have a clue how to get across the line until the end of the Test when after bash-up after bash-up by the Wallaby forwards under Scotland’s posts had failed, the ball was finally moved wider and Giteau put Cross into a gap to score an easy try.
Earlier this year there was some controversy regarding comments by John O’Neill, the CEO of the ARU, that the Wallabies should be paid on results.
At present they get, I believe, $11,000 a Test, win or lose. O’Neill suggested a higher amount for a win and a lower amount for a loss. RUPA, the players’ trade union, complained that the successful Wallabies in the past didn’t need financial incentives and that, anyway, players don’t play for the money.
Well, let’s see. Any number of people have ear-bashed me about how passionless the current Wallabies are in their play. This attitude, I believe, goes back to George Gregan who when accused of being passionless made the case that professional players didn’t have to get worked up or fired up to honour the jersey and perform well.
Tell that to Simon Poidevin or to Stephen Larkham, so sadly missed by this current Wallaby side and in the quarter-final of the 2007 Rugby World Cup at Marseille.
These players, and all the great players of the past, including the wonderful 1984 Grand Slam Wallabies, were never complacent about playing in the Wallaby colours. If blood had to be shed for the cause, it was and that was that.
But on Saturday the Wallabies betrayed this great tradition. There was no fire in the belly, even from someone like Elsom who used to play with the abrasiveness of a fireball.
As I watched the Wallabies complacently going about their business at Murrayfield I kept on thinking of them as the rugby-playing equivalents of those businessmen who continued to give themselves bonuses even though their companies were collapsing around them
Scotland played well, for a team that doesn’t have any standout players.
Ironically, the man of the match for some newspapers was Nathan Hines, who learnt his rugby in the Australian bush. Scotland defended tenaciously even when they were being totally out-played around the field for most of the Test. They played the occasional ball they won through the hands to force crucial penalties from a stretched Wallaby defence. And they kicked the crucial goals, from the penalty spot and from the field, something that Giteau couldn’t do on the day.
Here’s another cliche that generally is hard to cope with but which is true for the complacent Wallabies right now. The team is a ‘work in progress,’ we are told. Well judging from the emails I am getting from irate Wallaby supporters there is not much progress and not much work – on the field, at least.
The great thing about touring is that while the tour is on there is always the chance of redemption. That chance is next week against Wales at the Millennium Stadium. We want a Wallaby side that plays with typical Australian pride and tenacity, a side prepared to do the tough things well to get a victory.
A victory against Wales will create some momentum going into 2010. A defeat creates what was unthinkable a week or so ago – one victory out of four against the Home Unions.
Dr Herbert Moran was the Wallabies first great captain. On the 1908 tour of Britain and Ireland, Moran created the tradition of the Wallaby captain leading from the front, and of a team style that should be, as he put it, ‘vigorous and a little dangerous.’
In the epic Test against Wales which the Wallabies lost but not without a titanic struggle, Moran created a call that should be revived to inspire the current Wallabies: ‘We wanted the ball very badly from the scrum in those last moments. Each time we settled down to push, I would utter one single word “Australia,” and each time those forwards responded magnificently.’
Let’s see the spirit of the 1908 Wallabies at Cardiff in action on Saturday night.
Super 14 Tipping now live on The Roar. Join now.
Like this content? Buzz it up!
Free Email updates:
Our daily emails are only sent if there is content for the sport or that author. You can subscribe to multiple daily emails; or get the daily Roar email with all our content in it. We value privacy. More...
(160)
Knives Out said | November 23rd 2009 @ 5:57am | Report comment
When Australia lose why is it always a question of passion rather than a question of skill, leadership and tactical nous? The Scottish scrum was erratic, the lineout sometimes rushed, the kicking innacurate, and the back three poor footballers. How does a professional player respond to that scenario? The Australia starting side contained, on average, 37.6 caps per man. Why could that side not break down what was a committed but limited Scotland side? The answer cannot simply be a lack of passion.
Mr cheese said | November 23rd 2009 @ 7:04am | Report comment
Indeed.
You’re right to say that they lacked passion. I thought that they lacked “clue”.
They didn’t have a scooby doo.
Never having played rugby at any level, I cannot be sure. It seems to me, however, that you get a hatful of points but chucking the ball around. Then you shut up shop and spend the last 20 minutes with a cigar hanging from your lips.
The convicts were not passionless, they were clueless.
The Scottish dude Andy Nicol was right on the BBC commentary with Eddie “The Butler” Butler: when you’re in a 3 on 2 situation, it is plain daft to mess it up. How can you mess it up with a forward pass ?
I think I have an idea: when Jonathan Davies returned to Rugby Union from League, certain players refused to pass to him because of his League past. Perhaps that’s why people don’t always want to throw the ball to Ryan Cross. He got the try, je comprends bien, but they missed other opportunities.
Is that it ?
Knives Out said | November 23rd 2009 @ 7:32am | Report comment
I think so. Where’s the brains trust?
stillmissit said | November 23rd 2009 @ 7:11am | Report comment
Knives – don’t tell me you are one of those players who believe that if we hang in their long enough we will win? Passion and commitment are two vital ingredients to a successful team. The only exception to this is if the Wallabies were playing Epping 3rd grade.
Knives Out said | November 23rd 2009 @ 7:30am | Report comment
Passion and committment are vital but then so is technical excellence. For example, SA won the 3N because they were technically excellent at specific parts of the game and also because they were led well. The Wallaby backline seemed unsure of what they were trying to achieve, and when whatever they were trying wasn’t working nobody stepped up and said “Put it in the corner every time, and let’s test their back three.” Mitchell and Hynes made inroads, and Cross, despite his obvious running arc, always made metres. The Scottish pack seemed petrified of Palu, and yet there seemed no organisation to take advantage of the lack of skills in the Scotland side. Australia wasn’t exactly bullied out of the game. I honestly think that Elsom isn’t the man for the job, and despite experience in key positions: Moore, Chisholm, Smith and Giteau, no support seemed forthcoming.
Bay35Pablo said | November 23rd 2009 @ 8:33am | Report comment
Stillmissit, having trained a couple of times with Epping, I’d back the Ram’s thirsty thirds on the Wallabies current form. And probably back them to off the Scots. More (ex Eastwood) talent in the Rams that Scottish rugby!!!!
stillmissit said | November 23rd 2009 @ 9:35am | Report comment
Bay35Pablo – Epping’s thirsty thirds were a hard team to beat last year. I guess their lineout was superior to the Walabies as they won all of their own ball and there was certainly a fair amount of passion in the has-been’s running around in their pack.
Mr cheese said | November 23rd 2009 @ 9:03am | Report comment
Surely you don’t attribute their defeat to a lack of passion ????
That seems strange to me. How can a ball thrown forward be attributed to a lack of passion ?
Mr Giteau should learn that you’re meant to kick the ball through the sticks.
We are consistently told that the Aussies are better than us at sport in part because of their better weather. Perhaps this was proof. They need the sun rays on their moustaches.
In the SF of the Rugby Union World Cup, England beat France in the driving rain. The French whinged.
As Sir Clive Woodward put it: “I know that it rains in France too, because I go there on my holidays”.
BennO said | November 23rd 2009 @ 7:36am | Report comment
Because they have all demonstrated at one time or another that they are a talented, skilled bunch of individuals. But as a team they don’t play with enthusiasm. I’ve noticed it for a long time, they never chase hard when a player makes a break. If you watch the games from the golden years support play is a key feature. It takes passion to play support because you might not get the ball, you might not score the try yet you’re there in case you’re needed. This current side doesn’t do that and it shows a lack of passion.
Also they have shown they can mix it with the big boys, almost beating the all blacks, thumping the boks – I’m changing thumped to comprehensively outplayed. They comprehensively outplayed the boks this year. They have the talent, skill, tactical nous and ability to execute when they are on the job. They can’t do it two or three weeks in a row. That shows a lack of passion in my view.
As for leadership, that’s certainly a part of it and is often discussed in these pages as well. I would say Giteau has to go as he is in a leadership position but doesn’t demonstrate any. Ironically I think a formerly all reds inside backline of Genia, Barnes, Cooper and Ioane would fire without the constraints of Giteau’s belief that he owns the jersey.
But I agree with spiro that overall a lack of passion is what does it. They don’t hurt when they lose. Ever since I saw gregan smiling and joking with the opposition after a tense loss I thought, he cares about it less than I do, how can that be? He’s supposed to care about it more than anyone. I think passion has been lacking for about 5 years now.
end of rant.
Knives Out said | November 23rd 2009 @ 7:53am | Report comment
I would perceive a slow kick-chase as being due to poor organisation rather than a lack of passion, and/or poor kicking, BennO.
BennO said | November 23rd 2009 @ 7:57am | Report comment
I’m not talking about chasing kicks Knives Out, I’m talking about chasing after a player who makes a break. I can remember countless times Giteau making a lovely break only to be caught and have no one following to receive a pass or secure the ball. Result: No try when there should have been. But I would also maintain that a good kick chase is also indicative of a passionate team.
Knives Out said | November 23rd 2009 @ 8:05am | Report comment
Fatigue or poor fitness perhaps? I really don’t buy the passion theory. No rugby player goes out to lose, and Australia was dominant in quite a few aspects of the game. If they really weren’t trying then surely they wouldn’t have done various things well? I’m not Australian so I can’t comment on the Australian context, but as an objective observer what I see is a lack of leadership, no clear tactical game plan and poor skill execution. Why, for example, can Burgess still not throw a rugby ball properly?
BennO said | November 23rd 2009 @ 8:17am | Report comment
Well I guess everyone interprets what they see differently and that’s fine. But there is a difference between not going out to lose and playing with passion. You just need to watch the state of origin games to see that. There is a level of passion that makes for an incredible game of football. You get unknown players like Adam Mogg called up who play the game of their lives because they play with a passion that is unknown to this wallaby side.
There are no doubt individuals who lack certain skills (as there are in every team) but you just have to look at Smith, Elsom, Horwill, Giteau, Robinson, Hynes, Ashley-Cooper to see that a very good side is lurking in there with generally very skillful players. Maybe leadership is a problem too, I wouldn’t rule that out, but passion is such a wonderful ingredient to a team, it lifts players like nothing else.
Matt0931 said | November 23rd 2009 @ 8:32am | Report comment
I think it’s more to do with respect for the opposition than passion.
Did they train as hard for this test as the Irish or England test? me thinks not.
I think the coaches and the players were already thinking about the welsh well before the scottish game.
stillmissit said | November 23rd 2009 @ 9:20am | Report comment
Knives at last we totally disagree. This is the normal response from a young player who is totally process bound and risk averse.
Had Australia just followed a process then they would not have made the breakthrough at El Alamein in the second world war. The Aussies just fought on when nobody thought they could do it, no logic, limited structure, just plain passion, guts and cussedness.
Your generation has no idea about these great virtues as you have never been exposed to anything that demanded it of you.
Now you can come back with the whimpish answer that this is rugby it aint a war. To me it has always been similar, we go out there to beat an opposition that is tough and committed and wants to win and does not want to lose at the same intensity as we want to.
You can take as many ideas and tactics and statements about poor skill levels you want but in the end it is 15 men fighting 15 men. Take the passion out of it and you can just give the game to Rommel 9-8.
johnno42 said | November 23rd 2009 @ 6:08am | Report comment
yeah tell George Gregan that the reason for the defeat was “the wallabies were short on passion”
Surferbikerboy said | November 23rd 2009 @ 6:53am | Report comment
Let’s face it people, this is one of our worst Wallabies side, probably the worst in Aurtalian rugby history. They are clueless, lacking the skill level and intelligence required to lift themselves from the mire they find themselves in. Even our top guys have been dragged down to the level of the weakest links in the chain. Is this because they have given up, or just worn down by the mediocrity that surrounds them?
There can be absolutely no doubt though, that these guys lack the passion required to be competitive all the time and this surely must come from the lack of player depth pushing them to continually achieve, and the fact that their pay packets are secure no matter how they perform. Like many Australians, I was left bewildered and totally ashamed (and damn angry) that these guys had the arrogance to demand money for a trial game.
Maybe the issue is these guys are cossetted away too much from the reality of the real world. I can’t help but think that a bit of good old fashioned ‘face your accusers’ (ie, the rugby public) and be made to personally answer some hard questions about their lack of performance might at least wake a few of these guys up.
kingplaymaker said | November 23rd 2009 @ 7:08am | Report comment
Spiro in a way it’s not suprising that when a team has had its confidence repeatedly crushed by an endless series of losses it is incapable of playing well, motivating itself, and finishing off tries. The current side is like a man who has lost his job, his wife and his house and is finally faced with a mugger in the street bent on robbing him of his last few coins: does he put up a fight or back down and submit?
My own idea is that the team has lost because several key players were removed at the beginning of this season and during the last, and that this began a snowballing succession of losses. The players as a group were not good enough and lost despite having some confidence, which as a result disappeared. So with inadequate players and increasingly less confidence they continued to lose until now, even against a team with an inferior playing group, their confidence is so shot that they cannot muster any performance at all.
When confidence goes because a team’s players are not good enough, the more losses it accumulates the more the confidence goes and the harder it is to get it back. Until some more players are acquired or bought back this will continue to be the case.
Surferbikerboy said | November 23rd 2009 @ 7:19am | Report comment
Interesting theory – on the whole I agree with what you say. But, I rejoiced when some of the older guys, especially Nathan Sharpe, were axed because to me they were the ones who were far too accepting of a loss.
kingplaymaker said | November 23rd 2009 @ 7:36am | Report comment
Superbiker I think there’s a difference between a talented older player like Vickerman and Mcmenniman (who’s actually only 25) and an Al Baxter: axing the second older type is good, axing the first less so. The problem is the ARU axed the first.
kingplaymaker said | November 23rd 2009 @ 7:21am | Report comment
Spiro in fact having said all that, I now realise that an article I wrote has just appeared in which I give my explanation for all this at greater length so if you like you can see it there as it’s a little too long for a comment.
Kevin,Meath said | November 23rd 2009 @ 7:35am | Report comment
Scotland are not a bad side, they have made themselves very difficult to beat over the last couple of years but have failed to go to the next level score tries and beat teams. Especially at home they defend with massive amounts of pride. If you don’t take chances (21 points) and miss kicks (11 points) then how do you expect to beat any half decent team?
On the negative for Australia you are now going to play a team (Wales) who have been much stronger than Scotland over the last few years and who have a backline full of Lions. You drop 32 points against them then you will have problems.
Steven Jones is playing very well, Jamie Roberts is finding form as is Shane Williams and Martin Williams is at his ‘cheating’ best.
On the plus side Wales have their 4/5th choice tighthead and light, if athletic, locks so their scrum is suspect , although they stood up to the Argentines no mean feat. They are missing a few player (Adam Jones who is showing why tightheads are in such demand) Lee Byrne and Mike Philips , that (in my opinion ) shouldn’t be a big problem with Peel but Gatland seems to prefer Cooper. They also like to play ‘rugby’ that is a more open game, that would be good for Australia and hopefully the rugby fan. As a Welshman in exile I would take a 6-3 win but as a rugby fan I hope it produces a fine game.
Australia play like you did against Scotland then your feked, play like you did against Ireland then its going to be a great game. Will have to figure out how I can sneal off early to watch it.
BennO said | November 23rd 2009 @ 7:51am | Report comment
At the start of the tour this was the game I was most looking forward to because I love the way the Welsh play the game (not a long time fan but when Graham Henry took over in the late 90s I took notice and they developed a good deal of belief I think). But now after the Wallabies performances I’m just scared to watch it! We might bounce back and play a great game but I think we’re gonna get touched up by the Welsh.
Kevin,Meath said | November 23rd 2009 @ 8:10am | Report comment
As a completely biased Welshmen hope so! but I suspect the ‘Aussie’s will bounce back. Wales want to run the ball as do Australia, Wales (esp the scrum) are not that strong up front , although Charteris ( who by the way is English or I should say Cornish and prefers to play for Wales) is doing well in the lineout. So i expect Australia to do well up front, theres not much difference between Wales and Ireland. Has all the marks for a good game of rugby, pity I don’t finish my college course until 5 on saturdays, will have to find a relative who is ill.
Kevin,Meath said | November 23rd 2009 @ 8:12am | Report comment
just edited comment so correction no longer required. But what are the chances of a NH clean sweep on staurday?
BennO said | November 23rd 2009 @ 8:22am | Report comment
Well let’s hope it’s a good one. As you say, it’s sure to be entertaining rugby whoever wins.
The Link said | November 23rd 2009 @ 7:52am | Report comment
An Australian Rugby Football side that cannot attack, is well, un-Australian. No imagination. Like watching 15 robots camped in the opposition 22.
Nick the Rooster said | November 23rd 2009 @ 8:00am | Report comment
Let me start by saying that I’m a proud Australian and always will be. However, it gives me a warm feeling inside watching the Wallabies get bashed and beaten.
I have never been a rugby fan and therefore never really cared about the Wallabies. It wasn’t until the night I stayed up to watch them be humiliated by the English during the last World Cup that I began to despise them. That nght, they weren’t just beaten. That night they taught a lesson in passion, toughness and pride. All the things you would normally take for granted with Australian national teams. I was embarrassed to call myself an Australian after that performance.
The Wallabies are proving what is wrong with rugby in this country. The non-existant local competition and the reliance on pompous private school boys coming through the grades is creating a soft underbelly that is being exposed by tougher opposition. Skill and speed might get the Wallabies a few wins here and ther but as soon as they come up against the likes of the Springboks or All Blacks, they’re made to look soft. Even the All Blacks themselves commented on how soft the Wallabies were during this years Tri Nations. That’s right……. soft!
And now the Scots have done it. They came out and played with a bit of pride and passion and have shown up a Wallaby outfit who should have been far more superior. The Wallabies have again embarrassed Australia on the world stage.
All I can say is thank God for the Kangaroos and rugby league. Although they may slip everyone now and again and lose the odd match, only to the Kiwis, they always represent Australia with pride. They would never be beaten by another team through lack of toughness, passion or pride.
BennO said | November 23rd 2009 @ 8:08am | Report comment
You’re not from around these parts are you pal?
Nick the Rooster said | November 23rd 2009 @ 10:16am | Report comment
I am very much from around here mate. Born and bred in Sydney. This is why I am so disgutsed by the Wallabies.
BennO said | November 23rd 2009 @ 11:46am | Report comment
Relax mate it was supposed to be a light-hearted dig…declaring a love for league on a rugby thread made me think of an old western where the villain rides slowly into town.
Also the points you raise are regularly thrashed out on these pages (particularly weak third tier competitions), so it seems you haven’t been following them.
Nick the Rooster said | November 23rd 2009 @ 1:23pm | Report comment
Sorry BennO – I get all excited whenever I get the chance to give it to the Wallabies.
BennO said | November 23rd 2009 @ 3:22pm | Report comment
No wuckers, you must have had a fair few chances recently!
Mr cheese said | November 23rd 2009 @ 9:07am | Report comment
Nick,
isn’t the problem that the “Wallabies” have accomplished more on the world stage than the “Kangaroos” because of the difference between the two sports i.e. Union is bigger ???
I watch both League and Union.
Over here ( Inglaterra ), John Eales and Campese would be much better known than Mal Meninga or Andrew Johns.
John Eales is very highly regarded. Sadly, Mal Meninga isn’t because his sport is not very big.
John Eales projected a very very positive image of Australian sport and of Australia.
Sadly, no RL player could ever do that. You shouldn’t be so quick to throw stones at Union.
Bruce Ross said | November 23rd 2009 @ 9:26am | Report comment
“the reliance on pompous private school boys coming through the grades”. The current malaise in Australian rugby has much to do with the current tendency for school boys, whether “pompous private” or not, not “coming through the grades” where they would learn their craft over several years, but instead being immediately rushed into professional football with a very limited skill and knowledge set.
Mick Gold Coast QLD said | November 23rd 2009 @ 11:26am | Report comment
In this context I am reminded of Matt Burke’s considerable period as apprentice to Marty Roebuck at the Mighty Eastwood – I recall him getting one of his early representative opportunities only after Roebuck busted his leg, and the public interchange between the two one Saturday up at Milner as the master handed over the responsibility in the knowledge the kid had been well groomed.
Justin said | November 23rd 2009 @ 11:35am | Report comment
I thought Burke started out as a centre? I know his first few maw matches were at 13 with Scotty Bowen supplying greats balls from 10.
Mick Gold Coast QLD said | November 23rd 2009 @ 3:45pm | Report comment
Don’t recall what he started out as, Justin.
He was merely one of the young ones at family BBQs with my son and his mates – quiet, personable, confident.
I do recall he played wing, centre and full back at the Woodies and that he had a good grounding in Club rugby before and during his progression upwards. I also cannot recall the full Woodies complement at that time – there may have been a couple of others who played full back from time to time, even while Roebuck and Burke were there. We were blessed with many good backs.
Conversely I saw a young Brisbane kid play full back (poorly) for the Wallabies over in Wellington and then again the other night, as a late replacement, who I doubt has ever seen a Club dressing shed. If he has it has not been many times at all.
Nick the Rooster said | November 23rd 2009 @ 10:11am | Report comment
Mr Cheese…………..The fact that rugby is played in more countries doesn’t make it a better sport. The only reason that it is played in more countries is because it spread with the British empire all those years ago and was made part of the sporting curriculum in the private schools founded by the settlers. The same way that cricket spread to India and the West Indies etc.
You keep reffering to the Wallabies being better known in Europe, which has nothing to do with what I said. The fact they are well known makes it worse for us given they are so pathetic.
Being well known doesn’t make you great or mean your talented. It just means that the sport you play has more of a media focus onj it and more money pumped into it on the world stage. Does the fact that Gary Ablett, Tony Lockett and Chris Judd aren’t house-hold names overseas make them lesser athletes over here? And you refer to Mal Meninga and Andrew Johns and compare them to John Eales and David Campese? Are you kidding? Mal and Joey would wipe the floor with either of them. And don’t forget that Australian Rugby hired Andrew Johns to teach them how to kick.
Thanks for the advice, but I’ll keep throwing stones at the Wallabies as they’re a joke!
Mr cheese said | November 23rd 2009 @ 11:26am | Report comment
Nick,
I like RL so don’t start the RL v RU debate with me.
John Eales is a giant of Aussie sport. As an Englishman, I can say that with respect and probably jealousy.
Meninga was terrific but John Eales was fantastic too.
Anyways, France was never part of the British Empire. They have RU.
I continue to believe that John Eales gave a great image of Australia. Much better than Meninga or Andrew Johns.
Dan said | November 23rd 2009 @ 12:30pm | Report comment
John Eales was a true ambassador for the country and the game, but in terms of sheer skill there’s few people who have as much skill and control as Andrew Johns… I still remember him coming back to play state of Origin after 18 months off the field through injury and him calmly setting up half the blues tries with pin-point passes under pressure and then kicking three perfect conversions from the sideline. That man had a level of on field class that the over-paid Matt Giteau can only dream of.
Nick the Rooster said | November 23rd 2009 @ 1:12pm | Report comment
Well said Dan!
Nick the Rooster said | November 23rd 2009 @ 1:21pm | Report comment
Mr Cheese – why do you keep refering to John Eales and Mal Meninga? How old are you?
I agree John Eales is a gentleman, a good role model and a great ambassador for Australian sport. But I’m talking about the current crop of Wallabies and how pathetic they are. If you go back and read my first comment, you’ll see that I said I lost all respect for the Wallabies after they lost to England in the last World Cup in 2007. John Eales didn’t even play then!
And, I realise that France were never part of the British Empire. What I meant was that England’s influence throughout the world all those years ago was the reason for the spread of rugby. Argentina, to my knowledge, was never part of the Empire either but it was through English schools based in Argentina that rugby spread there.
NickF said | November 23rd 2009 @ 1:30pm | Report comment
Nick the Chicken, I grew up following rugby league whilst playing union. I am a season ticket holder for the Dragons and have been a season ticket holder for the Waratahs few quite a few season but discontinued as I felt the Waratahs administration didn’t treat their fans very well.
Did you know that this year the Roosters had more players arrested than win games? I don’t need to tell you about some of the other atrocious behaviour by other players. Then theirs the great Andrew Johns, lets mention his drug taking, and not just in Australia, but overseas as well.
Were they making Australians look good?
While we are there what about Anthony Watmough, assaulting a sponsor (Kangaroo) and Paul Gallen, racial vilification, picking at another players stitches in a tackle, sorry his is just too many to mention (Kangaroo), are these great ambassadors of Australia.
As for your attempt to denigrate Eales and Campese. Both have done more for Australia, Australian sport and Rugby than Meninga and Johns, both of which were great players.
Take of your small world “NRL-only” blinkers. And give up on your “what league has done for rugby union” argument, and remember such names as Wally Lewis, Ricky Stuart, Ray Price, John Brass, Rex Mossop, Dally Messenger etc. and see that both codes influence each other.
Nick the Rooster said | November 23rd 2009 @ 2:38pm | Report comment
NickF………. another pointless rant which has nothing to do with my original comment.
And when did I say anything about league doing anything for union? What arguement are you talking about?
As far as my NRL blinkers go, I’m afraid you’re way off. I watch AFL and the A-League as well as the NRL. If only there were a decent rugby comp to watch I may consider it. The ARC was such a huge success. And before you start with the Super 14, don’t bother. The fact is that the only country that still wants the Super 14 is Australia. The local SA and NZ comps are quite strong and they don’t need the Super 14 to improve their players. On the other hand, rugby would die in this country if it wasn’t for the Super 14 due to the joke that is club rugby.
At the end of the day, my beef is with the Wallabies. While I admit that rugby is as boring as watching paint dry, I don’t mind the odd NZ club match as they’re fairly entertaining. The Wallabies are a joke, pure and simple.
And you talk about player behaviour. The only reason league players keep being dragged through the media is because it sells papers. You don’t hear about rugby players getting in trouble because nobody cares!
As far as making Australia look good, I believe holding up trophies and shields in an Aussie jumper makes Australia look very good. Something Andrew Johns, Brad Fitler and Darren Lockyer have all done in the recent past, which is more than I can say for any Wallaby player.
And I’ll finish by saying that you don’t seem to bright. You’ve spent money on Waratahs and Dragons season tickets. Enough said.
NickF said | November 23rd 2009 @ 3:55pm | Report comment
Rooster man, quote-
“And don’t forget that Australian Rugby hired Andrew Johns to teach them how to kick.”.
Justin said | November 23rd 2009 @ 9:19am | Report comment
Funny thing is they were far superior they just couldn’t ground the ball or kick goals!!!
Timmypig said | November 25th 2009 @ 12:36pm | Report comment
Nick thanks for your contributions. Now pack up your 1890s-style class hatred and disappear from the Roar’s rugby threads please champ.
Oh, and BTW:
“…they always represent Australia with pride. They would never be beaten by another team through lack of toughness, passion or pride.”
Have you forgotten how your brave, tough, manly, magnificent Kangaroos were too scared to tour Lancashire in late 2001 because they feared becoming Al Qaeda targets?
fox said | November 23rd 2009 @ 8:15am | Report comment
Ironic it is rooster then that a bunch of private school boys’s underbellies were exposed by another group of private (or as they call it there, public) schoolboys. In Scotland rugby is the game of the upper classes – and more so than here even.
You are right to feel embarrassed though. But it’s alright, immense glory is just around the corner – or so I keep being informed! It is, I keep reminding myself, simply a matter of time before these lads hold onto passes and some key players stay on the park (or indeed the tour) for 80 minutes – and we have a better organiser in midfield than Gits.
The only thing that is obvious to me in all this is that the Wallabies don’t have a world class goal kicker and because of that, it is absolute crucial that all chances at 5 pointers be taken. Other southern hemisphere teams on tour have gotten away with playing below their abilities due to converting those vital 3 pointers. Unfortunately we have no such safety net.
The Wallabies are still some way to being successful but I will keep the faith. There is still much to be positive about. However, it cannot be underestimated just how vitally important this weekend’s match against Wales is!
Knives Out said | November 23rd 2009 @ 8:24am | Report comment
I just think that passion is too easy a response to fall back on, and in my experience it is primarily an Australian response. For me, passion is something that carries you through one off games, like the 2007 QF between Australia and England. Australia would probably have won that game 99 times out of 100, BennO. Therefore I also believe that passion is a necessity when things aren’t going to plan, but that ultimately the most significant aspect is the broader picture. For example: tactical flexibility on the field of play and leadership. These two things also dig you out of holes. This Australian side has been playing under Deans for two years and is yet to establish a consistent style of play. What sort of rugby is the team trying to play? I honestly can’t tell. Do the players even know?
BennO said | November 23rd 2009 @ 8:50am | Report comment
Crikey you’re jumping around the page now, I can’t follow!
I agree with what you say about the type of rugby. I’ve seen Horan and maybe Kearns talk about how they can see it and they think the players do too, but I don’t see too much. Although having said that I missed the last two games. I think Spiro’s summation isn’t bad though (kick when necessary but run when you can) but if that’s the plan I don’t think they have got it yet.
But regarding passion it’s true it’s an easy fallback because it’s so obvious. But the wallabies do look like they’re just going through the motions. They have done for some time now, perhaps since Eddie Jones. THey play with, let’s call it passion and enthusiasm when the media gets on their backs a bit and they execute well and play with tactical nous and all that (Boks game this year as exhibit A) but that only comes when everyone is having a go at them. THey need that passion every week, I don’t think it’s a one off thing. They are representing their country for crying out loud. There’s no greater honour.
As for being a uniquely Australian response, I think that’s got two sources, one is state of origin in a sporting context. That has elevated passion in this country to a mythical thing. The passsion QLD displayed from the start and to this day is legendary. It’s genuine and it’s on display every year. Until recently bookies had them losing just about every series, yet over almost 30 years it’s 50-50. They grow legs in the QLD jersey. The other source is of it is historical, the national pride that comes from proving ourselves to the world. We don’t take too many things seriously in Oz, but as you know sport is one of those things. We demonstrate to ourselves that we are free from the Old Dart by beating them in sport. We should be a minnow in most sports, yet we consistently punch above our weight. Because we want to prove to the world (and probably ourselves), through sporting success, that we are important in the world. Or something like that anyway.
Basically it comes down to wanting to beat the Poms at everything and that took a lot of passion in the very early years because we didn’t necessarily have the skills or the technique. We had a shared passion borne out of a hatred of the English always being on top. That’s lingered in most teams and in the minds of most fans.
That’s what I reckon anyway.
Knives Out said | November 23rd 2009 @ 8:55am | Report comment
There wasn’t a reply option below your last post.
That’s an interesting response. We’ll just have to agree to disagree, BennO. I see passion as short-term, something that aids and elevates a tactical framework and accurate skill set.
BennO said | November 23rd 2009 @ 9:09am | Report comment
Fair enough. Though I agree with you about what passion can do. I think our only disagreement is that I think the national side should have that burning in them every game.
Knives Out said | November 23rd 2009 @ 9:15am | Report comment
I agree that passion should be a given but Australia lost because of technical issues: poor goal kicking and a forward pass. It is a very broad debate, I suppose.
BennO said | November 23rd 2009 @ 9:26am | Report comment
It’ just circular I think because you’re quite right, that’s why we lost but I’d say that if this team played with more passion they’d have executed better!
Ben C said | November 23rd 2009 @ 9:26am | Report comment
I have to agree with KO
The end of the Wellington test displayed a lack of passion.
The loss ot Scotland was down to:
(a) lack of ability in the lineout
(b) lack of any sort of tactical leadership in the backline
The first seems to be the cattle. Chisholm has always been a journeyman and Horwill is a Botha/Thorn workhorse (who has lost his spark) and not a Matfield/Vickerman lineout general
The second, I am not so sure about. Is it lack of tactical awareness at 10? Everyone seems to agree Giteau does not seem to have the vision for an international fly-half. Is it coaching? There does not seem to be any plan to the backline. Deans talks about kicking but the kicking is woeful. Some of the selections are baffling on occasion. I suspect it is a bit of both. Perhaps they need to ditch Richard Graham and look for a better backline/skills coach.
Daniel J said | November 23rd 2009 @ 3:00pm | Report comment
KO – Passion is essential, it is the driving motivator that will win a tight contest, it affects moral and in turn will affect the attitude of the team. All of these ingredients are without a doubt profoundly missing in this current wallabies side and don’t think that it can be rubbished… I know what you are saying that it is easy to do that, but in all honesty, do you think if the wallabies had beat Ireland that they would have lost against Scotland? i know it’s a hypothetical but you could almost sense that once the grand slam was off th cards the team might have given up….. just a thought
Has anyone else noticed the complete lack of composure Drew Mitchell shows after he scores? it’s embarrassing.
whodares said | November 23rd 2009 @ 8:32am | Report comment
Deans has to go
What sport / organisation would keep a person at the helm that went backwards by 30% after replacing a head person who was also going backwards.
OK Ford GM Chrysler but apart from them nobody.
Robbie Deans has the worst record of any Wallabies coach hands down. Even a Brain effected Greg Smith had double the winning record.
The buck has to stop with the coach. He trains/ teachers the team and selects the players. If the players he selects and the tactics he devises and techers don’t get results then he has to be accountable.
Deans simply has no idea. Evidence this idea of playing what is infront of you. Why? Because you can’t think of or teach a move that will work?
This might work at S14 level when you have had the two best 10’s in Merhtens and Carter and the best lose forward in the world Richie M sprinkled with a few other classy All Blacks.
The ultimate test for any coach is taking a team of also rans and turning them into world beating champions not taking a team of champoins and getting them to win consistently.
Which coaches do this? Rod Mcqueen, Tim Sheens (tigers), Bob Dwyer (at Randwick), Gus Hiddick (Australian soccer)
stillmissit said | November 23rd 2009 @ 9:10am | Report comment
whodares – I agree with you that someone has to take the rap for this effort and there is nobody else apart from Deans. The ideal solution would be to sack the backs coach Richard Graham and put Jim Williams on notice but the bottom line lives with Deans.
I cant make the excuse for Robbie Deans that he didnt pick these players that is far in the past. He owns this mess and he may be looking for a job come January.
I totally agree with McQueen brought business ability to rugby, Tim Sheens, would have been better to buy Sheens as coach than the group of rip off league players, Dwyer, nobody better at picking raw talent, Gus Hiddick consumate pro.
Bruce Ross said | November 23rd 2009 @ 9:18am | Report comment
whodares, you include among your list of coaches who have taken a “team of also rans” and turned them into “world beating champions” “Bob Dwyer (at Randwick), Gus Hiddick (Australian soccer)”.
I don’t remember in which year Dwyer first coached Randwick (1978?) but given that the Club won five Premierships throughout the ‘Seventies I hardly think he started off with “also rans”.
I don’t follow soccer but am surprised to learn that under Guus Hiddink the Socceroos became “world beating champions”.
Jim Boyce said | November 23rd 2009 @ 10:05am | Report comment
Bruce – Hiddink only had that team for 6 monthes and certainly not ” world beating champions” but a team that was in contention for a long way against Italy in the 2006 World Cup.
Bruce Ross said | November 23rd 2009 @ 5:08pm | Report comment
Fair point, Jim.
johnny-boy said | November 23rd 2009 @ 8:39am | Report comment
Spiro – complacent is a very good description. It seems clear to me that the Wallabies minds are on strike. Sub-conscious or conscious, it doesnt matter – the result is the same. The Wallabies have some very good players, but they are obviously not firing, on a regular basis for some serious reason. That reason imo, is Deans. It may also have something to do with Nucifora, who seems to specialise in disenchanting players. People are asking why dont the Wallabies play with more passion for their country. Well for starters they have been told by O’Neill that Australians arent good enough to coach them . It must be a former All Black and All Black coach. The enemy. It’s lilke Kevin Rudd asking Malcolm Turnbull to take the position as head of the ATCU. It just aint gonna work, despite Turnbulls’ IQ. As a consequence it wouldnt be surprising if the Wallabies are questioning themselves in their own minds, whether or not Australians as players are really up to it in world rugby as well. Doubt begets doubt.
Whatever it is, do we really need to go even deeper than rock bottom before something is done about it ? Deans has 3 choices. 1) Bugger off. 2) take out australian citizenship to demonstrate his committtment to Australia and the Australian team or 3) for c….. sake move Giteau from 10.
Deans came to Australia saying he was inspired by Brockhoff? to help get the best out of players. Well the best thing he can do now is one of the above because what he is doing now is helping them go backwards, not forwards. Thanks a million Drongo. If Deans continues down this path towards the world cup, there wont be an australian rugby game to be the head coach of. Is he a cunning stooge of the NZRFU ? A vitual All Black to borrow Andrew Logans superb phrase.
Deans says Australia is continuing to find ways of putting itself under pressure. Like continuing to play Giteau at 10 Deans you dunce ! You are the person continually putting Australia under presure by persisting with something that doesnt b…. work ! As it was with Burgess and Baxter, until public opinion forced him to change. Deans philosophy of playing what is in front of you has been interpreted by the Wallabies as having a go at trying to make the miracle break by yourself, rather than as a team. Again the problem is Deans ! You cant blame the ref any more Deans. Blaming the players doesnt cut it cos it’s your job to get them humming. The problem is you ! For goodness sake show some balls and own up to it. And stop this cowardly not contesting the lineouts. It’s just downright un-Australian !
Deans’ coaching skills are looking more and more as having been prettied up by McCaw and Carter and clinical Canterbury execution. Full credit to the Scots for busting their arse for thier country. They deserved it.
I won’t be watching any more Wallaby games whenever Giteau is selected at 10. I’ve had a gutful of this obstinate stupidity.
Hansie said | November 23rd 2009 @ 3:19pm | Report comment
Yep, and his key sponsor, Mr O’Neill, should take responsibility for the Deans appointment. He’s already absolved himself of any responsibility by saying that head office is doing all it can. By contrast, he is quick to claim credit when results are going Australia’s way.
The way it is! said | November 23rd 2009 @ 8:42am | Report comment
Nick the Rooster you are 100% correct. The Australian rugger system is producing a soft underbelly by having a focus of selecting from the private school network who have most things in life handed to them on a plate ,as a result they are just not true rugby players in the form of a Poidevin etc. This system has now been operating for 10 years + and now you have the results, a very weak national team. I read that certain private school boy stars are being drafted straight into Supert 14 academy’s etc without going into grade to toughen up.
Money is another reason we have an uncommitted side and I bet that Deans would not have coached another national team if it wasn’t for the massive $$$ that he is getting. How can a coach impart a sense of the national jersey etc when he is not even a bloody Australian it just can’t be done and anybody who tries to tell me other wise is delusional.
Knives Out said | November 23rd 2009 @ 8:52am | Report comment
Lawrence Dallaglio went to a private school. Jonny Wilkinson went to a private school. Brian O’Driscoll went to a private school. Those three players all have certain things in common.
The way it is! said | November 23rd 2009 @ 9:48am | Report comment
Yes they all play for teams which Australia should beat if they play with more character, forged from a tough path way to the top!
Mr cheese said | November 23rd 2009 @ 9:53am | Report comment
Ah yes, but when Lol and Wilko needed someone to put the ball over the try line in 2003, they handed it to Billy Whizz.
Which private school did Billy Whizz go to ???? ( Do they have private schools in Leeds ? )
The way it is! said | November 23rd 2009 @ 12:44pm | Report comment
Yes and that character to do what Billy Whizz use to do was not gifted by anybody but developed from his upbringing as he had no fall back options like some of our current Wallabies.
Justin said | November 23rd 2009 @ 9:24am | Report comment
This private school/handed eveything on a plate is the biggest load of sh!t I have ever heard. It’s been the same for 100 years.
The way it is! said | November 23rd 2009 @ 10:02am | Report comment
You obviously went to a private school? Overall it really doesn’t matter what school a rugby player went to as long as they are not gifted a spot in a team as they must show true character of will and desire over a protracted period of time and then when things get tough in the trenches the true will to win is evident. The will to win was clearly not there in the last test for Australia.
The SA & AB teams seem to consistently have this will and it’s developed way back from the culture they are developed in!
Justin said | November 23rd 2009 @ 10:18am | Report comment
Well they scored a try in the last minute so to me that suggests they had the will but not the skill to finish it. See the post below for the reality of private v blue collar comparisons. Some have it some don’t, it’s either in you or it isn’t and what school you went to doesn’t change it.
stillmissit said | November 23rd 2009 @ 9:41am | Report comment
My experience with young players is that you can’t generalise. I have had public school boys with more guts than some of our current Wallabies and Westies with no ticker at all and I have had the reverse of this.
In a hard game like rugby some people stand up and some fold. I don’t mind it at the club level as I tell the guys you need to have guts to play this game well.
In the Wallabies it is totally unacceptable, you show the guts or you should be shown the door.
Dan said | November 23rd 2009 @ 4:51pm | Report comment
The impact of the private school system is wildly overstated in Australian Rugby and it is not to blame for our current predicament. It’s worth remembering that more than half the country’s rugby players have public school backgrounds nowadays. In fact, in some areas the trend in positively the reverse. I went to a public school that chose to play Rugby due to the travel prospects while the much richer private school up the road played Rugby League.
No, what’s wrong with Australian rugby is not the private schools, but the legacy of the limited and localised club competitions (which are arguably proppoed up by old private school boys I suppose, but that’s where that argument ends as far as I can tell) that keep the game at a semi pro level outside of the Super 14. We simply don’t have enough full time professional footballers. That is why the kangaroos look so much better than the wallabies. It’s not simply their opposition, but that the Kangaroos have the luxury of picking from 16 teams of fully professional footballers who have to endure a rigorous 26 week competition.
Bay35Pablo said | November 23rd 2009 @ 8:45am | Report comment
“George Gregan who when accused of being passionless made the case that professional players didn’t have to get worked up or fired up to honour the jersey and perform well.”
Don’t remind me of why I came to hate someone who used to be a good half back before I spent several years wishing he’d rack off …..
Hammer said | November 23rd 2009 @ 9:04am | Report comment
The players shouldn’t need to have a financial incentive in order to perform for their country – I couldn’t imagine the concept having to even be contemplated in NZ or SA … there you pull on the jersey in fear of not being able to honour what’s gone on before …. nothing less than 100% will do …
the question surely is then (which I’m really surprised hasn’t been mentioned in this piece) is Deans the right person – you mention Gregan, Lackham, Poidevin … but is a kiwi the right person to be trying to install national pride into a bunch of Australians who clearly are going through the motions …
Harry said | November 23rd 2009 @ 9:15am | Report comment
While watching it live I noted that we were quite directionless in the last 15 minutes. There was an unwillingness for any player to take responsibility and lead. Partially this is down to confidence (Gits is completely shot and his display on the weekend will fracture his confidence, perhaps forever … can you imagine the sledging he will get in Pretoria or Christchurch from the crowd when he next lineups up a pressure kick, let alone the players) but also a large part is the current players just don’t have the fortitude … their entire career they have found that mediocrity has been well rewarded and no real consequences for failure. There is also still a culture of arrogance and entitlement among Australian rugby, even among the supporters. Look at all the outrage here about losing to the Scots … a country that has been down in recent years for sure, but has a long and proud rugby history (eg. inventing 7’s, many great players over the years like Irvine and Hastings) and has learnt to make do with fewer resources.
Until the poor structure (no depth, no domestic comp, test players allowed to cruise, pay structures wrong) of Australian rugby is addressed we’ll wallow about in mediocrity and results like this will be the norm … as they were before the grand slam tour of 84.
Spiro I said before the tour a few weeks back that I feared this tour would be more like 81 than 84. Sadly its turning out to be so. Perhaps history may also repeat itself as the nearly-there Wallaby team, with some great players but equally obvious deficiencies,transformed it self into world beaters with some tough decisions, strong leadership and new blood.
Rusty said | November 23rd 2009 @ 9:21am | Report comment
It’s fairly well known Deans doesn’t like Giteau but will the ARU permit Dingo to drop its marquee player? The situation is starting to resemble the Gregan-Jones European tour debacle.
Ben C said | November 23rd 2009 @ 9:34am | Report comment
The on field leadership is a worry. Elsom is a “follow me” type of captain but does he have the tactical nous? He doesn’t need it if the fly-half or at least the inside-centre has vision and tactical awareness but we are missing that too.
Interestingly, an acquaitance who had reason to attend the John Eales medal dinner (just after the appointment of Elsom as captain) told me that throughout the night many players were clustered around Mortlock whereas Elsom was left pretty much alone throughout the night.
It wasn’t clear whether he was being snubbed or if he is, by nature, a bit of a loner. Neither strikes me as ideal for the captaincy.
Vented Relief said | November 23rd 2009 @ 2:26pm | Report comment
I’d much prefer an Allan Border type captain (elsom) then a michael clarke type captain (mortlock). I also think that once Barnes comes back we will have that tactical nous in the midfield. Just hope that he doesn’t break down prior to or during the world cup….. and that he is picked at 10.
stuff happens said | November 23rd 2009 @ 9:36am | Report comment
Well, wet nights at Murrayfield are not the easiest when your team is performing poorly.And as others have pointed out the Scots are dogged defenders but struggle to score tries. I thought their coach last season Frank Hadden was hard done by.The Scottish front five won the game for them.
The Australian locks are dreadful. Ricketty Knees described them yesterday as “Null & Void’ which I thought was wonderful.Don’t you think that before the game Deans would have showed them the France ‘Boks match to see what a really fired up passionate front five can do. Apparently not.
Jim Boyce said | November 23rd 2009 @ 9:37am | Report comment
Spiro – I notice you havementioned ,”respect for the jersey” a number of times. You also alluded to the current team being similar to the bonus accepting financiers who seemed to accept no responsibility for the financial meltdown of 2009. As long as the jersey looks like a bar towel fished out of an over- chlorinated swimming pool, I think that commitment to the jersey is questionable and only adds to the mindset of playing to program and accepting the money.
Here is an idea , why doesn’t the management team sit on the sideline. There is no lack of passion from the soccer manager so located, whether it be rain or shine. The glassed in look of the rubgy management team ensconced on padded seats beside computers is lack of passion taken to the nth degree.
This team could do with a team talk from the late Harry Greb, celebrated by Norman Mailer. Maybe they dont have to go down to the docks to find the meanest whore in town but a view of the bottom of life’s pit with accommodation to match would certainly add to their concentration.
This team is such a hot and cold side that they might win in style at Cardiff. I think Deans could motivate a New Zealand team but it is now debateable whether Christchurch can come to Sydney or Brisbane.
cinematic said | November 23rd 2009 @ 9:42am | Report comment
Spiro mentions complacency in the header to his opinion piece.
Surely complacency is something to be dealt with by the coach and management team – and if they can’t fix it then a change is needed?
For a side that has had such a horrific season to be complacent on this tour is beyond belief.
bennalong said | November 23rd 2009 @ 9:48am | Report comment
I had hoped that after the initial despair some rationality would surface and like glimpses of sunlight through dark clouds come the pars by Kevin,Meath and Kingplaymaker. Reread them!
To the blokes that want to spew bile, go ahead. That’s one of the functions of blogs – to allow the venting of emotions pent up after wins and losses
But remember, your vomiting is great for you but no good for any one else.
Let me ask you at what point you feel we lost it. For me it was Rocky Elsom’s try denied. (And you can see the grounding in the long shot replay from behind the dead ball line) Giteau had already missed.
My shoulders sagged. Can you imagine what it did to these young players? And yet they came back and pulled off an O”Driscoll ! They found the line, again.
Usually Giteau would have bagged that conversion no trouble. Would you be spewing now if he had?
The better team lost ! EH?
One last question. What will the Welsh be thinking? Initially they’d be pretty happy. Then they’d watch the replays and realise they’re up against two pivots that can kick and run unpredictable lines. A fast 7,a good scrum (how’s Robinson)
A team that might come back like scaulded cats.
Worst of all they’re expected to win against the Easybeats or they’ll cop a drubbing like you’re handing out to the Wallabies
This is a young team missing key players. Keep the faith. They’re putting in the hard yards. They’ll either be crushed or they’ll come through tougher and wiser.
I’ll go for the second option.
AndyS said | November 23rd 2009 @ 6:15pm | Report comment
For mine, the moment we lost it was Giteau’s drop-kick attempt. It was certainly the point I started to worry (albeit in my case because I’ve seen it before and knbow what it indicates). Views may vary on DG as a tactic, but to me that kick screamed a lack of attacking ideas, a lack of trust in the backline and a lack of appetite to keep bashing into the defensive wall. Even if that were not what was going on in Giteau’s head, I am sure it is how the Scots saw it and they went into the break with a massive lift.
Farmer said | November 23rd 2009 @ 9:55am | Report comment
Australia should have won this game by 20 points. Scotland never looked liked scoring a try.
For the second week in arow , they were over the line 3 times , only to be denied on all 6.
For the second week in row, poor goal kicking by Giteau denied the Wallabies of a win.
The Wallaby backline is missing Barnes big time. It does not lok threatening. Much of the blame for this must go to Gitea who is not able to create anything.
Maybe it is the cattle are not good enough.
Cross is a stop gap centre , not really up to Test standard. He does not create anything. He just runs the same line until getting tackled. Even then he is not motoring, he expects to be tackled. On Staurday they missed barnes and Ioane. Giteau has got to be moved from 10. There is no spark.
Maybe it is the backs coach. They do not look threatening.
Good sides have good goal kickers. They deliver the points. Had Giteau delivered, the Wallabies would be 3 out of 3 by now and everyone would be salivating for Wales.
It is a fine line.
Farmer said | November 23rd 2009 @ 10:31am | Report comment
As further evidence of the lack of direction, skill, managemet of the backline, leadership, …. ), during the game the commentators provided a stat of the number of times each team had access to the ball ( from a ruck, scrum, lineout etc) inside the opposition 22 .
At the 65 minute mark, the stat was Wallabies 42, Scotland 2.
This evolved to a stat of Wallabies 59, Scotland 9 at full time.
This says a whole lot about Scotlands defence and a whole lot about the ability of the Wallabies to create and finish something.
One final comment – this Test must finally bury the notion the Burgess is a Test standard half back. He only threw 6 passes and half were what you would expect from a front rower ( apologies to all the front rowers our there ! )
pothale said | November 23rd 2009 @ 10:37am | Report comment
“For the second week in a row they were over the line three times, only to be denied on all 6.”
They were? When did they get three disallowed tries in the game against Ireland?
They got a lucky gift from a coc-up between O’Gara/O’Driscoll, and Rocky got them over once.
Giteau missed kicks but so did Ireland, and they turned down penalties.
“Australia should have won…’ is becoming a worn-out phrase that has pursued the team all year. The reality is that they have done no better than most of the NH teams all year. The Top 3 has been a top 2 for over 12 months – then there’s the rest of the pack with Ireland, France, Australia and Wales toughing it out.
Going for a surf said | November 23rd 2009 @ 3:42pm | Report comment
Agree with you pothole re – 2 top teams – daylight third.
SA seem to suffer from fatigue in the NH tours. NZ just keep chugging along & Australia have lost all confidence & look mentally fatigued from dealing with so many games in tri nations, lost in the second half to superior teams.
Missed kicks & lack of variety / adventure in the backs is definitely a confidence issue.
They looked mundane in the backs against Ireland when they could have gone on with the game & was very worried about the out come of this weekend. Haven’t seen the game, but from all accounts, it was the same.
GregE said | November 23rd 2009 @ 10:16am | Report comment
It appears to me that the trouble with the Wallabies is not a lack of passion, it is the methodical robotic way they play the game and supposedly the way they train. Statistics that show maximum amount of possession mean nothing when you do not score points and win matches.
It appears to me that this methodical dropping to the ground and setting up is useless when you are not moving forward as it permits the defensive back line to fill in numbers and have less forwards committed to the ruck. The Scots defended very well; however, they should have done so as they outnumbered the attacking Wallaby backline so they had the numbers in defence. If a Wallaby pack trained and played on its feet and dragged the forwards to the maul, then the attacking backline stands half a chance of making a break by lining up one on one. Teams are penalised for collapsing the maul, so why is this not a priority? In saying this, it took well over 20 minutes for our inside centre to chip over the defensive backline to make them think twice about coming up in one line so quickly, go figure.
On a number of occasions it appears that our backline are so paranoid about playing this “forcings back” kicking game that they do not read the play. The outside centre and wingers are unmarked yet the ball is kicked. Maybe they should be screaming for the ball as wingers in the past would often do. Positional play is so paramount in Test Rugby so it seems yet if you do not contest the ball in line outs (my pet hate) or win scrums what are you left with when you have position? Run it!
The Wallabies are always at their best when they do the unexpected, and keep the opposition guessing. Alas, the predictable Wallabies game plan is so easy to read it’s frightening. What ever happened to Robbie Deans fresh (less coaching approach) and lets play the game in front of you attitude.
You would have sworn it was Eddie Jones coaching the Wallabies against the Scots. Come on Robbie, you have adopted youth, give them a free reign, what have we got to lose?
Harry said | November 23rd 2009 @ 10:44am | Report comment
I do wonder how much of it (lack of initiative from the backs and a seemingy rigis “game plan”, leading to a chronic lack of penetration and ability to score tries) is the coaches emphasising that they have to play a risk-free game … hence the boring and constant “kicking for position”. Certianly our blokes (and all modern professional rugby sides) are very unwilling to take too many riisks in attack. Look at modern rugby – these days you see more tries from intercepts/charged down kicks than from attacking backline moves with the ball in hand. Its an unfortuante reflection of the way the modern gme is being played. That trend towards risk minimisation is what is behind the collapse in Wallabies backline play. Players like Gits and Cooper are instinctive ball players and runners, yet they have systematically had all the flair squeezed out of them … look at all the abuse Cooper gets around the place for his shuffles and “Brain explosions’ (i.e. trying something new in attack).
Parisien said | November 23rd 2009 @ 10:18am | Report comment
Judging by some of the comments above on “passion”, World War Two, and Gregan’s smile, this is turning into Animal Farm. The dogs have been let loose.
Would love to see half these posters out in the rain at Murrayfield showing us their passion and committment.
Painful as it is to admit, maybe the Wallabies just weren’t good enough.
Bay35Pablo said | November 23rd 2009 @ 12:06pm | Report comment
Parisien, the dogs have been let loose for some time now. Now they’re starting to foam at the mouth.
“Would love to see half these posters out in the rain at Murrayfield showing us their passion and committment. ”
That’s the point, the way the Wallabies are playing you’d get more passion out of the supporters, because the players aren’t showing any pride in pulling on the jersey. And based on Scotland, passion can carry you through occasionally.
The Wallabies are good enough when they can get it together. It’s just insanely annoying they can’t do it regularly, which suggests it is heavily mental.
I recall someone saying the team bus after Ireland was quiet and the pick was the team was steaming and would be looking to take it out on Scotland. What happened to that?
Parisien said | November 24th 2009 @ 10:52am | Report comment
“the team was steaming and would be looking to take it out on Scotland”
Well to me it just proves that the problem is not with passion, but with mentality, skills, technique, preparation, rugby intelligence, option taking, calm headedness, strategy, vision, passing, kicking, lucidity, confidence, trust in team-mates, playing as a team, coaching … shall I go on?
Passion is great and definitely necessary, but 9 times out of 10, its all the rest that will win you the match. We’d all like to take it out on the field, and let out all that pent-up frustration and hurt at the failed 3N, the draw against Ireland, the critics, but rugby is not a brawl or even a boxing ring. And even in a boxing ring, and I speak from limited experience, nothing replaces training, preparation, skill and lucidity. I’ve seen a number of passion filled clumps cop the biggest hidings.
In the current context, I think this “passion ” debate is misleading and will lead nowhere. I guess it just makes us feel better because we are all feeling passionate ourselves right now. I think the real questions lie elsewhere: domestic competition or lack of third tier structure, lack of player depth, funding, decent coaching, skill development, current team selection, players’ form, Dean’s coaching, the lack of a world class 10, a second row, experienced talented centres etc
When these things are addressed, hopefully sooner rather than later, the Wallabies might start stringing together some wins again.
confused said | November 23rd 2009 @ 10:44am | Report comment
Why is it that that the selectors are not made accountable-the coach and players are criticised. There is much discussion about the players not being up to the task, but noone is questioning the actual selection processes or who is responsible for player selection. Maybe its the selectors who should be made accountable.
Red Rooster said | November 23rd 2009 @ 12:23pm | Report comment
I can see why you are “Confused” – The selectors are Robbie Deans, David Nucifora and Jim Williams so two of the three are the coaches and the other wants to be. What does this tell you. Agree on your arguement but all roads lead back to the Head Coach. As usual we try to make broad excuses for the situation but the responsibility lies in one place
Worlds Biggest said | November 23rd 2009 @ 10:59am | Report comment
How can a team be complacent after letting Ireland off the hook. I was expecting then to be still seathing and take it out on the Scots and win by 20. They should have been p&ssed off after Croke Park and bring that to Murrayfield. Instead we got an insipid performance by the hot n cold Wallabies. What the hell goes on in these players heads ?. I think Dingo is too soft with the team and Elsom is a man of few words. This team is desperately lacking any kind of leadership from Management to the playing group. I agree regarding the payment, more for a win and less for a loss. It’s too easy for these guys. Giteau needs a spell on the sideline. He has not played well at all this season yet still get’s selected ?. What sort of message is that ?. I would drop him for Cardiff, Cooper to 10, JOC to 12 and Digby to 13 if fit. Put Beale or Toomua on the bench. Cross is another that needs to go, the most predictable moving telegraph pole I have seen for a while. I would give Mumm a run in the starting team in the 2 row and axe Chisholm. Give Dave Dennis a run off the bench. Deans has stuck solid with a lot of these guys this year and they haven’t delivered for him so give others a run that are hungry.
Bulldog said | November 23rd 2009 @ 11:04am | Report comment
Bring back Sharpie and make him Captain until Pocock can take over… Where are all those Sharpie baggers now. Since he left the team they have been direction less, lacked punch in their mid field running (expecially from Horwill and Chisholm who are a joke) and the line out has been disgraceful.
Also OZ rugby needs to go to “harden the hell up” school. Without using the league angle as an “us vs them” theme as I like both sports – the rugby boys need to take a leaf out of the Leaguies books and learn to toughen up and not whinge about how much rugby they have to play. They do not play enough…. The NRL boys play 26 rounds in one of the toughest sporting comps in the world. On top of that they play SOO mid week and back up in the NRL on the weekend. Plus they pay Internationals and trial matches pre season. So a guy like Jonathon Thurston plays 30+ games of tough RL a year whereas Giteau might play 13 S14 + 10 international’s.
You do not hear any whinging from the RL boys about representing their Stae and Country and they show plenty of passion despite the heavy schedule.
Ben said | November 23rd 2009 @ 1:50pm | Report comment
I agree – too much training – play games – that is where you practice your skills – UNDER PRESSURE
Damo said | November 23rd 2009 @ 11:06am | Report comment
Rooster far above wrote something about comparative talents. How many lineouts did Meninga win?
BennO said | November 23rd 2009 @ 11:50am | Report comment
Yeah? Well how many conversions did Eales kick – oh wait – there was that one in Wellington and then that one…right.
Bulldog said | November 23rd 2009 @ 12:21pm | Report comment
My point is nothing to do with comparative talents – it is about comparative attitudes in a professional arena.
Arky said | November 23rd 2009 @ 11:09am | Report comment
When is Giteau going to be genuinely under the spotlight? As the highest paid player in the ARU ranks he offers the least when it comes to ‘value for money’. His qualities as a leader are questionable, his capacity to guide a team around the field are questionable. His judegment is poor at times and I suspect his capacity to follow team strategy and directives is also questionable. Yet he is still chosen? If Barnes were available would Giteau still be chosen to start at flyhalf on this tour – I think not.
Moving on older players has been a good thing. The younger payers will get there eventually – but it will not come without pain and hard work. Some of the older players were really not doing what they were paid to do. Are we really missing Mortlock? Is LT really a loss? I’ll take Genia and his future potential anyday over Gregan. Same goes for Robinson, Kepu, Pocock in the forwards, Barnes, Cooper, Ione and AAC in the backs – they will be the future of the game when they have the experience and the begin to turn around what Gregan and others left as their legacy. Don’t blame the youngsters blame what those before them left behind!
Bring in a rewards structure that pays for results and performance. Offer a base level of remuneration with bonus payemnts for results at each level. We can have the debate about passion but at the end of the day we cant ignore what a perfromance based rewards system will reward and foster!
RUPA – what is happening there? It is trade unionism in its base form. Tony Dempsey needs to wake up a realise that the game is funded by supporters and a lack of results means a lack of supporter $s. Great results equals great supporter base – equals more money to go around. How can RUPA continue to ignore this linkage? They need to wake up.
stillmissit said | November 23rd 2009 @ 11:20am | Report comment
Good post Arky and we should embrace this as the method of bringing home some bacon. I am not sure how we could make it player focused as opposed to team focussed.
I would prefer a player focussed remuneration system, as long as the upside is high and the downside is what they would get paid for running around as a non marquee player for the ARL which I think is about $150k per annum.
Parisien said | November 24th 2009 @ 11:01am | Report comment
Gregan was a world class player and played circles around this mob. Very good defender, organiser, and leader. He is considered very highly in Europe, I don’t understand this anti-Gregan thing coming from AussiesI even the south Africans and Kiwis I know admired him begrudgingly. The guy was an excellent player and deserves a little more appreciation. He never lost to Scotland either.
Brett McKay said | November 24th 2009 @ 11:07am | Report comment
Parisian, for what’s it’s worth, I’ve asked the question on here several times why when Gregan took steps to clear the ruck, it was referred to as a “two-step shuffle” or some such, but yet when Whiticker (or Cordingley, or Sheehan, or even Burgess and Genia) did it or do it, it’s called good service. Never really got a proper response.
Fair to say I never understood the anti-Gregan thing either…
Parisien said | November 25th 2009 @ 11:46am | Report comment
I wonder if its due to his calm, intelligent and polite exterior? Some fans seem to expect players to be constantly worked up. This thread is about “Passion ” after all. … But then Eales the gentleman doesn’t cop it so bad. A media beat up? – the Eddie Jones “favourite”, the insidious rumours about his time at the Brumbies and his influence on players, and their getting their way?
I guess an angry fan base will always look for a scapegoat but its a shame and an injustice it has to be Gregan. Mmmm, its almost Shakespearian.
Go_the_Wannabe's said | November 23rd 2009 @ 11:13am | Report comment
I remember when rugby went professional and I thought “I wonder what impact this will really have on the game in Oz……..” Not long after I read that Blocker Roach’s (Balmain and Oz Leaugey stalwart) son had taken up union at school because it was more of a world game…….and it coincidentally paid the better dollars.
Was this going to be the way of the future? Was the tide turning and all the young talent (and old) that used to flow towards Leauge (because of the dollars) was going to play Union now? You bloody beauty, I thought…….with the best of the young talent from League and Union, we are going to be unbeatable in a few years time. It will be so embarassing and it will become a monotonous avalanche of wins and trophies in the years to come. World interest will go out of the sport (like it has in League) because we will be so damn good at it. How naive I was!
So what went wrong? Well lets blame that root of all evil of course…….money. The players became business men in suits (and in fact the Wannabe’s strip should be changed to a dark green Armani suit) where money talked and b*llshit walked. Our players became mercenaries and sold their souls to the highest bidder (England, France, Japan……wherever) and that’s why there isn’t any passion anymore, there’s no dollars in passion. Look after No. 1 is the golden rule these days and just do enough to ensure your position in the team without getting injured. Forget teamwork……the others can go and get their own ball to look good if they want it.
So why hasn’t this malaise affected other teams? Well it has to some extent, but it’s just that the Wannabe’s have embraced the mercenary player concept with a vengenance (or passion…..it’s just that passion for country has been replaced by passion for money) more than any other team in the world.
If that’s the way they want to play then good on them, who can blame them for looking out for themselves and their families? Nobody else is going to put their kids through Uni once their playing days are over, are they? Isn’t that fair enough? Well, it is……but just don’t expect me and a couple of million other TV viewers to sit around watching winless one trick show ponies prancing around the paddock all day long.
So what’s the remedy? Hit ‘em where it hurts of course……the pocket. It was interesting to read Spiro picking up on something I’ve advocated a couple of times on this blog. That is change the match payment system……..lets make it $500 per player for a loss (or some other paltry sum) and $50,000 per player for a win. It’ll never happen of course…..but wouldn’t it turn the game on it’s head!
Then we’d see some passion…….but for the money of course. But am I just being far too twitter and bisted….or maybe I’m just a realist?
True Tah said | November 23rd 2009 @ 12:00pm | Report comment
The performance of the Wallabies on the paddock will have no bearing on their pay packets, well not in the short term at least. RUPA has pretty much a guaranteed % of Pay TV $$$ to go to the players and it is a large % as well.
In the long run, yes, a series of poor performances will lead to a reduction in Pay TV dollars, but lets face, todays culture is basically “all about me, right here, right now” todays players wont really worry about players of the future getting nothing.
Nick said | November 23rd 2009 @ 11:20am | Report comment
Get Campo in as a consultant. He can help the backs and teach them how to finish.
Arky said | November 23rd 2009 @ 11:24am | Report comment
If you run the rewards system across every level of payment it will ultimately be more player than team focussed. Ultimately it must be on team results. A key playmaker that can truly walk a team around the park and put team strategy into play will achieve at every level with team results and will be rewarded….
Campbell Watts said | November 23rd 2009 @ 11:54am | Report comment
Is this the last test we see Gits play at 10????
IT SHOULD BE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
If ever Deans required an excuss, surely Gits’s last performance was it! Put him out to 12, let someone else have a go at 10, and watch him play much better! He’s obviously a bit dim (ever heard him speak!) and doesn’t have the nous for 10, but he’s a great 12 when the decision-making presure is taken from his shoulders. Let him regain his confidence at 12 then we’ll see him playing better.
Not having the balls to move Gits out of the 10 jumper, I think, is Dean’s biggest failing to date. Any conspiricy theories here??
captain nemo said | November 23rd 2009 @ 12:07pm | Report comment
complacency is reserved for winning teams. Wallabies are not in the complacency league at the moment. Springboks not putting Italy away earlier I would put down to complacency
The Link said | November 23rd 2009 @ 12:19pm | Report comment
Bring back Phil Waugh
King of the Gorganites said | November 23rd 2009 @ 12:20pm | Report comment
an absolute disgrace. the moment for me that showed the complete inadequacies of the walalbies was when moore took the ball of gitaeu, tryline open, 5 metres out. how he did not score that i will never know. moore did everything he could not to score it, and it worked. that was the worse bit of finishing i have ever seen. why didnt he slide? it was a wet pitch. he could have slid in from 15M out, let alone 5m. his body height was way to high. it was totally ameautur. this guy last year was touted as the worlds best hook! what a joke.
for me that showed that the current crop of wallabies will never be great. they do not take their chances. when you are given the ball 5m out and with no defenders in front, u must score. there is no option about that.
that would have taken oz to 10 -0 after 20 mins. game over. simple as that.
these guys should have there salaries cut in half.
the scots must have thought bonnie prince charlie and his cohorts had returned to sctoland because the wallabies are PRETENDERS.
Ben C said | November 23rd 2009 @ 1:41pm | Report comment
KOTG
I must admit that occurred to me as well about Moore. He raced for the line, got tackled around the bootlaces and the halfback took him around the shoulders. Moore fell on his back but did not seem to put up any fight to try and ground the ball despite only one, smaller player hanging on to him.
Worlds Biggest said | November 23rd 2009 @ 12:38pm | Report comment
until a complete overhaul of the Wallabies culture changes then we will remain pretenders and a laughing stock. JON has publicly backed Deans while others in the media have stated ” there is no one else “. I reckon Michael Cheika could shake things up, he wouldn’t stand for any bs from his players. Deans now must come under serious scrutiny. He seems too much of a nice a guy which is not what these pampered poodles need.
Bulldog said | November 23rd 2009 @ 12:48pm | Report comment
I ran into Andre Pretorius at the races on Saturday in Perth. My first thought was how glad I was that he was going to be playing for the Force next season as he has the composure and experience to close out games that they have been lacking with the highly paid Giteau at fly half. Now I wonder how long it would take to nationalise him…
Good luck to the Brumbies next year with all their “stars”.
captain nemo said | November 23rd 2009 @ 1:00pm | Report comment
Bulldog, was Pretorious backing a winner.
Bulldog said | November 23rd 2009 @ 1:18pm | Report comment
We were lining up at the ATM before the last so I assume he was having as good a day on the punt as I was. Snipers Bullet won the Railway Stakes at 20 to 1 so all the bookies were cheering.
Uncle Eric said | November 23rd 2009 @ 3:32pm | Report comment
Couldn’t agree more Bulldog. For years I’ve been unable to fathom what the hysteria is about Giteau. The man can only kick well when not under pressure, doesn’t have a great passing game (problem for a no.10), and doesn’t have the vision to be constructive in attack. I’ve no doubt the WF will be a better team without him, good luck to the Brumbies.
Mick Gold Coast QLD said | November 23rd 2009 @ 4:07pm | Report comment
“unable to fathom what the hysteria is about Giteau”
Well, Uncle Eric, for a start he has world class muscle definition, way better than Dan Carter’s.
And he is arguably the quickest in both the Northern and Southern hemispheres in the sprint to the pay office. (Done it! I’ve long wanted to add “arguably” to a sentence, because it is such a redundant and meaningless word).
Further, he gets paid the same every week whether he does good work or not much work at all – a bit like a public servant, really. He somehow managed to shuffle up to “protected species” level quite early in his career.
He does enjoy the view from the best seat at vital times as blokes run past him to score or set up tries (McCaw in Japan, the Irish captain last week), he has impressive stats for the number of opposition legs hit by his potential grubber kicks and he is pursuing a higher number now in charged down kicks. Late passes to colleagues in no better position are a feature, as is yards amassed running cross field. Oh, on field instructions – he does a lot of barking at team mates who he beleives are – umm – not pulling their weight.
Rusty said | November 23rd 2009 @ 3:36pm | Report comment
Will be interesting to see how Andre goes at the Force – he wont be winning games for you on the basis of some mercurial side step. That said he wont lose game for you that way either
Uncle Eric said | November 23rd 2009 @ 3:41pm | Report comment
Very true, but I don’t recall Giteau winning too many games that way. That’s the problem with the man, the occasional bit of brilliance, buried under mountains of dross. Don’t think Mitchell will be missed too much and am very surprised the Tahs were so keen on him.
AndyS said | November 23rd 2009 @ 6:25pm | Report comment
To be honest Rusty, I suspect what the Force is hoping for from Pretorius will be an intelligent balance between territorial kicking and putting players like O’Connor, Shepherd and Cummins into space. He may not be the “mercurial” Giteau, but making the right choices and trusting the players around him might be enough.
Arky said | November 23rd 2009 @ 1:06pm | Report comment
No conspiracy theory on Giteau at 10 – I suspect Deans is building his options at 10 – Barnes for one and perhaps Cooper as another – before acting on the change. The coming super 14 season will see Barnes at 10 for the Waratahs and Cooper at 10 for the Reds so form there may offer genuine alternatives and therefore highlight Giteau’s inadequacies rather than have him bleating again and threatening to go overseas etc.
And fwiw – Giteau is the last person who will accept pay for performance as the gap between his current remuneration and what he would make under a perfromance based system is wider than anyone else…the Brumbies were shite and so are the wallabies…
The Other Reds Fan. said | November 23rd 2009 @ 1:17pm | Report comment
Giteau has to go. As Barnes isn’t there, put in Beale to pair up with Cooper and let them have a go. The Grand Slam has gone. At worst, they can both kick better than Giteau.
We have to accept that the Giteau star is waning and, quite frankly, he has always been overrated in my books. He is dragging Deans down with him. It seems that an injury to him is the only way we are going to discover how much we don’t need him.
Ben said | November 23rd 2009 @ 1:42pm | Report comment
I would send Giteau, Horwill, Chisolm, Burgess, Cross and Mitchell home immediately.
I would start all the battlers like Tyrone Smith in the Cardiff and Wales game with the best of the rest i.e Genia, Iaone, Cooper, AAC on bench.
A disgrace the whole lot and Deans can stop with all the “management” speak – 14/27 record hardly reflects what was expected.
The Other Reds Fan. said | November 23rd 2009 @ 5:07pm | Report comment
Being positive, does that mean we will never again see that slo-mo ad of Giteau kicking that penalty/conversion?
Harry said | November 23rd 2009 @ 2:38pm | Report comment
There is a strong case for axeing Giteau this weekend and, if Beale does allright on the Tuesday night and Ioane is fit, starting either Cooper at 10 and JOC at 12 or Beale at 10 and JOC/Cooper at 12. Gits copnfidence is shot but it may work to stick hiom on the bench and bring him on in the last 20? Worth an experiment anyway.
Jock said | November 23rd 2009 @ 2:50pm | Report comment
Hark back to Bruce Ross comments above (& others) talking about the development structure. In my heart I truly believe the development system is to blame for current decline in Wallaby standards. The selection of 14/ 15/ 16 year-olds for rugby academies and consigning the balance to “clubland”? I understand that rugby academies favour individually brilliant backs and sizeable young forwards (often islander/ polynesian). WHAT ABOUT THE LATE DEVELOPERS??
- How do the selectors get exposure to club level talent? Is Robbie Deans or someone watching “best of club rugby” videos from the weekend provided by each A grade coach. (Obviously not but you get my point).
- Is “team” mentality adequately taught at school and academy level (not in my experience) or is there too much emphasis placed on individual skill levels (as opposed to team mentality taught/ learnt thru the club experience). In my mind Quade Cooper is not a team man, rather a showpony. The pass he threw on the weekend shows that he wanted to appear individually brilliant in throwing flashy cut out passes rather then following basic backyard touch rules and passing to the next guy who was unmarked. It cost the Wallabies a win. And he is not the only showpony in the side..
– Finally does John O’Neill truly have the fans interests at heart? (beyond knowing that more wins equals more fans equals tv rights equalling more $).
I truly believe Australian Rugby is at an impasse and it goes beyond the current players/coaches / administrators. Right now we dont have the cattle and the current structure is to blame. If we dont restructure, we will continue to not having the player depth and thereby seing more of the same rubbish that we have seen this year from the Wallabies.
Question begs does “restructuring” (whatever form that may take) align with priorities of the current administration? I fear not. No quick bucks to made there. Time for a revolution! Meeting in the “town square” tonight… ! See below link for inspiration!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrzMhU_4m-g
End of Therapy
Jock said | November 23rd 2009 @ 2:54pm | Report comment
To The other reds fan “put in Beale to pair up with Cooper and let them have a go” sorry but I couldnt think of a worse solution for our backline defence.
The Other Reds Fan. said | November 23rd 2009 @ 5:08pm | Report comment
It doesn’t get much worse than losing like we did.
big Kev said | November 23rd 2009 @ 3:02pm | Report comment
For me there is only 1 major problem – severe lack of depth! This Aussie team is competitive if it has all it’s stars; in this case they have failed to replace Barnes and Mortlock, with even replacements Ione, Horne and others injured. The replacements are not up to it. This has meant that Deans had to leave Gits at 10, against his wishes. At last we have a decent pack. Bring back Vickerman and it would be world class. We have a very good scrumhalf and good back 3 (Ashley Cooper, Ione, Hines) so if we could just get the 10,12 & 13 channel sorted (or back fit) we would be a good side. But we are severely lacking in depth and cannot cover adequately for injuries or form lapses to front row, 2nd row, back row and pretty much the entire backline.
Also one other major gripe. Kicking the ball requires a good kick chase game. Why do the Wobblies kick the ball and not chase it? It infuriates me!
stuff happens said | November 23rd 2009 @ 3:29pm | Report comment
Spiro, the Australians could attempt some redemption on Tues night when they play Cardiff. The Herald in Sydney reminded us a few weeks ago that Australia has never beaten Cardiff in six attempts; 1908,’47,’57,’66,75 and 1984 all won by the Welsh club.
Both sides will have their Test players out of course. In the past almost all of Cardiff players would have been Welsh. Today in the professional era life has changed. Their Captain is Paul Tito, Xavier Rush is still there ,Ben Blair too, not to mention Sam Norton Knight, the huge Fijian Filise and no doubt some Welsh guys hoping to impress Warren Gatland.
Could be a real opportunity for Australia to get some pride & passion back in to the Green & Gold.
On the other hand it could be a tough night at the office.
Daniel King said | November 23rd 2009 @ 3:55pm | Report comment
The only thing that surprises me about this Wallabies tour is the thought that you’d go unbeaten.
Cardiff and Wales will win I think.
Harry said | November 23rd 2009 @ 7:53pm | Report comment
Very few Australian supporters thought we’d go through undefeated Daniel King, there might well have been a few braying media saying that but most of us are well aware of the current team’s shortcomings. Most (myself included) thought we’d do well to win two or three of the five tests. Well the best we can do is 2 (one draw of course) and thas about what I expected at the start. However even the most pessimistic didn’t think we’d be done by Scotland. balancing that, if you’d said beforehand that we beat England and draw with Ireland (and play reasonably well in both games) then the majority of us would have taken that.
Parisien said | November 25th 2009 @ 11:55am | Report comment
At least you were wrong about Cardiff so far!
stillmissit said | November 23rd 2009 @ 4:16pm | Report comment
One thing I meant to mention about the game and that is how strong is Sekope Kepu. That guy hasn’t got a clue what to do as a player at the international level but Christ did he move the Scottish front row out of the way.
My other thought as there is a lot of angst around this game. I dont care as much as I did following the ‘White Flag of Wellington’ I think this is less pain and more of a building thing. After the AB’s in Wellington I thought this team was gutless and hopeless. I also think that Scotland played well and I was not surprised that we lost. As soon as the media starts to pay out on a team calling them weak and no hopers in nice language this bunch think it is easy and switch off. Smelt a lot like the WC game against the English with Lote the Winker wanking at the camera.
Jim Boyce said | November 23rd 2009 @ 4:33pm | Report comment
Spiro – If you are still there, a touring group of 35 players inevitably politicise if they are not kept busy ie playing games. Do you have any observations on the dynamics of the touring group?
Greg Russell said | November 23rd 2009 @ 4:39pm | Report comment
Re complacency, I had the same thought but along different lines.
It was noticeable that when Brian Lara was playing, Chris Gayle, Ramnaresh Sarwan and Shiv Chanderpaul – all fine players – rarely seemed to bat as well for the West Indies. The feeling was that these guys had the attitude “Brian is here to score runs, so we don’t need to try as hard.”
With this in mind, the thought occurs that the cult of Robbie Deans is such that the players cannot help feeling “We’ve got a great coach now, so if we just follow his instructions, everything will be sweet”. As Spiro writes, “The Wallabies played complacently, as if they expected that sooner or later the dominant field position and their better skills would be rewarded with an inevitable victory.”
Not long after the appointment of Deans to coach the Wallabies, Spiro wrote a long profile on him. One of the interesting things I remember is that when Carter first made the Crusaders as a rookie, Deans called him into his office and said “What is your goal for this season?” Carter said “To oust Mehrts from the 10 jersey”. Deans said “Correct answer.”
This story shows that the greatness of Carter and McCaw goes well beyond their tremendous physical gifts – beneath their mild exteriors there is a fierce passion to win and be the best. It’s the same with Australian cricket players like Warne, Ponting and Steve Waugh – all truly gifted, but their greatness relied on a lot more than that.
The Carter story shows that Deans knows the importance of this extra dimension. However he seems unable to bring it to the Australian side (and not just the Scotland match shows that – what about 7 losses in a row to NZ, including 5 after being in front at half-time). Giteau has the potential to be a great player but he is not playing like someone who is desperate to succeed and who fears (in a positive way) losing. Andrew Logan in his post yesterday calls Chisolm and Horwill “The Bumble Brothers” and “the Blunder Brothers”. But really, when David Dennis is the next in line to take their positions, what real pressure can they feel to perform?
Of course Deans is not wholly to blame for this aspect of the problem – he can’t help the glut of injuries to Australia’s other top-tier second-rowers (Sharpe, Kimlin, etc.), and it’s not his fault that Australian rugby has no national competition to develop players.
However one way in which this problem is of his making is that he has almost completely discarded the older generation of Australia’s players, and almost as a religious creed he’s selecting young players, including barely knowns such as Matt Toomua and Luke Morahan.
It occurs to me that he has gone too far with this policy, and it is backfiring on him. For example, why didn’t he select Van Humphries as a second-rower for this tour? He has a solid S14 for Qld, and at least he is tall enough to win lineouts at international level, i.e., his presence would exert some genuine pressure on Horwill and Chisolm to perform in order to hold their places.
The other thing that wizened old players generally bring is hardness and desire. Those of you who read my posts will know that I’m no great fan of Phil Waugh in terms of his ability, but what I will admit is that he’s a tremendously tough old warhorse who would make sure that training sessions are hard and that players take to the field primed to win. That seems lacking to me, and I cannot believe that it is unrelated to the selection policy for this tour, which has been to choose youth at all costs, even if it has barely played at S14 level.
Harry said | November 23rd 2009 @ 5:02pm | Report comment
The reason why he didn’t select Van Humphries is he isn’t very good, as anyone who has to endure Qld rugby these days can tell you … he makes Nathan Sharpe look a hard nut, and Mark Chisolm a linout star.
But I agree we havcurrently have no depth at 4 and 5 and an amazing list of unavailabilities … Vickerman, Sharpe, Kimlin, Hockings, McMenimem, Caldwell, Wykes, Timani … my view is had any of these players been fit or available they would have been on the tour and come into consideration for a second row spot.
Of course there is one proven international performer, lineout jumper and and tough nut who will be available for the S14 and Wallabies next year … Justin Harrison. Qld should sign him for next year and he would certainly have been useful on this tour (were it not for the fact that he is suspended until January for err cocaine use).
Campbell Watts said | November 23rd 2009 @ 4:49pm | Report comment
Thoughts after just re-watching the game on fox:
Gits: PATHETIC, 1 kick from 5 was it? OMG he is average, anyone comparing him to Carter now!!!
Burgess: PATHETIC, did not do a single GOOD thing in his time as an “impact player”
Moore: PATHETIC, take some “Toughen up pills” – you were over the line, against a half back!!!
2nd row: who played?? Never heard their names mentioned, hearts the size of peas!
Mitchell: SHOULD NEVER KICK THE BALL, NOR RUN IT, maybe just run to the other side line?
Cooper: RUNNING is your only strength, as Nike said: just do it!
Genia: as well as he played his service from rucks in those last 20-odd phases was PATHETICALLY SLOW! – Actually all the forwards were PATHETICALY SLOW then – the Scots seem to have plenty of energy, maybe the Wobblies should hire their fitness trainer!!
Har de farkin’ Har – WHAT A JOKE!
Scotland played well! All this BS about them not attacking?? They looked as good if not better than the Wobblies on attack, yes they kicked a lot – but they were accurate, attacking kicks! Thouroughly deserved the win!
Arky said | November 23rd 2009 @ 8:26pm | Report comment
What’s the market on Richie Rich warming a bench seat soon? Go back to the comments on Carter wanting Mehrten’s spot (from GR above?) – my money says those conversations have already been had and the plans are well advanced.
As a supporter I would pay to be there to see Richie Rich on the bench or in the stands…how sweet that would be! I was astounded to hear he was nominated for IRB player of the year – and so was my 12 year old son! Really – what has he done to be where he is? He is so far from Carter the two should not be mentioned in the same conversation. And what leader spits the dummy in open forum the way he does – he should find some ‘grow up’ pills and share them with a few others….including Mortlock.
And if Mortlock was dumb enough to travel to Japan while he was the incumbent captain – he deserved to lose his leadership role. That has to go down as one of the dumbest acts of leadership that I can recall in sport!
Knives Out said | November 23rd 2009 @ 8:36pm | Report comment
‘Now you can come back with the whimpish answer that this is rugby it aint a war. To me it has always been similar, we go out there to beat an opposition that is tough and committed and wants to win and does not want to lose at the same intensity as we want to.’
That’s not totally fair, stillmissit. I could turn around and say that yours is the typical response from the older amateur generation. Personally I was a very committed player, committed to the point of spite, but the professional game can’t be built simply around passion. We shall just have to agree to disagree but IMO passion will only get you so far. Technical excellence is the key to success, and that is why a boxer like Joe Calzaghe and Floyd Mayweather Jr were/are so successful. If passion was the key then every joker off the street could become a great boxer or rugby union/league player. Australia lost the match because nobody on the pitch had the brains to change the match tactics, because Deans has not developed discernible styles and because the players aren’t skilled enough.
stillmissit said | November 24th 2009 @ 10:18am | Report comment
Assuming all is similar in skill and commitment, which it mostly is these days, the thing which wins games is passion. Watch the 2003 AB v Aus semi final in the RWC for a clear example of passionate players with a single desire. Couldn’t do it in the final but still a great game in my book. Nothing to do with E.Jones btw, this game blew his statistics sideways.
Knives Out said | November 24th 2009 @ 8:34pm | Report comment
‘Assuming all is similar in skill and commitment, which it mostly is these days’
That’s the thing though, a lot of sides lack good skills. That Scotland side was woefully inept. Australia got into good positions time and time again, what was required was good leadership and accurate execution. There will always be examples of games where passion wins out (and often in a knock-out competition), but had Australia and NZ played that test ten times I think NZ would have won 8 or 9. Australia would have beaten the 07 QF England team 9 times out often. In a non-knock-out situation you need more than that.
stillmissit said | November 25th 2009 @ 6:44am | Report comment
I said they were similar not that they were good and bad. I think that the basics are generally pretty poor these days but the difference between the number 1 team and the number 5 team is no more than 5%.
The Scotland side on that day played committed, passionate, defensive rugby and sometimes that is all you need to win. Lets take your woeful team in 07, they decided that they would attack every breakdown in numbers and blew us away due to our lack of commitment to the breakdown and poor execution.
Now you could argue that with superior skills and technical expertise we should have won. Well if it aint passion what got Dad’s Army over the line that day?
Knives Out said | November 26th 2009 @ 1:40am | Report comment
Passion did, but as stated that happened in a knock out competition. That passion would not have won England the 3N or the 6N or anything else that requires long-term organisation, good coaching and a constantly improving skill set. For me the call of passion is a complete smokescreen. The Australian test team was poor last year. It won some games but the performances were mostly horrible – kick and chase, defend, defend and defend some more! This year the same has happened except the team has won fewer games and other teams have improved. That is down to coaching and training, not passion. That the Australian sides were such utter bunkum during the Super season also confirms this fact.
Viscount Crouchback said | November 26th 2009 @ 3:03am | Report comment
So, Knives, what do you make of Martin Johnson’s statement that “you can talk all you like about tactics, but at the end of the day it’s about collective will”. That sounds suspiciously like the passion argument.
I agree with you, btw. But I’m beginning to suspect that Jonno might be from the Alan Shearer school of management.
rob mccourt said | November 23rd 2009 @ 10:58pm | Report comment
At the end of so much commentary it is probably difficult to say much new or much that will be noticed. I have never seen Australian Rugby so low since 1973 and Tonga. I was at Ballymore that day having played a sub-district curtain raiser. Celebrating our success over our Queensland counterparts alcohol played some role in the lack of respect shown for our supposedly elite group that graced Ballymore that day. My recollection is that we mocked the Australian team that day so pathetic was the display. My second row partner in our sub district victory was Keith Besomo, a fine and naturally gifted athlete and lineout jumper, who would have worn the Wallaby jersey more proudly and more effectively that day. How many more Keith Besomo’s are running around in sub district or grade today but are unrecognised because no more contracts can be issued. I hate to think.
Watching this Test Match I did not mock. I was young in 1973. Now I am older and it brings only sadness.
The blame game is tempting and to some extent has to be played. This is the professional era. Players and coaches are paid handsomely. As with any employee certain standards and results are expected. They are not being produced and so yes someone has to carry the blame.
This is not Robbie Deans first year. It is his second. And his record is the worst of any Australian coach, including I think Greg Smith. He has overseen Australia’s worst Test loss against South Africa last year. He has overseen our worst Tri Nations series. He has produced a team that is lucky to score one try a match let alone 3 or 4. And he has produced our worst loss since our loss to Argentina in 1987 ( or thereabouts ). He has clearly alienated rightly or wrongly a large section of players. Coaching is about man management and to date he has failed. Our skills are woeful. We can’t even catch and pass. The passing game in the backs last Saturday was atrocious. Passes looped, were thrown behind, thrown along the ground or thrown to no one. At least that way no one could drop the ball. Ball skills in the forwards are below par. Our captain who does not want to be a captain, and on the evidence is not a captain, is very short on ball skills. Big and strong he may be but a football brain he does not have. No support play works off our Rocky. More often than not he will find himself isolated and a penalty ensues.
So how did this happen. Generational shift ? I don’t think so. I don’t recall the AB’s or Boks suffering like this when in transition. So who is to blame ? We may win against Wales. I hope we do but do not be fooled if we do. We are after all bound to fluke a win here and there. The only test is winning well and regularly. If by this time next year my sadness continues then the coach has to go. He is receiving latitude his players are not getting.
Ben Bananas said | November 24th 2009 @ 7:44am | Report comment
Spiro
I’ve been having nightmares ever since 4pm last Sunday. A play in a misty castle in Scotland and there, the smell of death.
A playwright is centre stage handing out a blank script. “Play what’s in front of you” he says. The lead actors have not shown up.
The reply from the other actors is mute and motionless. Individually the actors can act but performing outside their comfort zone is not their forte.
Collectively it is as if they have never met. Each has a talent but “under pressure” to perform their stage fright is as a wallaby in head lights.
MacRobbie’s blood boils and his players are stained bloody and defeated.
“Accursed be that tongue that tells me so, for it hath cow’d my better part of man. And be these juggling fiends no more believ’d that palter with us in a double sense, that keep the word of promise to our ear, and break it to our hope! I’ll not fight with thee.
Will any good come from drowning in malt whisky? I dread the thought of leek juice next week.
Ben Bananas
Terry Kidd said | November 24th 2009 @ 8:37am | Report comment
Interesting points Spiro but I have to disagree with this statement …. when after bash-up after bash-up by the Wallaby forwards under Scotland’s posts had failed, …. this was no failure. I watched it unfold and when the forwards intially kept possesion and pick and drove I thought Good !!!! they will do it them selves and not give it to the clueless backs to kick away …. as the phases mounted there was a tv shot from the left and it showed the Scottish No 14 running in towatd the posts … it was then that I thought GREAT StUFF !!!! you have pulled the defence in, now move it wider …. they did and scored. Right at the death we finally showed some nous on how to get over the line. Maybe passion wasn’t a part of that phase of play but certainly commitment and perseverance were.
We don’t lack passion, we lack a true general on the park who is running the Wallaby game and directing the players. Stillmissit made reference to El Alamein ….. there we had a couple of truely great generals …. Moreshead who ran the strategic battle of the 9th Div and made the crucial relief in place at The Cauldron, and the two battalion commanders who actually fought the battle at The Cauldron ….. that is what the Wallabies lack …. a direction for their commitment and perseverance. Call it passion if you wish.
stillmissit said | November 24th 2009 @ 10:10am | Report comment
Guys I have a message for us all from the powerhouse at home. I got this following my latest outburst about the Wallabies.
She says “What are you guys on the roar going on about, your acting like a bunch of emotional women”. “We have lost 2 games by one point and you lot are acting like the sky has fallen in.”
“If we have a poor record at the moment it is mostly due to not having a reliable kicker.” “Get over it we are still building”
So there you have been told.
Parisien said | November 25th 2009 @ 11:54am | Report comment
by Toutatis, you’re right! the sky has fallen in! Bring on Asterix and Obelisk and their magic potion. Reminds me, thats how they beat the Britons. Will it work against the Welsh?
JimmyJam said | November 24th 2009 @ 10:16am | Report comment
I remember reading a great quote from Muhammad Ali that, IMO, pretty much sums up the failings of (some) of our current wallabies:
“Champions are made from something they have deep inside them – a desire, a dream and a vision. They have to have last minute stamina, they have to be a little faster and they have to have the skill and the will. But the will must be stronger than the skill.”
Parisien said | November 25th 2009 @ 11:51am | Report comment
“If passion was the key then every joker off the street could become a great boxer or rugby union/league player. Australia lost the match because nobody on the pitch had the brains to change the match tactics, because Deans has not developed discernible styles and because the players aren’t skilled enough.”
That’s MY argument! merde…
Knives Out said | November 26th 2009 @ 3:12am | Report comment
‘So, Knives, what do you make of Martin Johnson’s statement that “you can talk all you like about tactics, but at the end of the day it’s about collective will”. That sounds suspiciously like the passion argument.
I agree with you, btw. But I’m beginning to suspect that Jonno might be from the Alan Shearer school of management.’
I haven’t seen that quote yet, VC. I’ll investigate further.
I don’t think the significance of passion can be underestimated, but if the game was just about passion then Argentina and Italy would be world champions and South Africa’s kamikaze approach from 2000-2003 would have reaped more rewards. Rugby players, by their very nature, must be passionate people to reach the pinnacle of test rugby, thus games where one side wins through sheer determintation (i.e. Marseilles 2007) are very few and far between. A lack of passion certainly didn’t force Quade Cooper to throw a forward pass. Frankly, Australia has been lacking leadership and tactical definition since Deans took over. The play of the backline has also worsened. That’s why Scotland beat them, not because the Australian players couldn’t give a fig about their country.
I’m harbouring secret concerns about Johnson. I have a distant hope that Borthwick (who I thought played very well against NZ) will no longer be captain and that a new forwards coach will be brought in. Players respond to change.
Viscount Crouchback said | November 26th 2009 @ 3:25am | Report comment
Who would you like to see as Captain, KO? It occurred to me that Moody wouldn’t be the worst choice if one was looking for a fellow to lead from the front.
Knives Out said | November 26th 2009 @ 4:23am | Report comment
The issue of captaincy is a big problem given that the majority of club captains in the GP are not eligible for England. Moody would be the type of player to lead from the front, but I always see his ‘mad dog’ antics as being more suited to the role of senior player – somebody for the younger players to follow and emulate, but not to actually lead the team. Is Moody calm enough to be a test captain? Does he have the tactical nous? For the same reason I would preclude Wilkinson. Despite playing quite flat for Toulon his decision making in the recent tests was too narrow and he played far too deep (which may or may not be down to the coaches). He opted for points, which is pragmatic, but not consistently at the expense of the bigger picture. That said, Wilkinson is the stereotypical calm, totally dedicated modern professional. He might set a necessary example.
Haskell is the sort of chest out, confident, Dallaglio type of player but I don’t see him as a regular. I see the qualities of Croft and Haskell being utilised depending on the opposition. I’m not overly fond of Dylan Hartley and Phil Vickery is coming to the end of his career. Beyond him a lot of the forwards are perhaps too quiet to lead a team. Of the backs I would seriously consider Paul Hodgson. In summation: Paul Hodgson or Jonny Wilkinson.. with Moody, Haskell, Thompson as vice captain.