The Australian rugby apocalypse
By kingplaymaker, 23 Nov 2009 kingplaymaker is a Roar Rookie
What can explain the cataclysmic loss to Scotland this weekend? How could a team which last year looked in better shape to challenge for the World Cup than anyone else be reduced to a stumbling wreck, lacking direction, quality and the faintest glimmer of confidence?
With strange results the causes are strange and complex, and this is naturally case here.
It starts with the man at the top.
John O’Neill decided on the basis of some positive results last year, that it would be safe to lose a player or two in the interests of cost-cutting and marking his position of strength on the players, as the national resources were good enough to maintain the team’s competitiveness.
He therefore allowed Dan Vickerman to feel undervalued and leave, refused to assist the NSW Waratahs in the recruitment of Karmichael Hunt, fired Lote Tuqiri, allowed the Waratahs to bench Timana Tahu while paying him a huge salary and thus frustrating him into abandoning the sport, and was unwilling to pay Hugh Mcmenniman a little more in order to prevent him moving to Japan.
O’Neill’s calculation was the following: it’s highly important to show players that we will not allow them to make excessive financial demands (Vickerman, Hunt, Mcmenniman), or to behave badly in a way disrespectful to ARU authority. The playing resources of Australia are strong enough for the Wallabies to be competitive even if we lose a few players.
That explains O’Neill’s part, but why did Robbie Deans go along with this? Why didn’t he protest at the cavalier disregard of precious high quality players?
The answer is that Robbie Deans is a New Zealander, an ex-All Black whose last international coaching job was with the All Blacks. Blessed with an incomparable supply of talent, the All Blacks can simply lose a few players here and there and still trump the opposition.
Deans seems not to have realised yet that Australia does not contain the same abundant riches. As a result of this, the All Blacks are able to demand iron discipline and take an authoritarian stance towards their players, as if one or two leave there are several equally good possibilities to take their place.
This perhaps explains Deans own authoritarian streak, his cheerful collusion in Tuqiri’s sacking and philosophical indifference to Tahu’s departure. He comes from an environment where the playing weaponery is unlimited and the mindset that of a conquering army: the thinly supplied guerrilla mentality of the Wallabies is something he has yet to adapt to.
To add to the loss of quality in the side, the firing of Tuqiri devastated the team’s harmony and buzzing attitude.
So the Tri-nations began and the Wallabies, lacking all the energy and positive freshness of the year before because one of their senior player had just been summarily fired, slipped to a series of heavy losses.
Performances were still committed but lacked energy and in the end nothing could hide the fundamental inferiority of the playing group to their opponents. O’Neill’s five squandered players were absent where they were most needed, and the slide began to take speed.
With continued losses confidence began to fall away as well as energy, and to top it all, key players such as Stirling Mortlock began to get injured. Although towards the end of the Tri-nations a growth in confidence began to emerge, it was not enough and the repeated battering from the media and even the coach began to wear on the team’s ruined sense of its own value.
Without Tuqiri, Vickerman, Mcmenniman and Tahu the Wallabies are just too short of real talent.
Now the culmination of this descent has been reached. The Wallabies confidence is crushed. For whole epochs in rugby terms they camped on the English and Scottish lines, failing to score due to nothing more than a terror of failure.
Lote Tuqiri stands on the sidelines as a TV pundit watching Drew Mitchell and Peter Hynes, two wings of vastly inferior talent, taken down quickly by feeble Scottish counterparts whenever they touch the ball.
Ryan Cross with endless possession makes minor inroads where Timana Tahu would have wreaked havoc.
Dan Vickerman and Hugh Mcmenniman’s absence leave the Wallabies packs unable to out muscle a second-rate if large Scottish outfit as well as incapable of line-out dominance.
The worst thing however is that after a series of disastrous losses and scything internal disruption, the team as a whole has lost all bluster, inner strength and self-belief.
O’Neill’s terrible plot has run its course and the Wallabies sink to the most dreadful loss conceivable.
What next? How can Australia possibly recover from this?
The only answer is the following: players, players, players. Get the old ones back, get in new ones.
Watching Tuqiri on the sidelines couldn’t help prompt the following thought: is it possible to imagine the Wallabies losing to Scotland with him on the field?
Enjoy sports? Enjoy a bargain? All Sports Online has your favourite sporting brands at up to 70% off. Online only, premium quality sporting goods and merchandise at discounted prices. Get a deal now.
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Rugby Union articles
- Will Super Rugby crowds continue their slide? (178)
- Will South African rugby force a Super 21 by 2018? (171)
- Brumbies 2012: New coach, new players, new attitude (128)
- Pocock set to be named new Force skipper (56)
- Can the ‘Tahs win the battle after losing the Waugh? (51)
- What does the future hold for the Six Nations (50)
- Wales and France the early stars of the Six Nations (48)
- Barnes to lead Waratahs in first hitout
- Harris and Lucas in Reds No.10 audition
- Wales show Southern Hemisphere how to play running rugby (2)
- Dan Parks and the unsolved questions of expat rugby
- David Pocock: a skipper my Force teammates will fight for (17)
- Four changes to France Six Nations side (5)
- What opening matches of Six Nations taught us (11)
- Wales show Southern Hemisphere how to play running rugby (2)
- What opening matches of Six Nations taught us (11)
- Will Super Rugby crowds continue their slide? (179)
- Clinical Chiefs cost rusty Rebels in Corio (7)
- Six Nations shows rugby is a parochial game at heart (5)
- Goose’s Super Rugby up-and-comer XV for 2012 (29)
- What does the future hold for the Six Nations (50)
- Explore:
- Dan Vickerman, Hugh Mcmenniman, John ONeill, Karmichael Hunt, Lote Tuqiri, robbie deans, Rugby Union, Timana Tahu, wallabies

Knives Out said | November 23rd 2009 @ 7:20am | Report comment
‘Lote Tuqiri stands on the sidelines as a TV pundit watching Drew Mitchell and Peter Hynes, two wings of vastly inferior talent, taken down quickly by feeble Scottish counterparts whenever they touch the ball.’
I think you’ll find that Hynes made the most metres per carry (from the fewest carries) and that he was the only starting back not to be turned over and concede possession. Hynes also made the most tackles of the backs. I think you should also keep in mind that the only back three 3N players to have scored a try this series are AAC, Mitchell and Habana.
stillmissit said | November 23rd 2009 @ 7:31am | Report comment
Knives I am with you again (this is getting boring). Give me a Hynes over a Tuquiri any day.
Knives Out said | November 23rd 2009 @ 7:35am | Report comment
I think that to call Hynes reliable would be to do him a disservice because the term reliability has negative connotations in the rugby context, as if that player is incapable of excellence. He’s accurate, intelligent and can finish. I noticed during the Twickenham game that he’s a tough man as well. I’d like to see him playing in a back three with a Tuqiri-esque player. A big man who he could link with.
Dan said | November 23rd 2009 @ 5:28pm | Report comment
You’re certainly right that to denigrate Hynes is to illustrate that one has simply not watched him play, but Tuqiri’s value was certainly underestimated by the ARU in my opinion. He fell out of favour with many wallabies fans, but the man was an extremely passionate and fierce competitor that was very strong under the high ball (a skill we need in the current ping-pong Rugby environment of constant up and unders) and tackled with incredible ferocity. He always had the potential to make a devastating outside centre, but was simply never given ample time in the role.
formeropenside said | November 23rd 2009 @ 7:52am | Report comment
Really, the ARU cannot be serious anymore. Letting go the players mentioned above, not to mention Latham and Rodney Blake, further diluting Australian rugby by creating a 5th team, scrapping the ARC.
Are the ARU so hard up that they agreed to play a 4th Bledisloe every year (and thereby ensure the AB’s retain the trophy indefinately, as a 3-1 series win is required by the Wallabies to win it back – which I agree is purely a hypothetical anyway) but they still cant spend money where it is actually needed?
Heck, at least if Alan Jones had been coaching the Wallabies the last few years with these results he could have been axed and Deans appointed, still with a sterling S14 record. Who do the ARU appoint as the coach now? Its bad enough they recommend to Qld to hire ex-Tah Link over Connolly, so its unlikely Connolly would be a choice. Is Macqueen interested in coming back? Rugby has moved on though, largely to counter the changes Macqueen introduced.
Rugby in Queensland and Australia is *expletive deleted*.
kingplaymaker said | November 23rd 2009 @ 8:06am | Report comment
formeropenside one point I didn’t make fully was the climate in which O’Neill set off on his cost-cutting venture. With the losses the ARU had suffered financially in the years before, the global financial crisis, and the delicate state of the game’s popularity, O’Neill felt it necessary to save money at any price. In addition he thought that by showing the players who was boss and refusing to pay any of them a little more, he would keep salaries low and affordable.
What he didn’t bank on was how small that group of top level players really is.
So it was a gamble, and a miscalculated one.
Bay35Pablo said | November 23rd 2009 @ 12:14pm | Report comment
“This perhaps explains Deans own authoritarian streak, his cheerful collusion in Tuqiri’s sacking and philosophical indifference to Tahu’s departure.”
Making these comments based on personal experience KPM?
Or is this the same source of rumours as the one about why Tuqiri got the sack?
Simple answers solve nothing. it is a hell of a lot more complex, and harder to fix, than you suggest. Although depth is an issue.
kingplaymaker said | November 23rd 2009 @ 12:55pm | Report comment
Bay collusion was perhaps an excessively suggestive word: what I meant was that Deans said he agreed with the dismissal of Tuqiri. This implies he didn’t fight it, and indeed as it (whatever ‘it’ was) took place in a hotel where he must have been the boss of the group, he would have been able simply not to report it to the ARU if he didn’t think it merited severe action, which he must have known would eventuate. So I think he was a part of it.
When Tahu left Deans said he thought it was ok if he wasn’t happy with rugby, which although very generous as a sentiment, suggests he didn’t try as hard as he could to persuade him to stay.
My analysis is in the end rather simple and perhaps too much so: the Wallabies declined because they lost 5 top international players leaving them too weak. Bring in 5 more top international players and they’ll recover.
PastHisBest said | November 23rd 2009 @ 2:44pm | Report comment
“This implies he didn’t fight it, and indeed as it (whatever ‘it’ was) took place in a hotel where he must have been the boss of the group, he would have been able simply not to report it to the ARU if he didn’t think it merited severe action, which he must have known would eventuate. So I think he was a part of it.”
“When Tahu left Deans said he thought it was ok if he wasn’t happy with rugby, which although very generous as a sentiment, suggests he didn’t try as hard as he could to persuade him to stay.”
Exceedingly long bows KPM. Unless as Bay suggest you have the inside juice? If not, then I don;t know how you come up with this kind of thing.
Campbell Watts said | November 23rd 2009 @ 6:11pm | Report comment
Oh please kingplaymaker!
What – you think Tuqiri was worth Deans withholding information from the ARU board?? PLEASE!!
Tuqiri was one of the bad apples that has helped put aussie rugby in the pathetic postion it is now in.
His money-orientated bargining, team-mate pushing, I’m-too-good-to-work-on-my-speed attitude was never any good for the wallabies.
All he did was put bums on seats. His attitude was always “me before the team”, “it’s not me fucking up-it’s my team-mates”, I deserved to be treated like a king!
Looking at your moniker sounds like you may have some of Tuqiri’s delusions yourself!!
stuff happens said | November 23rd 2009 @ 12:36pm | Report comment
I suspect O’Neill has a lot to do with all this. I’ve read a number of reports in the Sydney press about his authoritarian attitude and that many players can’t stand him. The way he handled the Tuqiri saga was appalling and produced no benefit for rugby at all. I notice that Wendell Sailor is to be made some sort of ambassador for League – good move , people love him. This is what should have happened to Tuqiri at the end of his career.
But oh no, let’s sack him and show them who’s boss.And what happens ; the players are seriously pissed which affects performance( what a surprise).
Robbie Deans is not a miracle worker; he has a lack of talent in the pack and a seeming inability to make the right decisions re the backs. That plus the instability in the ranks makes life very difficult. The team starts losing , confidence falls and so it goes on…
kingplaymaker said | November 23rd 2009 @ 1:05pm | Report comment
stuff happens that’s spot-on. How did O’Neill manage to alienate Mat Rogers, Wendell Sailor and Lote Tuqiri? They can’t all be such difficult characters.
If all this had happened in New Zealand they would probably have got away with it. For example, when Luke Mcalister and Aaron Mauger left there were Ma’a Nonu, Conrad Smith and Richard Kahui (and others) waiting in the wings. Internal problems and firing players could never destroy such a world-class arsenal of talent as the All Blacks. There are just too many good players.
But in Australia good union players are as rare and valuable as gold.
Tuqiri was a shining success story as a league convert despite his recent loss of form. He won 67 caps and might have got 100, he was a world-class wing for several years and a great global figure in the sport. And then they fire him? If the reason suggested in the Daily Telegraph is true then it’s really too much for words: who cares if he does that?
Deans is a great coach but so are the New Zealand and South African coaching teams and they have better players thanks to O’Neill. As you say Deans isn’t a miracle worker and with inferior players, internal disruption, loss of confidence, what could any coach in history do in his place?
What’s particularly sad now is seeing how he has turned a player like Wycliff Palu, who was once an occasional performer going missing and getting tired in big matches ,into a relentless, dominating number 8. Who’s to say he couldn’t have done the same with Hugh Mcmeniman, Timana Tahu and Tuqiri?
AngryAnt said | November 23rd 2009 @ 2:52pm | Report comment
KPM,
While I agree there has been some poor decisions made re player retention by the ARU, and that the sacking of Tiquri I believe has created more tension and problems between the players (read Gits in particular) and management (including Deans) than it resolved financially, I cannot let you get away with the following:
He (JON)”…allowed the Waratahs to bench Timana Tahu while paying him a huge salary and thus frustrating him into abandoning the sport”
I strongly suggest JON wanted Tahu playing for the Tahs this year. He wanted anything that might encourage some people to watch rugby, and the Tahs this year did not give many reason to stump up for a ticket.
It is wrong to suggest that the CEO of the ARU actually has the ability to tell a S14/Provincial Coach which players to pick once contracted (I conceed the ARU gives contractual top ups to players, but they had done this with Tahu and money was not why Tahu went back to league. He went back because he did not master the game well enough or wasn’t given the opportunities to show that he had). It just does not happen. As a Tahs fan, and one who enjoys watching decent rugby I wish at time JON had been picking the side rather than Hickey and co. At least JON appreciates the need to put on a show that excites and interests people.
kingplaymaker said | November 24th 2009 @ 12:08am | Report comment
Angryant I think the ARU should insist that when they top-up contracts with vast sums as in the case of Tahu that the players is played. They effectively paid the Waratahs a fortune this year to leave him on the bench. O’Neill certainly didn’t stand in the way when Tahu wanted to leave however.
sheek said | November 23rd 2009 @ 5:02pm | Report comment
It’s finally dawning on people that Australian rugby is in serious trouble. Those who accused others of “death-riding” Australian rugby only just recently, are ranting along with the rest of us.
However, while we go about our ‘scorched-earth’ policy of finding the reasons for our demises & possible cures, let’s try to stay away from the quacks, or become quacks ourselves.
3 pieces of advise:
1. In finding solutions, let’s not throw the ‘baby out with the bath water’.
2. When suggesting solutions, try to avoid being engulfed into the world of pure fantasy & unreality.
3. Knee-jerk, short-term, feel-good solutions don’t provide long-term answers.
Personally, I don’t know anymore (the answers), & right now I don’t really care either.
Pete said | November 23rd 2009 @ 5:49pm | Report comment
KPM you’re not part of RUPA by any chance? You’ve drawn some long bows to try and pin this on JON. I don’t agree with some of JONs decisions, but even in my wildest dreams I couldn’t blame him for the loss to Scotland.
Campbell Watts said | November 23rd 2009 @ 6:20pm | Report comment
Here here Pete!
kingplayermaker is streching credulity here with this article!
Tuqiri was washed up.
Mat Rodgers heart was never as big as his ego
Tahu came for the money when the body was waning
Look more to the Wallabies lack of passion, their surplus of greed and their holier-than-thou attitudes to explain the sad form of the wallabies at the moment.
Deans should be getting around in the old t-shirt saying:
“it’s hard to soar with the eagles when I’m surrounded by turkeys!”
kingplaymaker said | November 24th 2009 @ 12:15am | Report comment
Campbell I think the Wallabies have played with huge passion and determination this year, but it’s hard to win if your players aren’t good enough, which they aren’t as I explain above.
If there had been any fault in passion it could be because a player who had been there for several years was fired four games into the season.
Campbell Watts said | November 24th 2009 @ 12:47pm | Report comment
KPM
So the capitulation in Wellington showed “huge passion and determination” did it?
Yes they’re now missing Sharpy, Mortlock, Barnes – some very experienced players, but I will not accept that the league players you are flogging on about were the solution to the present problems!
Tahu wasn’t getting played because his Tah’s coach didn’t think he was as good as the guys getting the 12 and 13 jerseys – simple as that. His chances to shine when he got a spot he blew generally. He never adjusted to the game and his mental ticker dropped because of it.
Tuqiri’s form had slumped so low he wasn’t worth the money they were being forced to pay him – so good on JON for getting rid of him – think of all the extra cash the ARU now have to secure the new emerging talent, not some 30-something old war horse with an attitude problem.
Bringing in league players is not the solution! Even as a stop-gap measure! It’s cutting your nose off to spite your face.
kingplaymaker said | November 24th 2009 @ 1:07pm | Report comment
Campbell yes I do think they played with passion which is why they were able to compete at all for so long with a New Zealand outfit boasting far superior players. By the end their confidence and hope were finished, their bodies exhausted, and so they collapsed.
You can’t really call Tuqiri a league player: he’s been playing union for 6 years and has 67 caps by now! I think his form was a temporary loss and would have returned.
Tahu I think should have been in the Waratahs and when they finally did give him a run was superb. I also think he would have done better than Ryan Cross in the last few matches.
I’m not pro-league or a fan of it by the way: it’s just a handy source of players.
The Wallabies do have a league player at the moment: Ryan Cross. Surely Timana Tahu would have done better than him?
kingplaymaker said | November 24th 2009 @ 12:12am | Report comment
Pete, consider the team facing Scotland if O’Neill had been someone else: Robinson, Moore, Alexander, Vickerman, Mcmeniman, Elsom, Smith, Palu, Genia, Giteau, Tuqiri, Cooper, Tahu, Hynes, Ashley-Cooper. That team would have won.
Knives Out said | November 24th 2009 @ 12:53am | Report comment
But you have stated that Hynes is useless and so is AAC. Why are they still in your dream team?
Pete said | November 24th 2009 @ 9:41am | Report comment
KPM, the team on Sunday should have won. They have the talent, something (everything) went horribly amiss.
If only we had Vickerman, McMeniman, Tuqiri and Tahu we would have won…
If only Moore had better body height as he lunged for the line, Rocky ground the ball, Cooper threw the ball to Cross instead of Mitchell, or Gits kicked any of those missed goals… we would have won.. and won easily.
There is no gaurantees that any of those “ARU booted” players would have performed well this season. Who would have thought 12 months ago that Gits would be having a form slump topped off by having the game from hell.
I understand your frustration but unless JON pulls on his boots and stuffs a try or misses a goal I can’t blame him for the loss… but it would be pretty cool if he did ask Robbie to give him a run!
kingplaymaker said | November 24th 2009 @ 10:42am | Report comment
Pete of course you’re right the current team have far too much talent to be unable to beat Scotland. I suppose what I meant was that if those four players had been there all along the team would not have lost so much before, and hence their confidence would not have plummetted, and hence they would not have lost to Scotland.
There’s no guarantee all four of those players would have performed well certainly, but surely some, at least half of them would. Vickerman was a reliable performer: and if Deans can turn Palu into a reliable one, he could well have done the same with some of the other three.
You right though they should have won.
O’Neill seems to be a tremendously powerful man in Australian rugby: I’m sure if he ordered Deans to put him in the team he would have to do it!
Campbell Watts said | November 23rd 2009 @ 6:23pm | Report comment
Hmm..
No cheers on your article KPM.
I’m not suprised!