By LeftArmSpinner -
December 1st 2009 @ 2:32am
Get a Roar profile
Loading ...Related coverage
Deans is giving the Wallabies every chance
Wallabies coach Robbie Deans talks to the team during the Wallabies Captain's run in Sydney on Friday, July 25, 2008. AAP Image/Jenny Evans
Robbie Deans is giving the Wallabies and Australian Rugby every chance to return to former glories and possibly win the next Rugby World Cup.
In horse racing parlance, Deans has positioned the Wallabies “one out” from the fence and “one back” from the race leader.
Deans has done this while showing responsibility for Australia’s national team and respect for the individual. On his arrival, he gave the incumbents the first chance to meet his standards.
Of the established players in 2007, only Stephen Moore, Matt Dunning, James Horwill, George Smith, Matt Giteau, Adam Ashley-Cooper, Cliff Palu, Mark Chisholm and Drew Mitchell have survived. With the exception of Adam Ashley Cooper, all have struggled with their form and the pressure from the incoming youngsters.
Mark Chisholm is only on the current tour because of the large number of injuries and the relative lack of depth in the lock position. I do not understand and cannot explain how Drew Mitchell is still in the squad, let alone the team.
Over the past 12 months, Robbie Deans has undertaken a major cleanout of the playing roster and brought in a large number of very young inexperienced and untried but individually brilliant footballers.
During this transitional time, Deans has demonstrated tremendous subtlety, patience blended with decisiveness and a determination to not accept any performance that is less than 100% or that disrespects the wallaby jersey.
Deans benched Stephen Moore for Tatafu Polota-Nau in the critical Springboks game in Brisbane. Polota-Nau had a blinder in Brisbane against the world champions, and in my view, his explosive tackling was the principal determinant in the tone of the game.
When he got his next opportunity to start, Stephen Moore was a much better player for it.
While Deans has been patient with James Horwill as he made his return from major injury, he was much less forgiving to Cliff Palu, also returning from injury.
Palu lost his starting position and had to work is way back via the bench. We saw glimpses of wrecking ball form from Palu against England and his form has continued to improve since then. Robert Kearney, the Ireland full back, is reportedly still having nightmares after being the subject/target of Palu’s tackle.
Deans has shown a combination of patience, if decisiveness and passivity towards Matt Giteau. Despite the Giteau’s poor form and the overt petulance of a teenager, Deans refused to either bench or drop him completely.
He effectively redefined Giteau’s role, slowly but surely moving him out of the playmaker role and into more spacious and suitable pastures at 12.
Deans passively, but cleverly, pandered to Giteau’s ego by leaving him in the 10 jersey, while showing decisiveness in not selecting Giteau as vice captain.
Deans removed the captaincy and the 7 jersey from a leg weary and possibly terminally exhausted George Smith. A week later he dangled the same jersey in front of Smith. After more than ten inauspicious performances, Pocock blossomed. Against Wales, George Smith was back to his brilliant best creating turnovers and havoc generally at the breakdown.
Having two 7’s, each able to go at full throttle for 40 minutes, addresses the opportunities and issues of the modern breakdown.
Previously, with both on the field for the full 80 minutes, the improvement at the breakdown was insufficient to justify the weakening the scrum, the lineout and the ball carrying.
This is a model that can negate the brilliance of a Richie McCaw and how many international teams can copy this structure by finding and blooding and other world class 7 before RWC 2011?
Adam Ashley Cooper is a truly exceptional footballer. He can play in a multitude of positions under different coaching styles, while all the time appreciating and enjoying being a Wallaby. He moved seamlessly from the Connolly era to Deans.
He is essentially the only player, incumbent in 2007, to have done this.
Having cleaned out the incumbent players who could not produce the hunger and desire required by Robbie Deans, he brought in or promoted Berrick Barnes, David Pocock, Peter Hynes, Digby Ioane, Quade Cooper, Luke Burgess, Will Genia, Ben Alexander, James O’Connor, Sekope Kepu and Lachlan Turner. In most cases, they came in over the top of players with more Wallaby caps.
The stand out performer has been Benn Robinson. He is now the senior figure in a resurgent wallaby scrum, he throws passes that a fly half would be proud of tackles like Terry Randall and cleans out like a 7, while according to the pundits, is too small to be a prop.
Deans lived with the frustration of the mistakes that these youngsters made, in the belief that his investment in them would be vindicated. In reality, the Robbie Deans had no alternative and hence nothing to lose.
His arrival at the Wallabies just happened to coincide with a crop of youngsters, and in the critical positions of the hooker (Polota-Nau), half back (Genia), fly half (Barnes, Cooper, Beale) and Fullback (O’Connor, Cooper and Beale).
The Wallabies will have sufficient player depth and are aided by many players being able to play several positions.
Robbie Deans has also been helped by the shortsightedness of the Springbok selectors.
They chose the easier route of retaining an already ageing squad in the hope that they could survive until RWC 2011. The Springboks losses to Ireland and France indicate that they have reached their sell by date they have not had left themselves enough time to rebuild.
The Springboks, without strong on the field leadership from the likes of ageing Smit and Matfield, have the propensity to self destruct.
Despite being only halfway through the four year cycle, this generation of Wallabies has a once in a lifetime opportunity. They are a very young team, with exceptional individual skill, a proven coaching team and the burgeoning track record of two very good wins (Springboks and Wales), encouraging, credible performances (England and Ireland) and three poor games (New Zealand twice and Scotland).
Subject to RWC vagaries, the Wallabies and the All Blacks are likely to be the two best teams in the world and could meet in the World Cup final.
With two years until RWC 2011, the Wallabies can and must build on this by delivering consistent performances so as to build their self belief.
As with the racehorse, there is only so much that the trainer and jockey can do. The rest is up to horse.
Get Australia's best Rugby opinion emailed daily.
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...
(72)
sheek said | December 1st 2009 @ 6:02am | Report comment
Back in 1994, following the first-ever prime time mid-week test, opposing coaches Bob Dwyer & Laurie Mains were left to contemplate two entirely contrasting halves, & trying to determine which half indicated the ‘true’ position of their team.
This was the ‘Gregan tackle’ test, when Gregan knocked the ball out of Jeff Wilson’s arms as he was about to score the winning try in the dying seconds.
The Wallabies dominated the first half to lead 17-3 at the break, with two tries. The ABs were equally emphatic in the second term, creating many opportunities that broke down, & should have won, eventually going down 16-20.
As events would show the second-half showed the two teams up for what they would become in 1995.
For the current Wallabies, as they look ahead to the 2011 world cup, which team will we see then? The team that won so handsomely 33-12 against Wales, or the team that muddled to an 8-9 defeat against Scotland???
LeftArmSpinner said | December 1st 2009 @ 6:42am | Report comment
Sheek, I’d take your point but would suggest that there are three generic games:
Wellington: insipid, uninspired, pathetic, embarrassing display
Murrayfield: dominant performance in all aspects of the game except the score board and some naive played at crucial times together with an off colour goal kicker
Cardiff/ Brisbane: 80 minute performance, the ball in hand play passionate committed physically confronting complete rugby.
If the wallabies are a potentially brilliant but the young and inexperienced team, we can expect a variety of Cardiff of and Murrayfield performances.
If the wallabies and are a soft bellied shallow self centred group of quasi teenagers, we may get some good rugby but we will definitely get several more Wellington performances.
ohtani's jacket said | December 1st 2009 @ 7:36am | Report comment
Deans was slow to make changes, fumbled his way towards decisions he ought to have made from the opening match and had the Wallabies produce two good performances all year. The Wallabies made a hash of their Grand Slam tour and have fallen off from where they were a year ago, so I’m afraid the horse is further back than you’re making out Leftie. I do like how you turn Deans’ cluelessness into “tremendous subtlety.” It’s been rather blunt, wouldn’t you say?
All this talk about the World Cup is fool’s gold. The Australians did the same thing last time round. Why is it that you’ve resorted to the WC to pin all your hopes to? If the Wallabies lose everything up until then and get knocked out of the World Cup, what was this suoposed master plan period all about? An exercise in how to consistently lose?
fox said | December 1st 2009 @ 8:13am | Report comment
“Why is it that you’ve resorted to the WC to pin all your hopes to?”
Because to the victor go the spoils and eternal glory! I actually agree with you to some extent, but when a young side is building and finding its feet but struggling to some extent, it’s good to have a goal to focus on. Surely you can understand that much.
ohtani's jacket said | December 1st 2009 @ 6:16pm | Report comment
Their focus should’ve been on improving on last season’s results, which were by and large positive.
sheek said | December 1st 2009 @ 10:06am | Report comment
Yep,
It’s all Deans’ fault, plus he’s a kiwi – sack him!
Deans is probably responsible for the global financial crisis & global warming as well…..
ohtani's jacket said | December 1st 2009 @ 6:20pm | Report comment
Easiest gig in the world. Do nothing and get praised for it. No wonder you can’t beat the All Blacks when you revere a New Zealand coach so much.
LeftArmSpinner said | December 1st 2009 @ 10:13am | Report comment
OJ,
are you referring to the fumblings of 18 months ago or another time?
Not fools gold because I am not saying that they will win or even do well? The said material is the best available from the existing ore body. only the fire of the furnace will decide its composition. Upon visual inspection, when you look at it from the Cardiff and even the Murrayfield aspect, the glints of light indicate (only indicate not confirm) that it is gold. However, from the Wellington aspect, it looks like “the pretend stuff”.
The furnace that is S14/15, BC and 3N in 2010 and 2011 will confirm things.
OJ, unlike NZ, Aust doesnt have the depth to be able to bring in player after player. So, effectively, that 2009 touring squad is it. Some of the dirt trackers, such as Beale or KIngi, and a few of the injured locks (Kimlin, Caldwell, Hocking) may step up, get enough game time to feel comfortable and become effective at the top level.
There may be one or two others who emerge. But essentially, we have already selected 90% of the players and hence by definition the 1st XXII that will rep. Aust at RWC 2011. In assembling this group, Deans has done a good job. Now the players must grow and grasp the opportunity.
Don’t underestimate the external factors like the Boks and Welsh decline and the rise of Ireland influencing Wallabies future…… The pool C Aust V Ireland game will be a biggie. The pool C winner will play either Wales or Fiji. The pool C loser will play Boks.
ohtani's jacket said | December 1st 2009 @ 6:30pm | Report comment
I’m talking about the first match of this season.
Every change Deans has made this year was called long before he actually made it. He’s been slow to act and wasted an entire season. Forget about lack of depth, why does it take him so many Tests to change things that are obvious to us post-match? Why does he never fix things during the week? Why do they keep making the same mistakes over and over again? It’s not a matter of depth. That’s a red herring. It’s about coaching the players that you do have. New Zealand are hardly brimming with talent right now, but the coaching system makes Deans look like he doesn’t even have one in place. Two years in and he’s still mucking around with selections let alone how he wants the side to actually play.
CraigB said | December 1st 2009 @ 11:11am | Report comment
“Why is it that you’ve resorted to the WC to pin all your hopes to?” – maybe we like to copy the AB’s. Wasn’t that the reason for pulling all the players out of S14 in 07? How did that go again??
ohtani's jacket said | December 1st 2009 @ 6:22pm | Report comment
Mate, we’d won everything on offer up until that point.
The way it is! said | December 1st 2009 @ 8:41pm | Report comment
OJ I’m with you all the way on this matter and your points raised are correct.
Parisien said | December 1st 2009 @ 7:37am | Report comment
Thanks LAS, many interesting and provocative things in your piece.
Just a couple of points or opinions:
Mitchell is not that bad, he has pace and is a good finisher and try scorer, but weak under high balls and in defence.
AAC is a good runner, line breaker and finisher but can be egoistic and doesn’t always pass the ball to better placed team-mates. Still unsure where is his best position: centre, wing or fullback?
Deans may just prove to be the great man manager, magician and coach but I will never understand his benching of Smith fifteen minutes before the end of the Wellington test. IMO, pulling the captain was one of the factors that led to the Wallaby capitulation.
There have been other strange replacement/bench moments, and times when he should have pulled or rotated a player and didn’t and vice versa (Moore/TPN; Chisolm/Mumm, Genia/Burgess; Cooper/Giteau; AAC/ O’Connor). Is this great foresight to be vindicated next year or after, or bloody mindedness that has cost the Wallabies games and confidence this year? or is it military- like breaking the man/team to reform them as an efficient killing machine? if the Wallabies win the RWC in 2011, we’ll all say bravo, but if not? With all those games lost along the way? 2015 you say. I’m greedy and unrealistic, I want them to win most of the time as well as the World Cups. the wallabies have always been over-achievers – may it continue!
There are still many positives as you have pointed out fortunately.
Finally I wouldn’t write off South Africa yet. They lost some key players just before the tour, had achieved their major objective with style, and traditionally are suspect on end of year tours.
PastHisBest said | December 1st 2009 @ 8:56am | Report comment
Agree on AAC Parisien. Very good (excellent even) in some areas of the game, but his vision and ability to put others in space is non-existent IMO.
I would also not rule out France in the WC. They may have just been given a shellacking by the AB’s but are consistently good at the world cups.
LeftArmSpinner said | December 1st 2009 @ 10:24am | Report comment
parisien, Mitchell is that bad. he doesnt use his pace. he kicks it too much and they are poor kicks that he doesnt chase. He almost bombed that second try in cardiff with a forward pass.
AAC: he’s probably best at 13 but he is currently the best 15 and stocks of 15’s are thin, unless beale or Cooper or Turner can step up, or even Hynes.
If he has been guilty of anything, it is his slowness to react. Gituau to 12, Genia for Burgess, Mumm for Chisholm and Mumm on the bench the whole season, as you say. In Genia’s place, was this to allow the incoming player to acclimatise via the bench while giving the incumbent more time to find form? I am going to find in favour of Deans on the basis of benefit of the doubt. It was early in the 4 year cycle. The damage of the losses to the morale is very much a factor.
Who knows, but young players have emerged: Cooper, Genia, Ioane, Pocock, but it has taken them time, nmore time than I expected and most are still not the finished article.
Hoy said | December 1st 2009 @ 9:15am | Report comment
Without jumping the gun:
I feel Deans is the right man. End of story for me. I think we have the talent in our players. I don’t think we have shallow talent pool. So that leaves the reason for the shoddy results firmly in the laps of the players.
Deans moves a bit slow in some things for me. I would not have managed Gits quite the same. I don’t see why he feels the need to wear the 10 jersey, yet is happy to play one position wider. Surely now he sees the difference in his game between everything previous, and the Welsh game with more space.
I get caught up in the winning, because you can see what the team CAN DO, yet don’t do often enough. But this great win over Wales, will again count for not much if the next game is shit and the players are all headless chooks. We need consistency, and this comes from the playing group I feel. The break is maybe the best or worst thing to happen now. Time will tell.
rugbyguy said | December 1st 2009 @ 10:29am | Report comment
i agree.
australia i think will be one of the teams to beat come 2011,
Deans has a young side now but in 2 years they will be experianced and in their prime.
if anyone doubts Robbie Deans has the gift for turning young talent into world class players then
have a look at the Crusaders when Deans was in charge, he took many young raw talented players and developed them
Dan carter and Richie McCaw are just two examples,
the wallabies have some talent, Will Genia is one could become a star of the futre,
Rocky Elsom is a physically a freak of nature and a very good player already, captaincy only seems to have made him grow in stature, he could be as good as McCaw in time.
Im sure Deans will recruit well and manufacture players to fill the gaps in the wallabies sqaud,
wallabies vs All Blacks for the final
rugbyguy said | December 1st 2009 @ 10:36am | Report comment
recruiting from 7’s is a great way to find outside backs!
its a trick New Zealand used well in the late 90’s
tana umaga, jonah lomu, cristian cullen, jeff wilson all made a
name for themsevles playing sevens.
but then New Zealand has gordan tiectens as sevens coach and he is
a magician at creating stars.
LeftArmSpinner said | December 1st 2009 @ 11:06am | Report comment
beale and horne could have benefited from that
Brett McKay said | December 1st 2009 @ 11:38am | Report comment
Great stuff Leftie, it’s easy for us now to fall into the “she’ll be right” hole again, but we have to be mindful that a lot can still happen between last Sunday morning and September 2011. But we’re well entitled to like what we’re seeing, and if means we’re now all looking forward to watching rugby in 2010, then that really is good news.
Perhaps this is also the time where we Wallaby supporters need to conduct our own reviews, particularly our expectations and reactions to both wins and losses. That’s not to say that we should accept mediocrity, but that perhaps we should use a little more context before casting the stones of criticsm. Perhaps I should have written my “Let’s get off the Wallabies backs” column this month rather than last month. Constructive criticsm is good, but knee-jerk rants prove nothing.
By all means let’s enjoy the outcomes of the Spring tour, but let’s not completely ignore the debacles of Wellington, or even the frustration of Dublin and especially Edinburgh. OJ’s comments aren’t too far off the mark when viewed in the wider context I think they were made in.
(I think my inner Greg Russell has surfaced…)
Let’s just not get too far ahead of ourselves. As David Pocock wrote today, a week truly is a long time in rugby.
Just on Adam Ashley-Cooper to finish, anyone that has cast an eye over the advertures of brothers Matty and Patty this month (Chasing the Dream) would know that AAC himself still admits that wing is his preferred position, though he knows he may not play it much any more. It’s always amusing when a player is potentially world class in a position, still pretty handy in another, but prefers neither…
LeftArmSpinner said | December 2nd 2009 @ 7:18am | Report comment
Brett, the she’ll be right hole is further down the track.
All I can say at this point is that this team, on the basis of what is in front of us now, can go all the way. Whether they do will be determined primarliy by their desire and some luck. They cannot just stop now. In fact, the effort required will only increase.
And let me clarify, by all the way, I mean get to the final. then it is a lottery. At this moment, the AB’s are the team to beat. they are much much more likely to win and so say the bookies. $1.95 to $5.50. See below. Interestingly, the bookies still have the boks very much in the frame.
NEW ZEALAND 1.95
SOUTH AFRICA 4.75
AUSTRALIA 5.50
FRANCE 11.00
ENGLAND 13.00
WALES 21.00
IRELAND 26.00
ARGENTINA 41.00
SCOTLAND 151.00
FIJI 251.00
ITALY 251.00
SAMOA 501.00
TONGA 501.00
My article just restates the market as follows:
NEW ZEALAND 2.50
AUSTRALIA 4.00
SOUTH AFRICA 5.50
As regards the rants, after the Wellington game, a rant was more than justified. they were appalling and this is a national team!!!! It came on the back of too many poor games (Brisbane excluded, but also it demonstrated what they could do if the got it together). the culling at the selection table for the NH tour and the call for Giteau to be given a wake up call were all justified. Again, Giteau’s performance agaisnt Wales showed just how poorly he had been playing in the previous games. I was never calling for him to be dropped and never returned, just benched ” ‘ta think again!!”, as the Scots say.
Growden’s wild swings in attitude do nothing.
Who Needs Melon said | December 1st 2009 @ 11:56am | Report comment
OJ,
Re: “Deans was slow to make changes, fumbled his way towards decisions he ought to have made from the opening match”…
To be fair to Deans I think he started with a bit of a mixed up jigsaw. Look at the backline:
1) Genia has made it obvious he should be the Wallaby 9 but he had a chequered Super14 season through injury.
2) Barnes who should be the Wallaby 10 plays at 12 for the Reds. Mostly. When not injured.
3) Giteau who SHOULD be playing in the Wallaby 12 jumper plays at 10 for the Force.
4) The contenders for the Wallaby 13 jumper were dogged by injury.
5) There were NO real standout wingers. The best winger probably proved to be Kurtley Beale. Who knew?!?
6) The contenders for the Wallaby 15 jumper (AAC and JOC) played at 13 and 12 respectively. Sheppard also injured.
Aside from the front row and Elsom, the forwards were a only slightly less of a puzzle. Who was the best backup to Palu?
I’m hoping during next years Super 14 to see:
– Genia to play all season for the Reds in the 9 jumper.
– Barnes to play all season for the Waratahs in the 10 jumper.
– Giteau to please, PLEASE play for the Brumbies in the 12 jumper. I know it won’t happen.
– Ioane to play all season for the Reds in the 13 jumper.
– A couple of wingers to put in some decent performances. Forget Drew at the Tahs. Perhaps Cummins?
– A good battle for fullback spot perhaps between Beale at the Tahs, AAC for the Brumbies and Sheppard for the Force?
Wylie said | December 1st 2009 @ 12:07pm | Report comment
I’m hoping the Brumbies will play Toomua at 10, Gits at 12, Lealiifano at 15 and AAC on the wing.
LeftArmSpinner said | December 2nd 2009 @ 7:19am | Report comment
wylie, agree with all except AAC s/b at 13. Mortlock wont be around or will be injured!!!!
Wylie said | December 2nd 2009 @ 7:35am | Report comment
Yeah – perhaps a bit optimistic on my behalf. I’m living in hope though.
ohtani's jacket said | December 1st 2009 @ 10:18pm | Report comment
I agree that the backline has been a puzzle for Deans, but last year they were awful defensively and this year they couldn’t attack. That’s just poor coaching. Basically, the Wallabies’ season boiled down to a big final home game and a tour ending boilover. I’m really only writing these posts to challenge Leftie. There’s no point pretending that Deans knew what he was doing all along. If the Wallabies are going to improve, then Deans also has to improve as a coach. No matter who he selects, he has to do a better job of fixing the Wallabies’ problems from one Test to the next. Why, for example, didn’t he work on the lineout after Tokyo or the attack? It’s as though he thinks these things will right themselves. What was he doing pre-tour when the All Blacks were messing around with the step ladder and our coaches getting stick for the squad they’d selected and telling Ross he needs to bulk up?
sittingbison said | December 2nd 2009 @ 2:02am | Report comment
OJ, I think that not enough credence has been placed on the unpredictability of youth and inexperience by many posters on this issue. At the level of age and experience of many of these players, they will often show glimpses then play a shocker, often in the same game. Deans is too old a dog to not understand this, and has actually shown great steadfastness in slowly giving them increasing amounts of game time and responsibility in the face of adversity with the results and pundit attacks. We all clamored for this and that, but the reality is it takes time for the young and inexperienced to get the hard nosed professional edge required for consistent success. Ferguson did it with kids against all opinion (at least that of Hanson), but they were from an experienced reserves team and trained with the best. How do you manage prima donnas, or players that believe they are the best (when they almost are). Sometimes they need a kick up the bum, other times they need to be mollycoddled. Whatever, it sure aint easy. During a period of recycle everyone has to suffer inconsistent results, sometimes managers fail and the cycle continues. The problem Australia face now was initiated by Eddy Jones being followed by Knuckles who hung in there for the WC 07 rather than starting the rebuilding faze or post Jones clear out. As I have alluded to in prior posts delaying the natural cycle in any sport has disastrous consequences down the track by eliminating a generation and placing an undue burden on the next.
And my 2c worth: like it or not every sport is now defined by the world cup cycle. The ABs not winning in more than 20 years is a major detraction from their otherwise illustrious record.
ohtani's jacket said | December 2nd 2009 @ 10:11am | Report comment
You raise a lot of fair points, but I don’t think Deans entered this season expecting a losing record. Robbie Deans may come across as larconic in press conferences, but he’s a hugely competitive coach. I don’t buy this zen-like image of him teaching his pupils the hard way. Oftentimes, a coach is successful in his first year and struggles in year two and that’s certainly what we saw here.
Who Needs Melon said | December 2nd 2009 @ 5:58am | Report comment
Fair enough.
LeftArmSpinner said | December 2nd 2009 @ 7:28am | Report comment
OJ, “to challenge leftie” and long may it continue. It is really what the roar is all about!! I am not saying that he knew all, but his approach was a considered one that accounted for the players as individuals. Every salesman will tell you it is easier to sell things to existing clients than it is to go and get a new client. So too with rugby. it is fasr better to keep the existing players and then add some younger ones to provide depth. For Deans, the incumbents didnt take the opportunity…..so eventually the young ones had to come in as the situation was unacceptable. Deans had nothing to lose at that point. also, he knew that the youngsters would come with energy and no scar tissue and could reinvigorate the squad. it happens in every sporting team…..
the lineout is comprmised by the lack of locks due to injury. of all the positions, lock is the one dragging the chain in terms of development and renewal. But, I cant understand or explain why Mumm was left on the bench game after game and then Chisholm given the gig ahead of him and yet the led the dirt-trackers.
ohtani's jacket said | December 2nd 2009 @ 10:24am | Report comment
Deans had coached against the incumbents for years.
He either thought he could coach them better or didn’t want to step on any toes, but his hand was forced through losses and the changes came too late. He should’ve known after the Super 14 that the Wallabies needed a shake-up. John O’Neill is banking on Deans making the Wallabies competitive as soon as possible, not in two years time.
Hindsight being 20/20, he should’ve at least stopped the bleeding.
Jameswm said | December 1st 2009 @ 12:20pm | Report comment
Does anyone else see the irony in a Kiwi criticising Australia for placing too much importance on the WC?
ohtani's jacket said | December 1st 2009 @ 9:40pm | Report comment
What’s the point in talking about the World Cup when the team can’t string together two wins? Wallaby supporters have been up and down like a yo-yo this season. The immediate goal ought to be to win all their home games next season and work at their away record.
sheek said | December 2nd 2009 @ 1:43am | Report comment
With, or without Deans as head coach….. ?
ohtani's jacket said | December 2nd 2009 @ 9:50am | Report comment
Well, they’re hardly going to get rid of him are they.
LeftArmSpinner said | December 2nd 2009 @ 7:34am | Report comment
OJ, of course their objective is to win their next serious game and not think about anythingelse. But we have the luxury of being able to look down the track and project.
With such a young and unproven team as the Wallabies, the question is whether the group has the ability/potential. this has been a difficult thing to determine given the unpredictable game results. Brilliant Brisbane followed by woeful Wellington (dont take too much out of my choice of words, I was prioritising the illiteration!!!!! rather than the accuracy of the word). the gap between the games was almost too hard to believe.
Worlds Biggest said | December 1st 2009 @ 12:28pm | Report comment
I agree regarding Mitchell, he is talented but too flakey with his concentration lapses. If he can fix that he could be very good. We need more wingers and 2 rowers to bolster the ranks and push for starting spots in Wallaby set up. Easier said than done of course. Everyone seems focused on the RWC however we need results next year. We haven’t won a Tri Nations in 8 years or Bledisloe in 7 years. Not good enough. Yes the RWC is the summit however we need some consistent big wins next year. As for the RWC, keep in mind both Wallabies ( 03 ) and England ( 07 ) only got there act together at the later part of those tournaments, made the Final and nearly won it.
rugbyguy said | December 1st 2009 @ 12:37pm | Report comment
10 gets the ball more than 12. Your best player should have the ball as often as possible.
Gits is clearly the best back in australian rugby so give him the ball. when the rest of the aussie backs learn to follow his lead they will have a potent attack. see wales game last week ,gits had a hand in 3 of 4 tries.
Hoy said | December 1st 2009 @ 12:59pm | Report comment
He had a hand in those tries after standing two out and finally having the space to run. I assume you are saying Gits should be 10 but your argument would put O’Driscoll at 10 for Ireland. Do you think he should be 10 as well?
Giteau may be the best back in Australia, however he may not be the best 10, and after this year, I don’t think he is.
Who Needs Melon said | December 1st 2009 @ 2:46pm | Report comment
Maybe Benn Robinson should be playing at 10 then.
LeftArmSpinner said | December 2nd 2009 @ 7:45am | Report comment
Rugby guy, you confuse your “best player” with best play maker. Some, sorry many, hard headed forwards argue that the 3 can be the best player, but he will never be a 10…………. giteau is not a playmaker. he is an attacker, he can beat a man rather than put a player in a gap. Sure, he put the kick in to Ioane’s try. that was great. But, he has not done this previously. how often has a giteau led backline run a true backline movement.
I genuinely can’t remember the last time. I remember numerous times of giteau, at 10, running a crash ball. that is not a backline movement. it only includes one player and ignores the fundamentals of rugby, the ball is the fastest object on the field and backline movements that encompass clever running lines and extra players puts pressure on defending backlines. I refer to the Ireland try by O’Driscoll. It included an extra man (8 made the first pass), a double cut out pass form 9 to 13 and then a straight run by 13, all done at speed and with no margin for error, either on the try line or mid field with really fast wingers to finish off. Thats why they are called “finishers”.
Damo said | December 1st 2009 @ 1:24pm | Report comment
Yes Rugby Guy ” Your best player should have the ball as often as possible.” And Genia could cut out pass to Giteau every time . 10 is the most specialist position in the backs. He does not have to be a game breaker ( like Ella or Larkham) but he has to be able to set things up. I love Giteau as a player. But his best position is another issue. Someone else said he could play wing. I’d like to see that as a trial at least.
Jameswm said | December 1st 2009 @ 1:57pm | Report comment
By rugbyguy’s logic Jonah Lomu should have played 10 too.
We need Kimlin to have a big S14. He is mobile, skilled and tough. He carried the Brumby tight 5 at times last season and he carried Ben Hand the whole season.
Brett McKay said | December 1st 2009 @ 2:44pm | Report comment
James, it’s Kimlin’s likely absence from next year’s S14 that is the main reason the Brumbies moved to sign Justin Harrison…
Rockin Rod said | December 1st 2009 @ 2:34pm | Report comment
James, Kimlin is out for S14 season, thats why they signed harrison. As far as carried Ben Hand, if you talk to all the Brumbies forwards they love him because he does all the shitters like an old school lock. He will partner Chis as locks again next year for the Brums.
rugbyguy said | December 1st 2009 @ 5:49pm | Report comment
first Odriscoll cant kick so he can really only play at centre,
i never said 10 was gits best positon, if their was someone else then maybe he’d be better elsewher i think he has the skill set to play anywhere in the backline,
fact is aussie dont have ayone who can play 10 as well as gits, he is australia best back, and no one said he cant play at 10 and still stand at secound r3eciever for attacking plays, dan carter has often switched into 2nd receiver to create defensive mismatch’s.
JezNez said | December 1st 2009 @ 7:50pm | Report comment
LAS you think Saturday night was an 80 minute effort? Sorry mate but the fifteen minutes or so to start the second half was a mindless kickathon by the Wallabies. Plus the lineout never got tested as the Welsh kicking game was not a patch on the Irish from two weeks earlier. I’m bouyed by the performance but its the same old same old from this team of being able to put in one good performance but they are yet to show they can back one up. By having a pleasing game in their final match of the year I guess we don’t get to see if they have developed any consistency yet.
LeftArmSpinner said | December 2nd 2009 @ 7:51am | Report comment
jez, no it was not an 80 minute performance in terms of the application of the successful “run the ball” tactics of the first half. However, it was an 80 minute performance in terms of effort.
It is inexplicable for a team to dump successful tactics in the second half. had the welsh scored a try agaisnt the run of play, and that can happen, the game would have chnaged completely and the Wallabies would have been facing a reinvogorated team and vociforous crowd and they would have been on the cusp of another loss after leading at halftime…………….
mattamkII said | December 1st 2009 @ 9:05pm | Report comment
OJ – which would you rather?
65% win ratio but the WC trophy to top it off
or
80% win ratio and getting knocked out in the semis
I’d rather the top one….so building to a WC isnt such a bad idea really.
Oh, and if you thing the Wallabies are worse off than this time last year you are mad.
ohtani's jacket said | December 1st 2009 @ 9:49pm | Report comment
The Wallabies have a 53.6% winning percentage and the Cook Cup. This time last year, they had a 64.3% winning percentage, the Cook Cup and the Mandela plate.
Building for the WC might not be such a bad idea if it was what he was actually doing. Let’s face it, it’s a line that gets trotted out because of the Wallabies’ poor results. Why didn’t Deans cull the side sooner if he was so unconcerned with the Wallabies’ results this year?
sheek said | December 2nd 2009 @ 1:47am | Report comment
OJ,
You are generally a knowledgeable & passionate rugby supporter. But when it comes to Deans, you have a blind spot, & are totally devoid of any objectivity.
Your constant criticism of Deans is actually becoming comical.
katzilla said | December 2nd 2009 @ 2:54am | Report comment
That doesn’t mean hes wrong sheek.
And the opposite could be said for all you Dean’s lovers out there.
‘Building’ towards a world cup denotes progress. How is losing to Scotland considered progress?
Your winning percentage is less then last year. And the quality of opposition that you’ve lost against is lower. Last year you lost to The 3N champions, the Reigning world champs and the 6N champs,
this year you came last in the 3N, drew with the 6N champs and lost to the 5th placed 6N team.
LeftArmSpinner said | December 2nd 2009 @ 7:57am | Report comment
Kats, scotland game had to aspects to it. the score board and the stats. wallabies dominated every stat. domination……… they lost it on the scoreboard because they failed to convert the stats domination into points. tries bombed- easy goal kicks missed etc etc. And that is before the additional points that would have flowed as the score board blew out………
at this point in the cycle, I can live with a scotland performance but I cannot live with wellington where they simply didnt play committed rugby or represent their country adequately……………
sheek said | December 2nd 2009 @ 8:24am | Report comment
Katzilla,
I could be wrong about Deans, & OJ could be right, although I doubt it. And I say this without conceit or arrogance.
Firstly, I’ve given the matter considered thought, as I’m sure others have done so, but without fear or favour.
Secondly, I don’t have any particular axe to grind. I don’t allow, or try not to allow, personal feelings interfere with what is right or wrong.
Thirdly, I pride myself on not being a sheep. In fact, quite often, I’m quite proud if I find myself in the vast minority on a particular issue. It seems to me, most people are incapable of deep thought, & simply follow the accepted wisdom, without figuring things out for themselves.
It’s a generalised put-down to call someone a “Deans lover”. In fact, it’s so pathetic, it’s amusing. It’s like calling someone a “tree-hugging, looney leftie”. Which is what, exactly?
Here’s an independent, left-field statement for you – the problem is not, & never has been Deans. I contend that had anyone else rather than Deans been coach, the Wallabies win-loss record would have been….. WORSE!
You see, the problems of the Wallabies & Australian rugby is not the national team coach, it’s our structures. A few wins here & there won’t alter that fact, & rugby fans should not forget that either.
We have too few participation players. We have too few contenders for each position in the Wallabies. We have poor coaching at all levels leading to poor individual skills. We have poor career pathways. We have insufficient opportunities for professional players. We have poor interaction between state bodies & their juniors. We have in short, poor structures that need massive overhauling.
It’s not the national coach. We can change the coach yearly without addressing all the other problems, & we’ll still be bobbing up & down in the same spot in the ocean.
Besides, Deans was the best candidate for the job. If all this makes me a “Deans lover”, I’ll wear the insult with pride!
katzilla said | December 2nd 2009 @ 2:03pm | Report comment
Sheek i meant the term as no insult as i wrote it but can see how it may have been taken that way.
My apologies. I merely meant to imply that he has his fan club and the same non-objective title could be levelled at his fans also. (Its not completely left field to suggest he has nothin to do with the Wallabies woes, my Cantabrian friends are in the same boat you are)
I agree that the problem is not entirely his, but you put no fault at all in his basket.
Is he beyond reproof?
All the things you mention I agree with, infrastructure, development etc,
But your laying zero blame at his feet.
If you didn’t have deans as your coach the win/loss ratio could have been worse, but we’ll never know. So maybe it could have been better?
LAS – That Scotland result, and the Wallabies inability to convert pressure into points is the problem, not a positive from a poor performance. Credit should go to the Scots for tackling their hearts out, but at this level pressure should always = points at some point.
Where does the blame for that lack of finishing lie? In the hands of the coach.
These guys all score tries at s14 level, it isn’t a development problem.
Parisien said | December 2nd 2009 @ 4:07am | Report comment
I am a Wallabies supporter, but I completely agree with OJ and think that on this issue at least he is being perfectly objective. Deans reactivity between games is either slow, non-existent or operating on such a long term abstract level that he has me completely fooled. His best foresight and selection was to play Alexander at tight head, but he has been conservative and slow to react on TPN, Chisolm, moving Smith away from 8, Genia to 9 and Burgess out, Giteau to 12, Turner/Mitchell decision, O’Connor back to the bench. And thats just for the players. How has he adapted his match strategies? before the game? during the game? why have them play a bad kicking game? what has been his use of the bench?
Four consecutive losses to NZ is not acceptable, especially where the team got worse and worse.
I for one want more results now and every season, and do not plan to pin my hopes on 2011 (I remember only too painfully 2007).
LeftArmSpinner said | December 2nd 2009 @ 8:04am | Report comment
parisien, deans appears to have been slow. I agree. Geez, am still calling for Giteau to be at 12. But, with 2 years to go before the RWC, he has used the time to explore all options. Imagine if the old guard of Waugh, Tuqiri, Baxter, etc had stepped up when given the chance. we would now have a blend of experience and youth and lots more depth that in turn filters back to s14 and club rugby. had he cut immediately, this option would have gone out the window and with it the chance to bring the youngsters on (more carefully) through graduated exposure via training, the bench etc. O’Connor didnt have this luxury and he is yet to find his feet. Pocock, on the other hand, has been devleoped beautifully and look at the results.
sheek said | December 2nd 2009 @ 8:56am | Report comment
Parisien,
Two things…..
1. Has it occurred to you that Deans doesn’t have much room to move with the cattle at his disposal? If Graham Henry wanted to motivate a key ABs player, he could drop him & replace him with someone almost as good. Better still, just the threat of relegation might do the trick.
Deans doesn’t have this luxury. He has too few quality players competing for positions.
2. This leads to point two. The players find a comfort zone, & exist in that comfort zone. Only when they feel their position under severe threat, do they play above themselves.
Which might explain the win over the Boks in Brisbane, & the win over Wales in Cardiff.
There is possibly a third point. How do you know Deans hasn’t considered all the other things you mention? Deans is around the players all the time. He’s in a much better position than us to know how his players are going, or not going. He may also have all the right strategies & tactics, which the players are either unwilling or unable to implement.
ohtani's jacket said | December 2nd 2009 @ 10:36am | Report comment
Sheek, who do we have to replace Carter and McCaw? Have you seen our locking stocks lately? Where is Carl Hayman’s replacement at tighthead? Why have we struggled with wingers over the past two seasons? Why haven’t we produced a great halfback in the last decade and why is our midfield a constant problem?
Apparently, Australian rugby’s talent pool is so thin that you can’t replace Smith with Pocock, Burgess with Genia, Giteau with Barnes (if fit), Baxter with Alexander and so on… The problem isn’t the players, it’s that the Wallabies don’t have a system in place where they’re winning matches and introducing players into that game set-up.
The only time they win is when the opposition aren’t up to it.
ohtani's jacket said | December 2nd 2009 @ 9:59am | Report comment
Sheek, you’ve blamed everyone except Deans.
Every other coach gets it in the neck for their results, yet Australians seem almost apologetic for the performances the Wallabies have given under Deans, as though they’ve let him down. It’s like some weird byproduct of having an outside coach.
sheek said | December 2nd 2009 @ 11:20am | Report comment
OJ,
I haven’t said Deans is blameless, or I haven’t had the opportunity to, since most everyone else has been saying so.
Sure Deans has made mistakes, but to base his coaching ability purely on his win-loss record is purile.
As I suggested before, let’s replace him with say Cheika, who’s had a good run with Leinster, or is it Munster. Oh, wait a minute, we selected Deans for the same reason – his excellent provincial record!
One of the Wallabies most revered adopted sons was NZ born Greg Davis, who played 39 tests for Australia 1963-72. Davis led the Wallabies in 16 tests 1969-72 during one of our weakest periods.
He managed just two wins & a draw, yet he was regarded as an inspirational skipper. It wasn’t his fault, he wasn’t surrounded by good cattle.
Yeah, McCaw, Carter & Hayman may not have ready made replacements, but this happens occasionally in NZ rugby. However, you guys generally mask your weaknesses well, due to well organised domestic structures.
Obviously, we’ll have to agree to disagree. It gets silly arguing with a cyber-pseudonym that doesn’t represent a real person!!!
ohtani's jacket said | December 2nd 2009 @ 10:59pm | Report comment
I’m real!
jus de couchon said | December 2nd 2009 @ 2:32am | Report comment
Is the RWC cup that important? Its only 4 weeks every 4 years. With some exceptions it consists of many miss matchs and forgetable finals. Professionalism is a double edged sword. Here in England the Autumn Internationals are still popular , and because of money driven interests now seemingly permanent. How long this will last is anyones guess. The anticipation of an All Black/England game at Twickers is gone. A touring Aus or Bok team, just good memories.
warrenexpatinnz said | December 2nd 2009 @ 3:54am | Report comment
LAS I think you have made some good solid points and I strongly support the Wallabies although the roller coaster of 2009 did dent my resolve at times.
Rugby commentators from England and New Zealand, Peter Thorburn NZ quoted from Radio Sport in NZ yesterday stated “the scariest thing in world rugby for the All Blacks is the Wallabies”. I can’t remember exactly the comments following but he made further points of the Wallabies youthfullness, the completeness off the squad, the depth! and when the consistency comes to the Wallaby game, of which it will then they are the most serious threat to the ABs search for the elusive RWC.
Deans like the Wallaby players has been learning over the last eighteen months and for all you snide remarking hot and cold Wallaby supporters do you not think that a coach deserves the oppurtunity to understand the personality of his players, in different pressure situations and playing alongside different team mates in those situations? I think there was this false sense of instant success with Deans and it was unrealistic to expect the changes that he needed to bring through into not only the Wallaby personal ranks but style of play would take more than just a season or two.
If you compare were the AB coaches are and Deans I think we would agree Deans has been afforderd greater leeway and the ability to rotate players and blood a huge number of players, far more than any other squad with SA the closest comparison. I think this coupled with NZ rugby bosses and supporters who were ‘burnt’ up through to the 2007 RWC with the rotation policy and subsequent failure have cost the AB coaches the flexibilty in like what Deans is doing and which may place them in a difficult position unless rectified through 2010 which will be a hard ask.
You only have to look at the AB positons of 7 and 10 to realise that they are limiting their squad by playing McCaw and Carter constantly without having players to fill their positions of a similar calibre (not expecting the same level of brillance?) and the old issue of all your eggs in one basket comes to the fore and point to the Umanga debacle in 2003 and yes Iknow who the coaches were! But Deans as i say is a smart man and learns from his mistakes as we all do.
Looking forward to the start of the 2010 Super Fourteen to watch the progress of the Wallaby squad and expect to see natural improvement from several of the group with the remaining honing the improvements they have already made. I hope that the Aussie Super Fourteen coaches continue the style of what the Wallabies started to show.
Enjoyed the 2009 ride mostly, sucked a lemon occasionaly but for the first time in a long while actually looking forward to not only S14 but the new 2010 international season with a tinge of excitement.
LeftArmSpinner said | December 2nd 2009 @ 8:12am | Report comment
warren, your point that deans is learning to operate in a new culture, it is his first time as national head coach and inherited a disaster, all need to be factored into any assessment of Deans.
I see similarities between Smith and McCaw. great players in a critical position. But also very taxing on the body. Smith and Pocock can, together, go thro two more 3N and BC’s and on to 2011 putting in great performances if they play 40 minutes a game. can McCaw go the same distance at the same intensity and effectiveness while playing 80 minutes. I doubt it. Secondly, who is his replacement if he cant? His Pocock if you like……
the same goes for carter, but his risk is injury more than work rate toll. Who is his back up and how much experience has he had?
warrenexpatinnz said | December 2nd 2009 @ 2:15pm | Report comment
LAS I don’t see any current replacement for Carter as although I am a Bay of Plenty supporter I don’t have Mike Delaney as a standout 10, steady as she goes type but won’t win you a game at international level. As for Donald his kicking game is very poor and realisticaly he would make a better centre as has the bulk but lacks the quick acceleration at times.
The All Blacks are extremely fortunate to have two once in a generation type players in the same team however take either McCaw or Carter out and the side loses balance, still a very capable side but when coming up against a strong and 80 minute performing side they will get beaten with both France and South Africa showing that this season.
For the games sake I hope both those guys make it through intact until 2011 but with their coaches not in a position to blood the changes they can’t build a change like the Pocock and Smith, Gitteau/Barnes and Cooper?
LeftArmSpinner said | December 3rd 2009 @ 6:30am | Report comment
the ABs have something the Wallabies dont. they go out every time and give 100% and play clever rugby. consistency with passion and massive pride in the jersey.
Am I hoping for too much to think that Deans can create this in the Wallabies for the rest of time……….
Jameswm said | December 2nd 2009 @ 10:22am | Report comment
Rockin Rod I rely on what I see with my own 2 eyes. Hand hesitates – he isn’t tough or physical enough for S14 level rugby. Maybe it’s a lack of confidence, I don’t know.
If you call hanging round the tight stuff not really doing anything the old school work, then yes, Hand does a lot of it.
mattamkII said | December 3rd 2009 @ 12:28am | Report comment
OJ is David Nucifora I reckon.
katzilla said | December 3rd 2009 @ 1:50am | Report comment
OJ couldn’t butcher the biggest talent pool in NZ even if tried.
LeftArmSpinner said | December 3rd 2009 @ 6:31am | Report comment
very funny
mattamkII said | December 3rd 2009 @ 10:31am | Report comment
Katzilla might be George Gregan?