By Spiro Zavos
December 3rd 2009 @ 2:52am
Related coverage
Chris Hickey must get serious about running rugby
Crusaders' Andy Ellisleft, bottom left, tackles the Waratahs' Dean Mumm as his captain Phil Waugh jumps to make room for a pass during their Super 14 rugby union game at the Olympic Stadium in Sydney, Australia, Saturday, March 21, 2009. (AP Photo/Rick Rycroft)
What do we make of the NSW Waratahs coach, Chris Hickey, being surprised at the NZRU’s instruction to their Super 14 franchise to play more ‘positive’ rugby to restore the game’s popularity? Not much, in fact.
Hickey’s rejection of a similar policy for the Waratahs suggests to me that he has lost the plot and that his tenure on the coaching job must be in doubt.
Hickey says that he has not been approached by the Australian or NSW unions to change last year’s pathetic “win ugly” style that turned spectators away in their thousands, and failed to get the Waratahs into the finals.
I’ve been told by high authorities inside the Waratahs camp that they are decidedly unhappy with Hickey’s performance last season and that words to this effect will be delivered to Hickey.
Have these words been delivered yet?
Hickey was reported in the Sydney Morning Herald as saying that “at the moment the laws tend to favour the defensive team a little.”
Here is a news flash for the Waratahs coach: the laws of rugby have always favoured the defensive side. The task of the coach is to work out ways of beating this defensive bias.
The Wallabies did this on Saturday against Wales, as did the All Blacks and Ireland.
The strange thing about all this is that Hickey came into the coaching job of the Waratahs with a great deal of good will.
His Eastwood sides were very successful over a long period of time, and they played attractive and effective rugby. But as soon as he took over the Waratahs, he seemed to give up on the attractive, effective style and opted for “winning ugly.”
The problem was that he kept the second part of the phrase but not the first part.
His justification for playing defensive, kicking and boring rugby is that the Super 14 is “a very difficult competition you are trying to win.” The implication here is that you can’t win the tournament playing running rugby.
Well, tell that to the Canterbury Crusaders, a side that has won seven Super Rugby titles by running the ball.
The Waratahs take their name from the wonderful 1928/9 NSW side that toured Britain and was famous for running the ball from virtually anywhere on the field. This is the tradition Hickey should try to emulate.
He has the talent in the backline, especially now that Berrick Barnes has transferred from Queensland. The pack looks like being strong and competitive. So there is no excuse not to play like the Wallabies did in their Test against Wales.
If Hickey thinks that this is beyond his coaching abilities under the present laws, then he should be told by the NSWRU board to hand over to someone who can do this.
The Waratahs just cannot afford another season of “winning ugly” rugby.
(83)
LeftArmSpinner said | December 3rd 2009 @ 6:49am | Report comment
Spot on Spiro, until the last paragraph:
“The Waratahs just cannot afford another season of “winning ugly” rugby.”
When did they last have a season of “winning ugly rugby”? I can recall plenty of “losing ugly rugby”, even during the 2007 season when they made the final.
Lest we forget the first 6 games or so of the 2008 season before Burgess came on to transform the playing style or the debacle of the 2007 season.
You have to dig down through the archives to the 2006 season for a “winning handsome rugby” season.
CraigB said | December 3rd 2009 @ 6:54am | Report comment
“Well, tell that to the Canterbury Crusaders, a side that has won seven Super Rugby titles by running the ball.”
Not really, they won by playing field position mostly and not contesting a ruck until they were a good chance of forcing a turn-over. Then they would flood it to win the ball.
Red Rooster said | December 3rd 2009 @ 7:51am | Report comment
The Tahs scored two triews to one against the crusaders in 2008 final but lost to Carters boot
rugby scribe said | December 3rd 2009 @ 9:27am | Report comment
However if you compare the points for and against for the whole season:
The Crusaders scored 120+ more points than the Tahs.
And conceded less in the process
Justin said | December 3rd 2009 @ 5:34pm | Report comment
Spot on, its a great myth that the CC play running rugby. Great side but not what I would call a running rugby side.
fatprop said | December 8th 2009 @ 2:42pm | Report comment
The CC played some very conservative rugby for most of the 2009 season,, but there execution was better than the Tahs.
Grimmace said | December 3rd 2009 @ 6:59am | Report comment
Spot on Spiro,
Australian Rugby cannot afford another season of the ‘Tahs “winning ugly”
formeropenside said | December 3rd 2009 @ 8:18am | Report comment
What rubbish. In the last 30 years, NSW performance (or, more usually, the lack thereof) has been irrelevant to Wallaby success. The problem at Wallaby level in recent years has been the collapse of Qld rugby, not helped by what Spiro refers to as the “transfer” – read poaching – of Barnes to NSW.
Lindommer said | December 3rd 2009 @ 12:11pm | Report comment
Poaching be buggered. Barnes chose not to re-sign with Queensland due to his frustration at the incompetent behaviour of the Reds’ management. That incompetence has been a direct cause of the Wallabies’ lack of success for the last five years.
In common with most sensible rugby supporters in Australia I hope the new team in Queensland, both at board and team management level, put the troubles of the last few years behind them and have a successful Super season in 2010 as well as contributing to the Wallabies progress.
LeftArmSpinner said | December 3rd 2009 @ 7:30am | Report comment
and it is not that difficult. for those that saw the AB V france, just after half time, AB get average phase ball, french defensive line is straight and nunbers up. Carter is at the bottom of the previous ruck and so unavailable.
Sivi takes the ball at fly half, facing a line of 10 defenders with 7 attackers.
The half back, Cowan has passed to cut out a forward positioned for the crash ball, and with it, three defenders,
Quick hands from Sivi to inside centre, who takes the tackle and gives the ball back to sivi on the loop.
Sivi’s loop now makes it 3 defenders on 5 because the mid fleld defenders are front rowers who dont have the speed to continue across field in cover.
the AB’s Read now has the ball, creates the forward momentum, takes the tackle and one defender,
Sivi has continued to loop around, gets to tackle first, gives a quick pass to Smith who goes straight at the last defender, draws him and gives it to the Jane winger who is unmarked and makes 20 metres down the flank where the is eventually tackled by the cover defence.
The play started on the 40 metres from the French line and finished the 15 metres from their line.
the defensive line was well set, the ball from the ruck was average and Carter the play maker was missing, yet it resulted in 25 metre gain and retention of possession and the chance of a try, not to mention the pressure it put on the French, physycally and mentally.
oh so simple. Some subtlety, some support play from sivi and then straight running from read and Jane
Ai Rui Sheng said | December 4th 2009 @ 3:24am | Report comment
Is this what Dingo calls “playing what’s in front of you”?
Nicol'arse said | December 4th 2009 @ 8:23am | Report comment
And that my comrades is the sort of champagne RUGBY that we all hope teams around the world will try to emulate..
Praise be that we see coaches start to instill this sort of “chance your arm, running rugby” from anywhere outside your own red zone.
Heck, I’ve even seen the AB’s run from their red zone if its on. What ever happened to backs showing some “vision” like the Sivi’s.
I reckon the conservative rot of many coaches is to blame!!
Rant, rant!!
Vincent said | December 3rd 2009 @ 8:08am | Report comment
LAS, I’m with you on the ’simple but subtle’ my heart skipped over the weekend to see such enterprising rugby, who would have thought? I’d actually forgotten the feeling to rise out of the comfort of my couch in praise of the way New Zealand apprached that game!!
Brett McKay said | December 3rd 2009 @ 8:21am | Report comment
I just hope the ARU give the same ‘positive rugby’ instruction to the 4 S14 sides. Andy Friend said some time back that he wanted to get back to the “traditional” Brumbies game in 2010, and while that’s great to hear around membership renewal time, let’s hope that’s still the case come next May.
But will Hickey, Mackenzie and Mitchell follow suit?? I’d suggest Mackenzie and Mitchell’s silence on the matter is deafening, and Hickey’s comments above don’t sound that promising either…
Dean Pantio said | December 3rd 2009 @ 12:13pm | Report comment
What was Andy doing during the 2009 season..?
Brett McKay said | December 3rd 2009 @ 12:37pm | Report comment
maybe Dean that’s why he wants to get back to the running game – the 2009 game plan wasn’t good enough..
Dean Pantio said | December 3rd 2009 @ 3:46pm | Report comment
Neither apparently was his 2008 game plan…
Jameswm said | December 3rd 2009 @ 8:43am | Report comment
CraigB – the Crusaders DID play running rugby – they would just pick and choose when to run it.
Turnovers was one example – two passes wide from a turnover, when the attacking team was often all cramped in near the ruck. And they supported the ball carrier in vast numbers, something that for some reason Deans has not been able to teach the Wallabies well enough.
Rickety Knees said | December 3rd 2009 @ 8:50am | Report comment
Amen Spiro.
It is difficult to understand how Hickey could go from playing attractive running rugby at Eastwood over many years to devolve down to the dross served up last season.
This is the stuff of Monty Python – McKenzie get’s the flick for playing ugly and is replaced by Hickey who does the same. Meanwhile the supporters are deserting the Tahs in droves, revenues are down and yet not a word from the NSWRU.
Dullards – all of them!
Darwin hammer said | December 3rd 2009 @ 8:53am | Report comment
“So there is no excuse not to play like the Wallabies did in their Test against Wales.” …. true to some extend – there certainly are some poor S14 sides that would mirror the abysmal welsh – but also there are sides that if the warratahs did try to open up they’d get murdered – the Hurricanes for one would love an all out open game …
horses for courses is needed for the Tahs the problem last season was they got off to a flyer playing a certain style (on the back of a couple of favourable Dickinson performances) that progressively got more and more conservative and they ended up going down a path that they then found hard to retreat from … they really had no second or 3rd option when things weren’t going right for them – the force game was a classic example …
Spiro Zavos said | December 3rd 2009 @ 9:17am | Report comment
Just being provocative here but do the NSW Waratahs have a problem with their captain, Phil Waugh? He is the constant between McKenzie and Hickey. I believe that Hickey should re-consider the captaincy and give it to Barrick Barnes. If this involves some dummy-spitting, then so be it. A Barn es captaincy would be a sign that the Waratahs are going to give the running game a go.
The other thing is that the running game is much harder for players to play than the kicking game. Players have to have the skills of, say, a Sivivatu and the fitness of a McCaw, all aroiund the field. Are the players prepared to get themselves to this level of skills and fitness?
I agree also that the NSWRU Board should issue an official instruction to the management of the Waratahs that they have to play Waratahs rugby. It was the NSWRU Board, after all, in 1995 who were the first rugby board in the world to officially declare that as far as they were concerned rugby union was a professional game. The IRB followed suit some months later.
Now we want the current board to be pro-active in bringing back the Australian game to the Australian Super 14 franchises.
Big Steve said | December 3rd 2009 @ 10:09am | Report comment
Spiro,
And when Barnes signs with Melbourne in 2011 the whole Waratahs organization will look even more incompetent than they do now.
Who Needs Melon said | December 3rd 2009 @ 11:45am | Report comment
Perhaps the captaincy carrot has been kept for just such a purpose a year from now. Might have been a player revolt if Barnes was given the captaincy before even playing a game for them.
Stephen F. Moon said | December 3rd 2009 @ 2:21pm | Report comment
why would NSW look incompetent even if Barnes leaves after a year? Is it not their responsibility to sign the best players available? Big Steve, would you suggest they should have told Barnes to look elsewhere they were not interested? imagine the reaction then….
formeropenside said | December 3rd 2009 @ 2:35pm | Report comment
No, its their responsibility to develop their own players.
Stephen F. Moon said | December 3rd 2009 @ 3:07pm | Report comment
No argument to be had about developing own players. have a look where 75% of Australia’s players come from. maybe 1 player in NSW squad last year from outside NSW (Mowen). Compare that to the numbers for the other provinces formeropenside….
Stephen F. Moon said | December 3rd 2009 @ 3:13pm | Report comment
For example QLD have 10 or 11 from other states …..
Big Steve said | December 3rd 2009 @ 3:52pm | Report comment
I meant if he leaves after one year as the captain.
We need a 10 and a goal kicker so it was great work getting him.
Stephen F. Moon said | December 3rd 2009 @ 7:08pm | Report comment
Agreed. Phil Waugh is safe as houses as captain, don’t worry about that….
Jim said | December 3rd 2009 @ 3:27pm | Report comment
Pertinent point about the running game being harder than kicking. The ABs have persevered with it through a turgid season and finally it clicked, albeit helped by the French also entering into the spirit / game plan. After 10 minutes i declared i actually didn’t mind if we lost the game, as long as it was played that way by both sides for 80 mins.
As a NZer I’ve always expected Wallaby backlines to cause us huge problems compared to other international teams by running at our defense with skill and nous. Can someone tell me what’s the story with Giteau? Undoubtedly talented, does he have too large an ego to accept direction? Or just used to player power ruling? Look at the AB set up, i can’t begin to imagine a player having any luck in trying to shove the coaching staff around. Straight out would be the response.
Justin said | December 3rd 2009 @ 5:41pm | Report comment
Barnes is hardly Mark Ella. Consistent and tough yes but not overtly gifted in getting a backline firing on all cylinders from what I have seen so far.
King of the Gorganites said | December 4th 2009 @ 1:11pm | Report comment
good point spiro. maybe waugh is the problem. he does seemed arrogant when quizzed about the style of rugby the tahs were playing. as captain he has to take a lot of the fall.
berrick seems a lot more likeable. i think that would help getting media coverage etc. time for hard calls to be made.
im afraid hickey is an ameatuer in a professional game.
Sprio, if you get a chance to see this, im interested in your thought on NSW suburban rugby and the people that run that game?
inthestands said | December 3rd 2009 @ 9:25am | Report comment
It’s interesting how we all look at this…
This thread seems to firstly have shot at Hickey for saying the laws are tailored towards the defensive side. However no one has come to his defence despite Rod Macqueen making the same overtures in The Australian (3/12/09). Even Campo has blamed the laws in the Daily Telegraph! (3/12/09) They are realists, but if a current coach like Hickey says it, he gets lambasted. We need a does of reality here; in any sport, coaches who win keep their jobs, and coaches who lose, don’t. Look at the Reds… self-proclaimed entertainers, but under Jones and Mooney they won eight out of 39 matches!
But apart from that, I think everyone needs to sit back for a while to wait and see what happens in 2010. By signing Berrick Barnes, Drew Mitchell and Sosene Anesi, it’s pretty clear that the Waratahs are looking for more creativity in close, and some more finishing power out wide.
Spiro’s selective quotes from the SMH article (2/12/09) choose to omit one of Hickey’s most important comments: “With the way we have recruited and strengthened our attack we would like to preserve our defensive record and improve our attack.” I’m sure every team in the Super 14 envy the Waratahs 2009 defence, so the first part is hardly surprising. But he has specifically commented that recruitment has focused on STRENGTHENING and IMPROVING the attack
Maybe I’m looking at it as ‘glass half-full’, but until we see a ball kicked, I think Waratahs fans would be well served to do so, and not write their team off.
The other interesting thing to monitor from an arm’s length is what looks like a kind of commendation for the NZRU for handing down their edict to the S14 teams. Now let’s be a little bit smart here… we all know with 100% certainty that if the NSWRU Board were seen to tell the Waratahs coaches and players how to play that the Sydney rugby media would splash it all over the papers in a negative context.
Dave said | December 3rd 2009 @ 9:38am | Report comment
I think a crucial point to remember in the NZ performance against France is that the all blacks have been ‘trying’ to play that style of game since the opening Tri-Nations Test in SA. It failed that day – as it did the following week and most of the season.
The reason? I dont believe that the philosophy was wrong, but the practice and skills were not yet there. They missed numerous try scoring opportunities due to basic errors.
Fast forward to the end of season and suddenly those passes stick and the right options are taken. Its practice. Its not rocket science. You can’t just go out and play ‘running rugby’ without living and breathing that mentaility constantly. There will be losses at first, but in the end its a lethal tactic for a side that perfects it.
The tahs have never played an open style of rugby which is why I support the Brumbies despite being from NSW. NSW have not had a genuine No.10 to be fair (at least in my time), but now there is no such excuse. The tahs have a great side suited to open play with Barnes at the helm.
2010 should be a season where the Tahs can be successful and entertaining all in one. Australian rugby needs it (same goes with the Brumbies – they MUST return to their old style to win)
Campbell Watts said | December 3rd 2009 @ 2:02pm | Report comment
Dave the Tah’s have had plenty of seasons to perfect it too!!!
They haven’t because of negative tactics – they haven’t been trying to throw it around!
I’m with Spiro – another season of such dour rugby from the Tah’s will kill of what little support remains!
Rickety Knees said | December 3rd 2009 @ 9:41am | Report comment
Agreed Spiro – Barnes is more than capable but will Hickey play Barnes at No10 to direct the play? Given that, apparently, Hickey was not even aware that NSWRU had signed Barnes – I wonder if anybody really knows what is going on at the Tahs.
The whole organisation appears to be dysfunctional.
inthestands said | December 3rd 2009 @ 10:05am | Report comment
I think you tend to see that with professional sporting teams, players vote with their feet.
If NSWRU was as dysfunctional as doubters fear it may be, I doubt they would have been able to sign Barnes, Mitchell, Anesi, Jowitt, Holmes, Fitzpatick, Roodt, Sidey, etc, or have been able to keep Waugh, Mumm, Baxter, Burgess, Halangahu, Horne, Mowen and Polota-Nau who were all off contract.
Also, Hickey was well aware of Berrick’s negotiations, even though it was Foley and Bowen who made the trips to Brisbane.
Rickety Knees said | December 3rd 2009 @ 10:14am | Report comment
So what style of Rugby do you advocate that the Tahs should play?
inthestands said | December 3rd 2009 @ 12:41pm | Report comment
They should build on last year’s defence with an invigorated and stronger attack. Which, from the look of the squad, is the way they’re heading.
Rickety Knees said | December 3rd 2009 @ 12:50pm | Report comment
So does that spell the end of the one dimensional Rugby played last year where the Tahs kicked the ball away in the strong attacking positions rather than put the ball through the backline and try and score tries, rather than sweating on opposition mistakes?
inthestands said | December 3rd 2009 @ 1:32pm | Report comment
I guess we’ll only know in February when the boys hit the paddock. Until then, you’d have to agree that the recruiting focus on attack is a step in the right direction.
Rickety Knees said | December 3rd 2009 @ 1:43pm | Report comment
IMHO – there is only one vital point that matters and that is whether Barnes plays No10 and is given free rein to run the backline. I would love to see Beale at fullback and a ball playing No12 say Halangahu giving the Tahs three attacking options rather than just playing forcings back.
The Tahs left supporters like me thoroughly disenchanted with the absolute crap they played last year, I for one hope that 2010 is a year of redemption
Stephen F. Moon said | December 3rd 2009 @ 1:42pm | Report comment
Rickety Knees,
Surely you are not so foolish as to believe ridiculous media reports that a head coach would not be aware that they have just signed the Wallaby vice captain. C’mon….
Rickety Knees said | December 3rd 2009 @ 1:54pm | Report comment
This was reported in the media at the time as so …. who would know with the Tahs
Stephen F. Moon said | December 3rd 2009 @ 2:02pm | Report comment
aaah yes the media. Must be correct then. Think about it mate…
Matt said | December 3rd 2009 @ 10:21am | Report comment
As an impartial NZer (and Hurricanes fan) I personally think if only the Reds had some good luck instead of bad luck then they’d be showing Australians how to play attacking winning rugby next season.
If they’d held on to Barnes to partner Genia, Cooper and Ioane in the backline then the spark and skills would be there to take on any backline. And had they kept hold of McMeniman and nabbed Elsom to harden up their pack then I’d have some pretty high expectations for them to have changed things compared to last season (where they managed to lose many games that were easily win-able).
Now, with Barnes defection I get the feeling that they’re back 5 steps compared to last season (not helped by McLinden’s retirement either!). Hopefully they can continue to unearth some more great talent and this time to sign them up for 4 years and actual get some foundations in place.
Who Needs Melon said | December 3rd 2009 @ 11:54am | Report comment
Good points. I feel Barnes would have been the steadying thinker in that backline. Heres hoping that Genia and Cooper now have a bit more experience and nous to go with their obvious raw ability.
My fingers are crossed for ALL the aussie teams for next year.
Sam Taulelei said | December 3rd 2009 @ 10:22am | Report comment
I’d say that this article would be more accurate and correct to say that Australian rugby can’t afford any of their teams winning (or losing) ugly next year and not just the Waratahs.
There’s no excuse from either the Waratahs and Brumbies for not playing an entertaining brand of rugby with their off season recruitment.
The Force have showed at times they can throw the ball around as well as anyone and the Reds are the opposite in that they need to focus on having more structure, winning the ball and defending when they don’t have it.
Doug said | December 3rd 2009 @ 10:33am | Report comment
Maybe the ugly would go away quicker if the entire backline wasnt made up of “utility” backs. When a player isnt good enough to get a game in their first choice position they should be sent down to a lower grade. If playing any position in the backline was so easy you would get a whole bunch of talented League players coming in and dominating.
For instance how did it help Kurtley Beale shuffling him to full back, inside centre? Did he suddenly become a better 5/8?
Bay35Pablo said | December 3rd 2009 @ 11:22am | Report comment
Look on the bright side – Tony Dempsey has resigned!!!
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/sport/tony-demspey-quits-as-rupa-bosss/story-e6frg7mf-1225806466969
Rickety Knees said | December 3rd 2009 @ 1:10pm | Report comment
Thanks Bay – he did well by the players and screwed grass roots Rugby development in the process. Hopefully out of all of this comes a more equitable solution that looks after all aspects of the game rather than just the players.
Brett McKay said | December 3rd 2009 @ 1:10pm | Report comment
Pablo, how many cartwheels have been performed in the halls of Rugby HQ today do you think??
Campbell Watts said | December 3rd 2009 @ 2:11pm | Report comment
Resigned and re-signed! 2 diffenrent things!
Had to read cafefully there – I thought you were being sarcastic
This may help the ARU finally start reigning in these ridiculous player payments of the moment!!
Tell me O’Connor is worth $650,000 a year!!! Off the bench??
Yeah right!
Pete said | December 3rd 2009 @ 7:02pm | Report comment
Do agree, hopefully some more money goes to grassroots and not ARU executive pay packets…
On the other hand, I have say one thing for Demsey. The fact that the players are paid so well has kept more of the on out shores.
stuff happens said | December 3rd 2009 @ 11:37am | Report comment
I suggest that we remember that our new found enthusiasm for the Wallabies running rugby is based on one game. Prior to that they were lambasted on ‘the roar’ and everywhere else.Much as I applaud the transformation I remain mystified as to why it took Deans & Co so long to try & fulfil the potential of the their backline ( OK for one half).
On the other hand my observation about the Waratahs is that despite having between 1/3rd & half of the Wallabies line up they are serial underachievers whatever style they play.Good luck to HIckey but his position seems a poisoned chalice for some reason.
Dean Pantio said | December 3rd 2009 @ 12:18pm | Report comment
Coaches are employed to get results. The reality is playing attractive losing rugby means getting the sack. Spectators desert the team and sponsors question their investment.
Campbell Watts said | December 3rd 2009 @ 2:14pm | Report comment
You don’t think that’s happening now after last seasons pathetic efforts???
Dean Pantio said | December 3rd 2009 @ 3:43pm | Report comment
Although “pathetic” they were better than any other Australian province – missing out on the finals by virtue of for and against.
Rickety Knees said | December 3rd 2009 @ 2:49pm | Report comment
And what does playing ugly losing rugby mean?
Brett McKay said | December 3rd 2009 @ 3:21pm | Report comment
Rickety, that’s when the Tahs don’t score more points than the other team
Stephen F. Moon said | December 3rd 2009 @ 2:00pm | Report comment
It seems a strange contradiction that Australian rugby fans continually bemoan the “negative” play of the Wallabies and the provinces, whilst all they can produce, comment and focus on themselves are the negatives…
A couple of points in response to Spiros.
1) It is not the ARU’s job to tell the provinces how to play, nor should it be.
2) It is incorrect to say that the laws have always favoured the defensive team. This is completely false. The current interpretations esp regarding the ruck place the advantage to the defensive side
3) NSW had attacking problems last year, true, esp in the backline. Here it needs to be considered that they struggled to cement a 10-13 combination through injury (Carter, Horne, Tahu). Norton-Knight was hardly an attacking threat from 15. Some times it is a case of playing the cards you are dealt, and well done for NSW for realising and addressing their shortcomings with the signings of Mitchell and Anesi in particular.
4) Canterbury kicked more than anyone else in the years that they won the s12/14
5) to suggest that making Barnes captain will somehow automatically make NSW an attacking team is absurd. Barnes is not renowned as an attacking player as is.
6) What is “Waratahs rugby”? It seems people opt to don rose coloured glasses when considering that the “Waratahs of old” were such a famous attacking, running team. I certainly cannot recall that over the last say 20 years. If we are talking about teams from 80 years ago (as Spiros does) we are really talking about another game. I believe Spiros is actually reffering to the 1927/8 NSW team, who never scored more than 3 tries in a game and who averaged just over 2 tries per game in internationals on their famous tour of Europe and Canada.
DCR said | December 3rd 2009 @ 3:14pm | Report comment
The 1991-2 Waratahs were pretty good. They beat Wales by 70 points. They had a pretty good coach. Mac, Mac, MacQu, MacQuee? Now what was that guys name? He even made Gregan look good. He was so good he had to work for someone else; at least so the NSWRU thought.
slacky said | December 3rd 2009 @ 2:06pm | Report comment
Chris,
You saw the result when the Tahs kept the ball in hand instead of kicking the bloody thing away all the time. If the Tahs try to ‘win ugly’ this year it will be a complete disaster. YOU NEED THE BALL TO WIN THE GAME. KEEPING THE BALL IN HAND MEANS THEY DON’T HAVE IT . Really is quite simple actually.
I am a total Tah’s tragic BUT there is only so much we can take. I sent back the refund for the extra game we didn’t have with the agreement that I would demand my refund back if the Tahs played like they did for the first three quarters of last season.
DCR said | December 3rd 2009 @ 2:51pm | Report comment
The quality of the Super 14 coaching will be more than critical in the next two years. The reason is because for the first time in decades we have an influx of young players at the highest level, especially in the backs. They need nurturing. To ask Deans to correct the shortcomings of the Super coaches is impossible. He is flat out teaching the unsuitable Giteau to play 10.
At the Waratahs Hickey was disastrous for Beale in 2009. Another season of confidence sapping work under Hickey and Beale should head elsewhere probably north to McKenzie country. Now Hickey has three 10s. What is he going to do? I don’t think he knows. He can ask L’Estrange who gave him the professional job in the first place. God help us. I would play Burgess, Beale, Barnes (9,10,12) with Halagahu/Carter as a back up for Barnes as he returns from injury. Let’s hope Hickey has learnt how to support a player returning from injury unlike what he did with Beale this year.
At the Reds McKenzie will play Cooper at 10 outside Genia. It is not a bad combination. He will work hard on Cooper’s defense, straightening his attack, and decision-making. McKenzie is a pro so it will be interesting to watch what he comes up with game plan wise with Coopers strong distributing skills and stepping.
At Brumbie land Giteau will select where he plays. That will be interesting because he is a flawed 10 and a pretty good 12. The others will have to fit in with it all. All they need now is Justin Harrison back and they can save on the coaching costs all together. They will give the Boks a run for the geriatrics 15. That is a bit harsh the Boks are actually pretty bloody good. Their kicking and chasing is so darn impressive it is intimidating and show me some rugby loving fan who doesn’t like a bit of in-tim-i- dation!
So that leaves the tragic Force. Things are so desperate over there that they have imported a very limited ex.RSA 10. Mitchell will work with what he has. Now that Giteau has gone he may be shown some respect by the players. Some of whom are developing pretty well over there. They did win every Australian contest last year even away in Sydney.
Let’s go back to development. Those who were exposed to Deans and the test arena will now know just how far things had slipped under Eddie Jones, Connolly and Gregan. They will also know how far things have improved in 18 months, so much so that the All Blacks have to play for 80 minutes to beat us and they haven’t had to do that in years. The solution is for the Super coaches to support those top shelf players and encourage them to pass onto those not involved with the Wallabies exactly what they learnt and how they learnt it. That means Barnes, Beale, Burgess, Genia, Cooper, Mitchell, Ashley Cooper, O’Connor, Pocock, Ioanne are now the senior leaders of others, whilst at the same time they are to be encouraged to improve their own skills. There are no magic wands, just hard work, confidence, empathy and good decisions. Good luck to them all.
conrad Rines said | December 3rd 2009 @ 9:27pm | Report comment
2011 world cup wallabies
a little different but will go very well i think!
1. alexander
2. polota nau
3 robinson
4 hand
5 vickerman
6 elsom
7 smith
8 palu
9 holmes
10 barnes
11 turner
12 mortlock/horne
13 ioane
14 morahan
15 shepard
* would consider cooper or oconner for a utility bench spot along with either horne or mortlock
* hand is a late bloomer with a wealth of experience and and is considered by micheal foley as a top lineout general.
thoughts?
Justin said | December 4th 2009 @ 4:46am | Report comment
Well you have the props the ring way round for starters
Locks look 10000-1 to play together for Aus, Pocock has taken huge steps and may be best in world in 2 years dames as Genia. If you want a slow indecisive crabbing halfback hen by all means pick Holmes.
Mortlock won’t be there and isn’t a 12 and neither is Horne. You have left Ash two dads out who was our best back this year.
In a nutshell I don’t think you are real close.
johnny-boy said | December 4th 2009 @ 6:52am | Report comment
I hope the Tahs go down the ‘try to win ugly road’ and get done and go broke for it (being a Queenslander). Sometimes this is the only way dullards learn. Hickey is a joke and I thnk there might be something in the Phil Waugh factor. He dont care.
This stubborness is one of the reasons he is on the outer for Wallabies I suspect. Worryingly I can also see McKenzie refusing to let a potent Queensland backline loose like he did with NSW although admittedly QLD forward play needed tightening up
Jameswm said | December 4th 2009 @ 8:25am | Report comment
There is one thing I think you’ve all missed – except DCR who touched on it.
If the Waratahs are to play decisive ball-in-hand rugby, who is going to coach it? Do the coaches have the expertise to coach it?
I’m not convinced.
And what about their skills – ever seen Turner try to pass to his right running full tilt?
My U10s backs do it better than some of them – but we practise it a LOT. Draw and pass, 2 on 1s, 3 on 2s, running hard and straight, support players in the right position.
The pros probably think they’re too good to practise the basic skills. We then go back to basic standing still passing and build up to sprinting and draw and pass again every 6 weeks or so. They love the pass under pressure one I made up where I smack them with a tackle bag if they’re too slow!
Build it up to make it harder and more fun, then break it back down to basics and build it up again.
I shold go and watch a training session to see what they actually work on. I am still amazed at how often a forward doing a hitup gets the ball standing still. Do they practise that? We do, and wonder of wonders the boys get the ball already running hard and straight and get over the advantage line.
You’ve got to wonder what they practise sometimes.
Short-Blind. said | December 4th 2009 @ 8:27am | Report comment
Nice summary DCR – as far as conrad’s team – holmes? I saw him play as a schoolboy and he looked the goods at this level. since he has been playing with the big boys he has been underwhelming to say the least. Slow, indecisive, crabbing across the field and only average pass……light years behind Genia – and a couple of others. Also Morty will be in Japan, Horne is an outside centre and I’m yet to be convinced that Digby’s best position is not on the wing.
Agree with the Hickey summations though – he needs to light a fire under the attack, I would play barnes at 10 and KB at 12 as I think like gits he appreciates the space more as it allows him to use his footwork at speed. However if you do this who is 15? Mitchell is too flaky to handle it on a regular basis.
Jameswm said | December 4th 2009 @ 8:39am | Report comment
I don’t have much doubt they will play Barnes at 10 to run the show and guide them around the field. KB at 12 – like Gits, he excels when the pressure of doing the mundane is taken off him and he can use his dazzling skills wider. His defence isn’t the greatest as we know but those either side tackle well.
Mitchell will play fullback – that is part of why he came to the Tahs, as the Force have Cam Shepherd.
Wings Turner and Anesi – pretty easy. Option of swapping Mitchell and Turner. Nasiganyavi backing up the back 3 I guess.
Outside centre Rob Horne but our weakest position in the backs, unless he starts fulfuilling the promise. Sidey as backup but I’m not convinced there either.
Halangahu backing up Barnes’s suspect body as he does similar (guilde the team round the field) very well and like Barnes is a strong defender. Hangers can also back up Beale at 12.
Tommy Carter might not even make the bench, with Josh Holmes, Hangers, Ratu and Sidey. Maybe as the 3rd back sub, but then who covers the back 3? I guess Kurtley can (fullback and now wing), and Rob Horne to a lesser extent.
Burgey said | December 4th 2009 @ 8:48am | Report comment
Only Rugby would worry about HOW teams win, rather than the actual winning of the game itself. Typical style-over-substance approach to Australian Rugby. The same preoccupation which has seen us languish in recent years.
Face facts, “running rugby” is largely a bloody myth – we played it in the 80s when we had the Ellas et al in their pomp, and it worked. But it worked bacuse we had the best players, not the current crop of also-rans. Likewise with the WC wins in the 90s – they were built on the fact we had the best players, not some imaginary free-flowing style.
If the asthetics of “running rugby” are so important to you Spiro, then go follow ice skating. Personally, I’d rather the Wallabies and Waratahs play winning rugby. In 20 years’ time you won’t hear people saying “Jeez Australia got knocked out in the quarter finals stage of the WC and otherwise couldn’t beat time with a stick. But at least they looked good doing it”. Dire stuff.
Doug said | December 4th 2009 @ 11:23am | Report comment
I think the point is that NSW have focused on winning ahead of all other concerns and become less successful. But because they are playing to win not to entertain they not just losers they are boring losers. Who wants to watch that?
The Ellas et al didnt spring from the ground able to play “running rugby”. If they spent all their time in teams that played 10 man rugby then thats what they would have been good at playing. By aiming to play running rugby you end up with a better skilled outside backs, who have a chance to be the best in the world.
In soccer the Brazilian’s have a myth of “Beautiful football” and it seems to work well for them.
Rickety Knees said | December 4th 2009 @ 12:40pm | Report comment
Interesting Doug – the Ella’s brought a new dimension to Rugby – similarly our indigenous brothers have brought a new dimension to AFL and have excelled in just about any sport that they have focussed on. I for one have never understood why we as a nation have not made a better investment in our indigenous family.
Rickety Knees said | December 4th 2009 @ 8:55am | Report comment
JWM – Mitchell at fullback – no thanks. For everything good he does there is always a corresponding howler. I like the idea of KB at fullback – Barnes at 10 and Hangers at 12 – gives you three attacking ball playing options. Horne at 13 and Turner and Mitchell on the wings. My tip also is for Holmes to challenge Burgess for 9. Good to see that Dave Dennis has signed with the Tahs.
Mate I completely agree re basic skills – especially forwards receiving passes whilst they are stationary. This is mind numbingly simple and I have not understood how in this professional era these guys continue to play this way. I note that the Wallabies were hitting the ball at pace against Wales – hopefully the returning Tahs will bring this amazing revelation back with them.
Jameswm said | December 4th 2009 @ 9:11am | Report comment
Rickety – I wouldn’t have Mitchell at fullback either, but that will be where he lines up for the first match.
That is one of the things I constantly shake my head at. It does make it easier to protect the ball (if you get it standing still) as your supporters are basically holding you as you get tackled, but I don’t think they do it that way for that reason. It’s just laziness or poor coaching or lack of brains or some or all of the three.
You should see my nuggety hooker do “hammer” (what we call it). He sprints onto it and loves rolling and bouncing off defenders. The trick is for him to have 2-3 mates with him. We have 8 forwards next season (6 last year in 12-a-side) which will help. It will be very simple – one or two hammers and once we’re moving forward (half-back is smart enough to work this out) get it to the 5/8 who can spin it wide – where there is a lot of speed. I’m lucky I have brains at 2, 9 and 10 – and no shortage of skill I might add.
andrew said | December 4th 2009 @ 9:50am | Report comment
Lets hope they sort out a backline and stick to it, the tahs have had so many different combinations. There needs to consistency to build combinations.
Hopefully Tom Carter will not even get a bench spot, if this happens the ball should be able to get past the insider centre, which has not happened for a longtime!
Also Beale has come back from the grand slam tour looking fit, lets hope he stays away from the buggers in the off season.
Jameswm said | December 4th 2009 @ 3:01pm | Report comment
True – KB does develop a weighty problem in the off-season.
Self-control, Kurtley. You’re a professional athlete.
Peter K said | December 4th 2009 @ 3:29pm | Report comment
Jameswm – I suspect the forwards hit it up stationary because they are not looking at breaking the line but going straight to ground to form a ruck, very very negative play. At least they should have 2 guys attached to them driving so a good maul can form. If they make a break rarely are there foreards backing them up so they lose the ball after they are tackled.
I would teach them to work in pods of 3 with the guy at the apex hitting it at pace with 2 supports.
I would have Turner at F/B but Micthell will get first digs to fulfill agreements on his signing, He can have a few howlers and then be move to the wing.
The team looks formadible and has potential to run the ball, but skills and poor coaching will prevent that.
01 Robinson
02 TPN
03 Dunning
04 Roodt
05 Caldwell
06 Mumm
07 Waugh
08 Palu
09 Burgess
10 Barnes, agreement on signing and manages team well, better passer and kicker than Beale
11 Turner
12 Beale, plays a lot like Giteau and everyone knows Giteau is far better 12 than 10
13 Horne
14 Anesi
15 Mitchell
JK said | December 6th 2009 @ 9:16am | Report comment
Dunning’s gone to the Force
Peter K said | December 6th 2009 @ 10:40am | Report comment
yes I forgot about that. Then Baxter at 3, not that much difference there.
Rockin Rod said | December 8th 2009 @ 6:49pm | Report comment
Roodt cant get off the ground. NSW will be forced to push Mumm to lock and Mowen to 6
Sportym said | December 5th 2009 @ 1:22am | Report comment
Poor Hickey, Between the NSWRU and Journos telling him how to play and where to play his players, gives him little room to work with. You’d think you would have to be slightly mad to become the waratah coach, you just cannot win, especially as I doubt the tahs will be able to play running rugby next year and win at the same time.
Wix said | December 8th 2009 @ 11:59am | Report comment
Spiro
The search for running rugby and the golden boomerang have a lot in common. They both need to connect back to their elders for guidance. Alas, not all of the elders are available. The one with the ‘mostest’ is no longer with us. He was Cyril Towers, who in c.1928 may have been the first to introduce the novel approach of running without kicking. Cyril’s legacy was handed down to the Randwick Rugby Club and in particular to the Ella brothers.
By the 1990’s Cyril’s message had begun to penentrate other clubs such as Eastwood. Howevr Messrs McKensie and Hickey, both products of those fine running rugby clubs fell into the bottomless pit of play ugly, such was the desparate desire to beat other teams also playing ugly at the bottom of the same pit.
What is needed is a sustained campaign, over years, not months, by Spiro and his influential friends to re-introduce the running game. They can start with old movies of Cyril Towers and (not so old) movies of the Ella brothers. Success will then be assured, not only for the Wallabies, but for the return of big crowds to enjoy the game which used to be played in heaven.