The altitude/attitude win the Wallabies had to have
By Spiro Zavos, 6 Sep 2010 Spiro Zavos is a Roar Expert
- Tagged:
- Pretoria, robbie deans, Rugby Union, Springboks, Tri Nations, wallabies
212 Have your say
Related coverage
- Rugby Union news
- Wallabies news
- Tri Nations Tournament news
- South Africa Springboks news
- 2011 Wallabies squad news
Make no mistake the Wallabies’ near-death victory over the Springboks at Pretoria is one of the most important victories the national side has had in recent memory.
If the Wallabies had lost, and it was a close-run thing, Robbie Deans would have been obliged to make some massive changes to his squad.There would have been calls, too, for his head even though this type of execution was never on the cards.
Given the lack of talent below the top fifteen, especially with seven potential starting Wallabies out injured or unavailable, Deans would have been forced to virtually start from scratch to make these changes. This would have meant nearly three seasons of team-building would have been lost.
I would equate the victory at Blonfontein to the win the 1990 Wallabies achieved against the All Blacks in the third Test of the series, after losing the first two Tests and earning the description of the ‘woeful Wallabies’ for their troubles.
Bob Dwyer’s hold on the Wallabies coaching job was under threat from a Queenland push for John Connolly. Dwyer also threatened to drop a number of the stalwarts who starred in the RWC 1991 triumph – Nick Farr Jones was one – if the All Blacks got up again.
Deans’ Wallabies have now won two of the three Australian victories in South Africa in the Tri Nations era. At Pretoria the Wallabies recorded their first victory at altitude for 47 years.
The last time the Wallabies won at Blomfontein was in 1933. History has been made and the Wallabies should be congratulated for succeeding when other great sides have failed.
The importance of the victory, therefore, cannot be over-emphasised.
The Springboks fielded eleven players from their RWC 2007 triumph. This was no make-shift team or a rotational team. They were trying to prevent five losses in a Tri Nations season for the first time. And they had a goal-kicker, Morne Steyne, who kicked every goal, one of them from half-way.
The play of the Wallabies in the first 30 minutes was about as perfect as an Australian side will ever play. Everything was done at pace. The ball was passed in front of runners. The backs made skilful choices with their kicking game. Deans’ philosophy of ‘playing what is in front of you’ was expressed to perfection.
I thought at the time, though, that when the Wallabies were leading 31 – 6 with minutes to go before half-time they made a mistake in twice rejecting kicks at goal. The option of a 5m scrum turned sour when they were penalised for going early into a scrum. Not long after this, following a tremendous run and chip from Victor Matfield, Jacque Fourie powered across for a try.
What should have been a 34 – 6 scoreline became 31 – 13, with the Springboks 18 points behind but with some momentum going into the second half.
They were relentless in reducing this Wallaby lead to an unlikely Springboks lead. When Steyn banged over a penalty to make the score Springboks 36 – Wallabies 31, South Africa had scored an astonishing 25 points to nil.
Saia Faingnaa then had his brain storm, lifted a Springboks runner and smashed him to the ground to be given (correctly) a yellow card. Despite this, the Wallabies with fresh legs from Luke Burgess and Berrick Barnes stormed back for a stunning try to Drew Mitchell off a skilful in-pass from Barnes.
The Wallabies were now in front. But could they hold on? You had the feeling that if this game got away from them they would be scarred for years.
Then came some Keystone Cops play from Kurtley Beale.
He had dropped a bomb from Francois Hougaard a little earlier. Then he passed a ball from a turnover won by David Pocock (one of six) over the dead-ball line. Now he slipped into a pass and head-butted the ball to Adam Ashley-Cooper who was ruled off side.
Steyn banged over the penalty. The Springboks now led 39 – 38. Surely a Test that was as exciting as any ever played could not take another turn?
We turn now to the referee Wayne Barnes. The 34 year-old English lawyer had a superb game. His rapport with the players was excellent as he spelled out from time to time exactly why he made the decision he did.
With seconds remaining, the Springboks went into a flop/sealing off regime which was made even more frustrating by the way the ball was held in the back of the ruck for many seconds at a time. I hate this form of time-wasting because it violates two fundamental principles of rugby: first, the use-it or lose-it rule; and second, the rule that the continuous contest for possession is fundamental to the rugby game.
As the Springboks started their flip/seal tactics I heard Barnes warn them about sealing off the ball. The warning was disregarded and Barnes ruled, correctly, that an offence had occurred.
The rest is history.
Beale banged over a huge goal. The whistle went. The Wallabies had won a famous victory, and a victory the Wallabies had to have.
Admittedly, as posters have pointed out already on The Roar, the Springboks were playing their third successive Test. They had started off flat, as they did also at Pretoria.
Some of the Springbok stars of RWC 2007 seem to be finished.
Bryan Habana was booed by the home crowd before being hooked in the second half. John Smit was a passenger for the first half, although he lifted in parts of the second half. He is so vital to the Springboks for his captaincy it would not surprise me if he played next year as a prop, once more.
It seems unlikely that the Springboks can afford to play with their three huge backrowers, none of whom are fetchers or diggers. Pocock had a field day. Probably Spies is the one who will go when Brussow comes back.
There are problems for the Springboks at fullback, on the wings and in the defence of the centres. The team of RWC 2007 is now looking an unlikely RWC 2011 winning side. You would think that changes in the forward, backs and the coaching staff have to be made.
The Wallabies are in the position of having a number of experienced forwards coming back for consideration for the next Test. The youngish backline has proved itself in the toughest rugby environment possible.
For the Wallabies, therefore, it is onwards and upwards. They have broken an altitude/attitude hoodoo. Their world ranking is number 2, displacing the Springboks from this position by their win.
Now they get a chance to improve their recent record against the All Blacks at Sydney on Saturday night. What a Test to look forward to.
Enjoy sports? Enjoy a bargain? All Sports Online has your favourite sporting brands at up to 70% off. Online only, premium quality sporting goods and merchandise at discounted prices. Get a deal now.
- Explore:
- Pretoria, robbie deans, Rugby Union, Springboks, Tri Nations, wallabies

Seiran said | September 6th 2010 @ 7:12am | Report comment
The Wallabies are ranked Number 2 in the world.
When was the last time we got to say that out loud? It sounds fan-bloody-tastic.
On another positive note, Alexander played 30mins of rugby unscathed last weekend and is gearing up for a Wallabies spring tour return. This is very welcome news indeed.
John P said | September 6th 2010 @ 12:35pm | Report comment
Must say it is going to be hard to displace young Slipper, who is really coming along in leaps and bounds….
Although competition for front row spots is something that rarely happens in Australia, so this is great news!
Parisien said | September 6th 2010 @ 7:31pm | Report comment
couldn’t agree more. Slipper, Alexander, Daley. they are still young but that is some depth beginning to develop.
sheek said | September 6th 2010 @ 7:17am | Report comment
Spiro,
It’s apt to suggest this is the Wallabies’ most important win since the 3rd BC test of 1990. Certainly for the players & coaches.
The positives – A win is a win is a win is a win. It’s good to win the close ones for a change. First win in SA at altitude since 1963. First win at Bloemfontein since 1933.
However, let’s not get carried away, still plenty of work to be done…..
Willy said | September 6th 2010 @ 8:22am | Report comment
Absolutely heaps of work to be done.
I reckon that’s what makes this team so exciting.
el gamba said | September 6th 2010 @ 8:32am | Report comment
A lot of work to be done sheek!
This was probably the best way to win in terms of team development. Had they held off that Springbok resurgence and had a comfortable or big win their may have been room to gloss over the faults in the Wallabies game of late. As it was, they will know there is a distance to go before they are competing consistently at that level. The other alternative, to lose from 31-6 up, would have been catastrophic!
I am all for this ‘play what’s in front of you’ style but we need to learn how to control the game. When under pressure we started forcing this style which doesn’t work.
Who Needs Melon said | September 6th 2010 @ 12:37pm | Report comment
That’s a good point el gamba. In terms of team development, a close win like this would be better than a big runaway win.
PB said | September 6th 2010 @ 9:21am | Report comment
I don’t agree with the Wellington 1990 comparison. The All Blacks hadn’t lost a test since before the 87 World Cup till the ’90 game, and were the only serious opposition for Australia at the next year’s World Cup. This Bloem game may be a historic achievement and a heartening blip for Wallabies fans, but at the moment they still play like a NH team: able to turn it on in some (admittedly dazzling) patches, only to be mowed down by superior opposition. Just happens the only clearly superior team at the moment is the ABs.
Sydney and Hong Kong are much more apt comparisons for watershed Wellington tests. But will they be like 90, or 09?
Hayden said | September 6th 2010 @ 7:25am | Report comment
Next week will be a big ask for the Wallabies. it will be their third game in a row, with travel thrown in for good measure. It may be hard for them to lift themselves again after what must have been an emotional roller coaster over the last couple of weeks. I can’t see the AB defence leaking so many easy points, but being without Carter is the big unknown.
Taking nothing for granted as an AB fan, I am expecting the ABs fitness and freshness to make the difference.
Willy said | September 6th 2010 @ 8:24am | Report comment
It will be hard for the Wallabies to lift themselves this weekend.
But age is on their side.
And as all we blokes know… it’s much easier to (ahem) back up quickly when you’re still young…
Hayden said | September 6th 2010 @ 9:42am | Report comment
Ah yes, I’d forgotten those days.
formeropenside said | September 6th 2010 @ 7:26am | Report comment
So, Beale managed to redeem a litany of errors by slotting a pressure kick, to save a game the Wallabies should have had in the bag at halftime?
On the other hand, the AB’s have no Carter in Sydney, which may be enough of a difference to make it 3 from 6 in the 3N. Comparative success!
Also, I understand that Deans actually used his (poorly balanced) bench this time around. That’s a start.
Tortion said | September 6th 2010 @ 9:11am | Report comment
If that game got you that down I don’t know how you pulled through the last ten years. First time in years the Wallabies have been watchable.
warrenexpatinnz said | September 6th 2010 @ 9:28am | Report comment
Mate you need to loosen up and not be so analytical, good win which is great for teams self belief.
Dan said | September 6th 2010 @ 3:19pm | Report comment
Beale actually had a great game I thought. Cut through the defence on several occasions and kicked the winning penalty. A couple of errors (one being a pass thrown straight at his head as he was trying to get off the turf) don’t make his game a bad one mate.
Mike said | September 6th 2010 @ 8:03am | Report comment
Beale needs to lose his terrible moustache to improve – looks like a 1930s Mexican bandit
Sam Taulelei said | September 6th 2010 @ 8:14am | Report comment
This team is going to give Wallaby fans many heart attack moments and a dizzying ride of emotions. Their backplay in the first half will also cause many opposition defences headaches, including the All Blacks.
Kurtley Beale’s positive play from fullback stands out like a beacon and together with the impressive form and counterattacking skills of Mils Muliaina and Israel Dagg for the All Blacks, any careless and wayward kicks will be run back strongly this weekend from both sides.
The width and speed of Cooper’s passing enabled the Wallaby midfield to stand very wide and stretch the Springboks defence too thinly on the wings, and when the Boks midfield tried to rush up and cut off the supply of the ball they became vulnerable to an inside ball to a support player running in from the blindside.
Luke Burgess substitution introduced more enery and aggression from halfback testing the Boks defence in close more than Genia.
David Pocock’s pilfering was immense and he is going to be as big a nuisance and as annoying a pest as George Smith was in his early career and Richie McCaw. Apart from Pocock the Wallabies play at the breakdown is not of the highest quality, at times stupid, and will be under more pressure this weekend. Since the first Bledisloe test there has been a reluctance for the Wallaby forwards to use the pick and go. Why I don’t know but it is an effective tactic to vary their points of attack and compress the opposition defence.
Managing the players workload this week will be critical for Deans and his coaching staff, the magnitude of the task for the Wallabies in travelling from Africa to play a Bledisloe Cup the following week in Australia is that they haven’t achieved victory yet and the All Blacks have only done it three times, it’s a huge challenge.
The rssult last weekend will at least assist the promotion of the Bledisloe Cup amidst the next round of finals matches in the AFL and NRL and should see more bums on seats from Wallaby supporters. This week will be fun with the mood of Wallaby fans more positive and hopeful than if it was after another loss.
Brett McKay said | September 6th 2010 @ 9:34am | Report comment
yeah well said, Sam. Your first par there perfectly describes what I went through in the early hours yesterday morning.
A big test coming this weekend for sure, but not impossible, it should be said. The ABs have had a tough weekend themselves, and while they will no doubt be inspired by the people of Christchurch and surrounding districts, it could also become a distraction.
The Wallabies will, as Spiro suggests, gain a massive amount of self-belief from this win, and will be keen to take on the ABs whilst still on this high.
The Christchurch factor for the ABs, the Bloemfontein factor for the Wallabies, coupled with the effects of the return trip from the Republic, all make this 3rd Bledisloe all the more appealling a prospect…
Parisien said | September 6th 2010 @ 7:36pm | Report comment
Great to see Deans use the bench, although S. FAingaa perhaps should have stayed put! The others all had an impact, especially Burgess.
Willy said | September 6th 2010 @ 8:19am | Report comment
Absolutely wonderful.
Brilliant, brilliant, brilliant.
Gee I loved this game. Not only did the Wallabies win, but they won playing Australian rugby – fast, open, exciting.
The first 25 minutes was absolutely brilliant. Best I’ve seen the Wallabies play in ages. And they’re all so young!
I’m not only excited about RWC 2011, but also the Lions 2013 and RWC 2015.
Suddenly it’s brilliant to be an Australian rugby fan!
(Pity about the scheduling stuff up that sees the boys have to back up for a Bledisloe this weekend. Another week to prepare and ramp up the excitement would have been perfect!).
Boerewors_boy said | September 6th 2010 @ 11:11am | Report comment
Absolutely agree, the style and execution of rugby at pace, the cut-out ball for the first try from QC to AAC, and to finish it off so well, was spectacularly good. Playing the game with that Australian backline panache is what we have been missing, and we know it can be achieved. Now the hard part, back it up after the trip back from sweet old SA.
Willy said | September 6th 2010 @ 8:20am | Report comment
Oh, and Robbie Deans – sign him up to 2015.
NOW.
formeropenside said | September 6th 2010 @ 9:25am | Report comment
Yeah, lets ignore the Grand Sham, 9 straight losses to the AB’s, first loss to Scotland in 30 years, a home loss to England…
warrenexpatinnz said | September 6th 2010 @ 9:31am | Report comment
Does the sun ever come out where you live formeropenside? You aren’t Peter Thorburn in disguise are you?
Colin N said | September 6th 2010 @ 9:35am | Report comment
To be fair, he has a point.
warrenexpatinnz said | September 6th 2010 @ 9:48am | Report comment
Facts are fine Colin but sport is best taken in real time and by that I mean every loss does hurt but every win against quality opposition, no matter if in the 80th minute should be savoured. Picking the carcass bare then regurgatating the remains may tickle the fancy of a few knockers but I congratulate the guys and the coach on a deserved win and hopefully another win or two is just around the corner.
formeropenside said | September 6th 2010 @ 10:02am | Report comment
I’m not going to get all triumphant over a dodgy win and let that blind me to the previous losses this coach and team have suffered.
Colin N said | September 6th 2010 @ 10:05am | Report comment
I agree with your rather eloquent breakdown, but I sort of think it misses the point.
I think, to some extent, both arguments on Deans are correct in their assertions.
He has bought through the likes O’Connor, Beale, Cooper (to some extent, as there was no one else), but he also kept faith with Giteau at fly-half for too long and the likes of Mumm and Brown. I only watched the second-half, but Brown seemed to be once again very poor.
It’s not like other positions such as Fainga’a, where their two best players are injured/not match fit, and Ma’afu, where Alexander is unavailable (although Slipper looks a far better player), but at lock, you have Simmons and at eight, you have Higginbotham and Hodgson(is Hoiles injured?) who have the physical capacity to play at test level.
As for his results, they aren’t better (arguably worse) than his predecessors.
Willy said | September 6th 2010 @ 9:38am | Report comment
Deans had to rebuild the team – and in many ways, Australian rugby – virtually from scratch. For too long we’ve been happy with “good enough”.
The process has often been two steps forward and one back.
But you have to hand it to the man for having the courage to stick with it despite the above set-backs. A lesser man would have folded and gone for safety first.
Deans is doing great things in Aussie rugby, and it’s just starting to bear fruit.
kingplaymaker said | September 6th 2010 @ 9:54am | Report comment
Willy you are one of the few wise and fair Wallabies fans.
Muzza said | September 6th 2010 @ 1:38pm | Report comment
Once the on field leadership matures and the young fellas learn to follow better this team will win again consistently. Still daylight between the AB’s and them but they’ll get there eventually. A performing Wallabies side is great for rugby in general.
Andy shearer said | September 6th 2010 @ 2:09pm | Report comment
Agreed.. Hate to bring politics into it… But i liken deans rescue of of Australian rugby after the poor forward pack development, structures, philophies of the Eddie jones years to Obama needing to turn things around after ‘W’ fell asleep at the helm for 8 years. There is just no way deans can put thi gs back together overnight.
Seems to me, the players respect deans and that is the most crucial thing. They know they have more to learn and he has been moving in the right direction. To cut him loose now would just be shortsighted and all this negative talk in the face of my points above aren’t helping Dean’s Renaissance.
BennO said | September 6th 2010 @ 9:50am | Report comment
Yes let’s ignore that stuff because in spite of them he has taken a team with an average age of what, about 24? to number 2 in the world. He has also achieved something with that team that John Connoly, Eddie Jones, Rod MacQueen and Greg Smith couldn’t. So I’ll take a home loss to England in a June test match for an away win in 1800 M.A.S.L.
Over the next 5 years we’re going to have an incredibly young team of veterans who play with confidence and flair. So absolutely, let’s sign him up for another 4 years to finish the job he’s started.
warrenexpatinnz said | September 6th 2010 @ 10:32am | Report comment
Good call Benno but maybe securing Deans for another year past 2011 is a good thing as I hesitate to go another four as I am interested in how far Mcqueen and McKenzie come on through 2011 and 2012 and obviously how we shape up for the remaining two tests and the NH tour.
formeropenside said | September 6th 2010 @ 2:00pm | Report comment
fyi, Connolly coached one (1) test on the highveldt, and lost it 24-16 in a dead rubber after a 49-0 hiding of the Boks in Brisbane, and a close win in Sydney.
Deans’ first attempt in Jo’burg resulted in a 53-8 loss. Only on his third attempt did he win the big prize – and as a resulr the Wallabies will be second in the 3N instead of last.
So, thanks for your strawman there. I’m also unsure that you want to hold up Greg Smith as a great coach who has now been eclipsed by Deans – although I understand that Smith does have a better winning ratio.
If you are happy to regularly lose June tests to NH sides, well, thats a choice for you. How about giving up hope of a Grand Slam as well?
Look, if we’d thumped the Boks, I’d be as happy as the rest of you apparently are. But it was an arsey win, and for all Beale kicked a pressure goal, he gave up at least as many points as he scored. So I am sorry if trying to be a voice of reason is upsetting.
BennO said | September 6th 2010 @ 2:30pm | Report comment
Strawman? I don’t think so. It’s a simple fact that RD as coach has achieved something that no recent Wallaby coach has managed, not even the great Rod Macqueen. That itself is a big achievement. So it took him three goes, the others never managed it, despite having players such as Eales, Horan, Larkham etc. The point is it’s an incredibly difficult feat that not even our 99 world cup winning team could produce.
As for the June tests, I’m always happy to lose a few. They are basically soccer style friendlies now. I’d rather we lose some of them than BC or TN games. And yes even the grand slam. It’s a shame we didn’t manage that, but I’m more pleased we beat the boks at altitude that had we won the grand slam. It will do more for team belief than had we beaten Scotland and Ireland.
I think you misread me, I’m not overjoyed (read my post the morning after the game in the match report telling everyone they are getting a bit too excited about one lucky win), but I do recognise that Deans has taken an incredibly young squad and started building a good team. Sure they’ve lost some close ones and we had a shocker last year, but it’s building (not rebuilding) well and we’ll be a force for the next 5 years because of it. This win at altitude is testament to the potential of the team.
Again, they’ve just done something that even the Wallabies of 99-2002 couldn’t do. For that I remove my hat to the players and the coach recognising that they’ve shown what they’re capable of and that they deserve the chance to stay together and keep demonstrating that.
formeropenside said | September 6th 2010 @ 2:40pm | Report comment
But we are losing those June friendlies AND the BC/3N games.
We can’t change Deans now – its too late pre-WC, which is unfortuantely all-important – but there is still some deadwood in the “unique units” that needs to be cleared out: the returns from injury will achieve some of this, at least.
BennO said | September 6th 2010 @ 2:57pm | Report comment
“But we are losing those June friendlies AND the BC/3N games.”
Yeah I know and that’s disappointing, but if we end up 3/6 then it starts to look better, despite not winning either trophy. 2/6 aint so good of course. But for all the criticism heaped on Deans, I think this win is evidence he’s doing better than would appear with a very young, and as you point out, injury hit team. Hopefully he learns from the success of using his bench too.
kingplaymaker said | September 6th 2010 @ 9:57am | Report comment
Yes a young and injured team.
Parisien said | September 6th 2010 @ 7:51pm | Report comment
But that is why the win is significant, because of those dreadful performances. Because of its context in place and time!
After the pain of those losses, the thrill of the win! I got more pleasure and value from the last two weeks even with the loss than I did for much of the last ten years. Personally, and I know I’m probably alone on this, I would prefer to see them lose with panache than win by playing that dreary one up stuff.
And if the Wallabies win with panache, than that will be even better.
Arky said | September 6th 2010 @ 8:24am | Report comment
A win is a win is a win. But as Sheek says – lets not get carried away just yet. A number of positives are worth noting…
It was a win at altitude – not done since 1963 and not done at Blomfontein since 1933. Take this for what it is – very impressive. Alongside this note that two of the three 3N wins in SA are under Deans. We are not there yet but this must be regarded as a positive.
While the wallabies may well have given up their lead – they did not give up. And importantly they moved on to win. A pivotal outcome for the near to medium term future of this player group.
Great games came from a number of player. From the front – Pocock was wonderful and appeared to work very successfully with the referee. McCalman stood to be counted. Rocky seemed to have plenty of space and used it to effect suggesting he is heading to some good form again. It was noteworthy that Cooper and Giteau as a partnership had the SA backs totally confused. It would appear to me if Giteau can continue in this vein he will be an asset that provides effectiveness and leverage for Cooper by supporting and not competing with him. AAC was as good as always. The back three played really well together. And despite the falcon and a few errors Beale more than proved his worth and showed that he will only get better.
But let’s not get carried away. There is a long way to go. Thankfully – there are a number of key players to bring back into the fray but before that takes place there is another game against the ABs this weekend. The significance of the win over the Boks will ultimately hinge on this weekend’s outcome.
kingplaymaker said | September 6th 2010 @ 8:29am | Report comment
Spiro you’re absolutely right that it would have been very unfortunate if the Wallabies had lost as it would have put huge pressure on Deans, pressure that would have interfered with his good progress with developing the depth and experience of the team. He faces very unfair criticism which ignores not only the more limited playing resources at this disposal compared to the other Tri-nations teams, but also the extraordinary injury toll he has faced. As far as I can see most of this criticism is at origin based on his being a New Zealander, a really childish reason. Wayne Smith, for example, is deeply unfair in his relentless and blistering attacks, and I very much doubt it would be the case were Deans from, say, Queensland. No one has given Deans an ounce of credit for this victory, despite its foundation in his attacking strategies, his bold yet wise development of young talent and his ability to continue motivating his players.
It is obviously a critical victory. The reason in my opinion the Wallabies have consistently fallen away in second halves was initially, last year, because the opposition’s superior playing quality eventually asserted itself, but more recently because having lost so many consecutive matches, the team had also lost essential inner belief and so began doubting themselves whenever anything went wrong: fear of losing. This explains the extraordinary number of knock-ons in the second halves of the last two matches. Knock-ons in abundance, unless it is raining, are a sure proof of nerves, a perfect litmus test of a team’s psychological state.
The only way to re-establish that lost confidence was to win, and at this stage in such a bad run luck was necessary. If the Wallabies could win just one of the next two matches against the All Blacks they may have emerged from this dark period of self-doubt.
I thought the nature of the Wallabies attack quite extraordinary and unusual. It involved, essentially, four highly talented playmakers putting each other into gaps. There have perhaps never been four playmakers as talented as Cooper, Giteau, Beale and O’Connor in a backline together, and the results were very suprising. Despite the absence of pure runners, the four mentioned were able to spin such long, accurate passes, spot such a mass of gaps between them and then play each other into them, that the opposition defence was shredded. When so many players can fire the ball like a bullet from one side of the pitch to the other and every player who receives the ball does so with a yawning gap opened in front of him, this is what results and I would never have anticipated it. Most teams have one fly-half making the play or at most an inside centre as well, the rest of the team being strike runners. This means that any creative element in the attack will normally being from a ruck. Four playmakers opens up completely unchartered avenues of attack, meaning the potential creation of gaps all over the field at all times and from other situations than the ruck, (though only if the four are as talented as these). I read an article by Will Greenwood yesterday saying the new laws are changing the nature of rugby, and one point is that having creative forces all over the field could be a way to use the greater amount of continuity.
If these four had two really brilliant runners too of course, who would always find themselves in gaps, things would be even better. Need I say Inglis and Hayne..I don’t think the South African defence was a joke in the first half, but the Wallabies will doubtless meet better, and it could be that bulk, linebreaking ability and directness are then necessary.
Ashley-Cooper although very good in defence, very brave, and steady at finishing off good positions, offered less brilliance in attack than the other backs, and made few breaks despite getting the ball on many occasions. Perhaps Ioane could go there in the autumn.
The only negative part of the match was the ease with which the big South African forwards were able to plough through the Wallabies pack. Palu and Polota-nau can’t return quickly enough to bring back real physicality to the defense.
South Africa could easily be a far better team and it is now suicidal to persist with a game-plan outdated by the new laws. I would move Morne Steyn to inside centre simply because he is worth his weight in points and should be in the team somewhere, bring in Butch James to transform the backline with a multiple of Steyn’s creativity, replace Francois Steyn with the more attack-minded Aplon and Fourie with the faster De Jongh. On the top of such a physical pack that backline would do far better than the lumbering juggernauts presently employed with the dull fingers of Steyn playing the tune.
One final note: how long can these wonderful new law interpretations last before the northern hemisphere try to have them changed and ruin the game again?
Willy said | September 6th 2010 @ 9:13am | Report comment
“I thought the nature of the Wallabies attack quite extraordinary and unusual. It involved, essentially, four highly talented playmakers putting each other into gaps.”
I know it’s a different sport, but if you’ve ever watched the Tigers play in the NRL this sort of thing would be familiar.
They have a hooker, five eighth and half back who are all brilliant with ball in hand and – at their best – they interchange seamlessly.
It’s amazing to watch when it comes together.
kingplaymaker said | September 6th 2010 @ 9:38am | Report comment
Willy it is intriguing that this may be being made possible by the new law variations. It could lead to a new way of playing whereby you have two or three fly-half-like players in each backline.
The use of space is also knew, zooming from one side of the pitch to another.
Mike said | September 6th 2010 @ 9:39am | Report comment
Actually the ABs have been doing it for years
kingplaymaker said | September 6th 2010 @ 10:09am | Report comment
Mike the ABs have never had FOUR playmakers in their backline at once. They do it’s true try to play like this to some degree, but they can’t do the things four top playmakers can, which totally transform the possibilities.
Jerry said | September 6th 2010 @ 10:16am | Report comment
Depends what you mean by playmaker – and I think you’re being a bit charitable to describe all those Wallaby guys as ‘top playmakers’.
Nerk said | September 6th 2010 @ 11:53am | Report comment
King Carlos, Dan Carter, Christian Cullen, Doug Howlett. Dougie counts because he is a highly accomplished fullback. These four have played together and done amazing things.
Currently: piri, dan and Cory jane are all playmakers. I would tend to include nonu because plays open themselves around him like no other player due purely to his presence. That makes 4.
Ben S said | September 7th 2010 @ 5:15am | Report comment
‘they can’t do the things four top playmakers can, which totally transform the possibilities.’
But only last week you were going to great lengths to lambast the ‘four playmaker’ selection, and yet now it’s stuff of the gods?
pothale said | September 6th 2010 @ 9:58am | Report comment
You mean imitate something from rugby league and bring it into the union game?!!
That couldn’t happen, could it?
kingplaymaker said | September 6th 2010 @ 1:01pm | Report comment
Nerk they can all playmake but only Carter, Spencer and Weepu have true playmaker ability: the rest are excellent strike runners who can do some playmaking at a lesser level.
I’m discounting scrum halves from the equation because their playmaking is of a different nature and normally in a different place.
So New Zealand have still only had a maximum of two on the field at the same time, such as Carter and Mauger.
Jerry said | September 6th 2010 @ 1:07pm | Report comment
Not really, NZ have often played a playmaker type at fullback – eg Leon MacDonald (who filled in at 10 remember) or passing 13s like Conrad Smith.
But it’s really a pointless comparison – have NZ ever had 4 inside halves littered around the backline? Probably not, though they did play McAlister at 13 once – not really a success. I’m still not convinced this Aus team structure is desirable, as JOC is still a liability on the wing and one swallow doesn’t make a winter for Giteau – he’s still a flake.
Sam Taulelei said | September 6th 2010 @ 10:09am | Report comment
It’s far too early to deduce from the Wallabies attack play that it will herald in new style of play and players selected in the backline. Rugby is a game for all shapes and sizes and the selection of those players has been forced more by injury than as a result of any forward planning. If other teams try and copy and at the same time ignore their own inherent strengths with the types of players they have available then there will be less variety in the game. Using the full width of the pitch is nothing new in the game but there has been less evidence of it since the game became more defence oriented and more teams adopted the rush style man on man defence instead of the zone defence forcing players towards the touchline.
Justin said | September 6th 2010 @ 12:22pm | Report comment
KPM is giving way too much credit to Deans on this. The only reason AUS are able to play with such width is becuase of Cooper. Gits has never been a great passer and JOC was not firing people into holes on the weekend. Beale is becoming a very good counter attacker. Both these guiys were making busts because of Cooper not because of their playmaking ability.
AUS still lack strike runners – with Genia/Cooper you dont need any more playmakers.
John P said | September 6th 2010 @ 12:55pm | Report comment
Oh apart from that time he fired the inside ball to elsom for the try?
kingplaymaker said | September 6th 2010 @ 12:59pm | Report comment
Justin many of the tries and breaks didn’t involve Cooper at all if you look closely.
I agree better strike runners are necessary though.
Why not give Deans some credit though? He’s had a tough time recently.
Justin said | September 6th 2010 @ 2:15pm | Report comment
JP – Any player on either team could have thrown that ball to Beale, it was a piece of cake and basic rugby.
KPM – Cooper had a hand in 3 of 5 from my memory. Deans has had a tough time but I think he deserves to be heavily scrutinesd.
The win was fantastic and COULD be the catalyst for this team but it could just be another out of the box performace too. There is still alot for Deans to do IMO.
kingplaymaker said | September 6th 2010 @ 1:10pm | Report comment
Jerry they did score 4 tries in 16 minutes against the number two team in the world with this undesirable structure.
Jerry said | September 6th 2010 @ 1:17pm | Report comment
Yeah, but they also conceded about 40 points two weeks in a row. It seems to me this backline is a bit “Campese” – the four playmakers you mentioned are all capable of doing something great one minute and completely hopeless the next.
Don’t get me wrong, it’s got a lot of potential, but you’re not gonna get that far if you need to score 40 points to win a match. Can this team address it’s defensive issues without sacrificing a fair bit of attacking flair? Dunno, should be fun to find out though.
bayboy said | September 6th 2010 @ 1:19pm | Report comment
But then what did they do for the other 64minutes?
It was certainly a game of two halves and luckily for Australia they pulled it off.
Was it convincing NO if it was they would not have let such a huge lead dissipate.
Unfortunately we are seeing shades of over confidence creeping back into roarers which happens after every win only to be followed by another loss and for the axes to be sharpened once more.
Enjoy the win but keep it in reality. A mammoth lead was let go, a tired and old springbok team were allowed to come back into the match and had it not been a last minute penalty from Beale it would have been a humiliating loss after being so far in front.
The Boks didn’t bother playing in the first half and the second 40 they showed us glimpses of what they can do. If anything I would be more worried being a wallabies supporting after letting such a huge lead slip.
Justin said | September 6th 2010 @ 2:17pm | Report comment
Bayboy – Its easy to say SA didnt play in the first half but they were not allowed to.
That first 30 minutes was breathtaking and most sides would have been looking at a big deficit. They were totally outplayed by AUS in that first 40.
bayboy said | September 6th 2010 @ 6:20pm | Report comment
Justin to use your logic the Wallabies weren’t allowed to play the second 40.
It was a chance penalty that got them home not a well deserved try.
So how about you admit to the second part to give a fair brakdown of the game. Whilst you say the Wallabies were good I say they got a few breaks from a bok team that were struggling for motivation. Once the penny dropped with the boks they roared home and took the lead what does that tell you about this wallabies outfit. One minute on fire the next a bunch of stragglers holding on for dear life because that is exactly what happened