Week 2: upsets recorded and statements made
By Brett McKay, 20 Sep 2011 Brett McKay is a Roar Expert
- Tagged:
- All Blacks, Rugby Union, Rugby World Cup, Springboks, wallabies
Related coverage
- Rugby Union news
- Wallabies news
- Rugby World Cup 2011 news
- New Zealand All Blacks news
- South Africa Springboks news
- Rugby 2011 news

Wallabies hooker Stephen Moore (left) and captain James Horwill (right) sit out the Australian team training session (AAP Image/Dave Hunt)
Well then, hasn’t that upset a few plans. At least now if the Wallabies do happen to pull off the improbable (as we’re all thinking this now is) and actually win the World Cup, then there can be no talk of having a supposedly easier route.
It was said in the aftermath of the Wallabies’ loss to Ireland that Australia would now have to win another Tri-Nations tournament even just to make the Rugby World Cup final. And this is a smart way of looking at it, because it does at least break the task down to something the Wallabies have done recently.
But more about the Wallabies later, there’s much more to talk about than another poor Wallaby showing.
If the first week of Rugby World Cup 2011 was all about the quality of the games, in particular those involving the minnows, then the second week was the one where some upsets finally came about, and major statements were made.
The upsets started late last week, with Canada getting over Tonga, and the USA beating Russia in the so-called ‘Cold War Clash’. But in truth, both Canada and the States were always going to be a decent chance of winning these games.
Canada had had several good lead-in games before the Rugby World Cup started, with wins home and away over the USA before arriving in Australia to play the Barbarian-Shackledraggers.
Their structured methods were always going to be a decent test for the more free-flowing style of the Tongans (indeed, they pushed France for 65+ minutes on Sunday night), so perhaps only the Tongans might have considered this result to be an upset.
The USA, particularly, have been quite impressive in this tournament so far, and their forward-oriented gameplan was the perfect foil for Russia’s attacking preference. I’m giving up a topic of a future Rugby World Cup column here, but Eagles captain Todd Clever has been outstanding in both the USA’s opening games. I don’t follow the fantasy leagues or anything, but it wouldn’t surprise me at all if Clever has been a leading performer.
Come Friday night, the hot topic of conversation was just how injured Richie McCaw and Co. were for the All Blacks. New Zealanders were either panicking about dying dreams or were quietly confident that the team hierarchy are just playing it safe.
By full time, I’d imagine most of the former concerns had transferred to the latter, with the ‘makeshift’ All Blacks giving Japan a good old-fashioned World Cup thumping, running out 83-7 winners.
Sure, it wasn’t quite the 145-17 demolition from 1995, and perhaps Japan coach John Kirwan was rightly claiming a moral victory when he said in the post-match, “It wasn’t as bad as last time.”
However, it was still a decent statement that the All Blacks had made. Here they were resting or nursing some key players, but yet they are still well enough drilled, and sharp enough in their execution as a team unit that it really didn’t matter who was wearing No. 7 or No. 10. Or No. 2. Or No. 12. Or No. 15. You get my drift.
In what pretty quickly turned into a 75 percent training run, New Zealand put Japan to the sword in the most clinical of fashions. The bonus point was secured on the half hour, and not even a change of hooker and captain in the second half would disrupt the home team.
As hinted by coach Graham Henry, Sonny Bill Williams did play in a new position, when he theoretically came onto Cory Jane’s wing. I say ‘theoretically’ because I don’t actually recall Sonny Bill Williams keeping the sideline or the touchie company. Not that it mattered.
As if it wasn’t already obvious, New Zealand remain the raging hot favourites to finally lift the Webb Ellis trophy a second time, and in doing so, they may end up using seven different XVs. And it won’t affect them one bit.
Argentina proved that not only are they the sporting the best strip of the tournament, but they are also among the most adaptable. Shunning the heavily defensive game plan that gave England such a torrid time, the Pumas turned on the running game against Romania to great effect, with their comfortable 43-8 win. It’s hard to see them not making the quarters at this stage.
South Africa similarly threw off the shackles to comfortably account for Fiji 49-3, but importantly, did it without Victor Matfield, without Bryan Habana, and for most of the second half, interestingly, without Captain John Smit.
Bismarck du Plessis is finally becoming unignorable, and his presence certainly helped the ‘Boks finish the game strongly. Barring any Pool C miracles, they will be a tough opponent come the knockout stage.
England, on the surface, look like they are finally getting into the tournament, though their 41-10 win over Georgia massively flatters the Motherland.
Martin Johnson certainly wasn’t impressed, describing England’s performance as “sloppy” and even further suggesting “If we are happy with those standards we will go home early.”
Be that as it may, England appeared much more composed with Captain Lewis Moody back on the field, and they will undoubtedly be enjoying how their side of the knockout draw has seemingly opened up.
And opened up it has, thanks to a lacklustre Wallabies’ showing against Ireland. All credit must go to the Irish though, for they executed their plan – as abundantly simple as it was – to perfection, with the net result being Will Genia being harassed at the breakdown to the point of being literally picked up and ran away with, and Quade Cooper forced into bad decision after poor option.
In his defence, at least it wasn’t for a lack of trying to make things happen.
The Wallabies set piece started off shaky and sadly went downhill from there, and while Bryce Lawrence’s interpretations at the breakdown could have gone either way, at scrum time, the Wallabies constant collapsing didn’t give him much choice.
The worst thing about watching Saturday night’s game unfold was how disturbingly accurate some previous comments of mine were becoming. During Friday’s Rugby World Cup Q and A session, Roarer Grandpabhaile enquired whether I thought an Irish win would be seen as an upset.
Answering objectively, yet prophetically, as it turned out, I replied, “…it probably will be seen as an upset, yeah, but at the same time, it wouldn’t be that surprising. Ireland are well overdue for a good performance, and now that the Wallabies have notched two on the trot [it was three, actually, but that hardly matters now], there’s a decent argument to suggest that they might be now due for an ordinary showing.”
Damn being right. But hasn’t the pre-tournament thinking been turned on its head as a result?
Recommend this story.
Follow Brett McKay on Twitter: @BMcSport
The Turkey 10
The Turkey 10 teams have now been selected, as Wild Turkey Bourbon's sport sponsorship kicks into the next exciting phase.
Choose which side you're going to support and get in the running to win $2,500!
Simply visit Wild Turkey Australia on Facebook for your chance to win.
Find out more.
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Rugby Union articles
- Reds back in contention, but Waratahs need a cleanout (287)
- What Hansen’s first squad means for the Wallabies (191)
- ALAN JONES: We have the players, it’s the coaches that are to blame (161)
- Who will be in the Wallabies’ backrow? (158)
- Will Cooper and Mitchell be back in time for Wallaby selection? (156)
- CAMPO: Will Deans change the style of the Wallabies play? (128)
- Tahs out. Brumbies win ugly. And Quade’s back! (124)
- McKenzie or White: who will be the next Wallaby coach? (19)
- Chiefs back on top after downing Bulls (6)
- Rebels know Super improvement needed
- Quade can play way into Wallabies squad (2)
- A Kiwi’s advice to Wallaby supporters (26)
- Confessions of a rugby union traitor (11)
- Reds focus on Brumbies, not finals
- A Kiwi’s advice to Wallaby supporters (26)
- Confessions of a rugby union traitor (11)
- Brumbies vs Reds: a lesson for the other provinces (11)
- Chiefs vs Bulls: Super Rugby live scores, blog (15)
- Hola Argentina, and welcome to the Rugby Championship! (24)
- Irish coaches looking to head Western Force (15)
- Dull Super Rugby coaches equal dull rugby (51)
- Explore:
- All Blacks, Rugby Union, Rugby World Cup, Springboks, wallabies


September 20th 2011 @ 7:19am
niwdEyaJ said | September 20th 2011 @ 7:19am | Report comment
Why is it that NH sides play so well against the Wallabies? Week in, week out we see them play abysmally against other sides then somehow pull out a cracker when men in gold are on the field… England’s effort at Twickenham was another prime example… never before have I seen England play the kind of rugby they did to hammer the Wallabies at home… it was like we were up against the All Blacks! And since then? Absolutely nothing – back to being mediocre week in week out.
This is now becoming a worrying trend.
On the other hand, maybe losing to Ireland has been a blessing in disguise? I’ve been quietly concerned that we’d top pool C and get marched out by Wales in the quarter final! Now we’ll most likely have to face South Africa instead (unless PDV puts out his “B” team for Samoa so they engineer their way into the other side of the draw!) so likely to be less “surprises” as we know what to expect from SA…
September 20th 2011 @ 8:04am
Ben S said | September 20th 2011 @ 8:04am | Report comment
‘Why is it that NH sides play so well against the Wallabies? Week in, week out we see them play abysmally against other sides then somehow pull out a cracker when men in gold are on the field…’
Well that’s just not true at all. Not by a long stretch. Wales have put in some great performances against SA in recent seasons, for example.
‘never before have I seen England play the kind of rugby they did to hammer the Wallabies at home…’
Then you have rarely watched England over the years. Have you forgotten the home loss in 2003 pre-WC? That’s just a ridiculous comment, and sums up (for want of a better word) the ignorant view with which a lot of SH Roarers perceive the NH.
‘Absolutely nothing – back to being mediocre week in week out.’
That isn’t true either. It’s like you think teams have to pull out a special performance to beat Australia. They don’t. Australia, under Deans, have been vulnerable in a lot of areas since day 1, and that hasn’t changed.
September 20th 2011 @ 8:51am
niwdEyaJ said | September 20th 2011 @ 8:51am | Report comment
2003 was a long time ago mate so if that’s the only other example you can think of where England have played attractive rugby then I think my point has been made.
at the end of the day, the tri-nations have made up the top 3 of world rankings for the majority of the last two decades and 5 out of 6 world cups have been won by SH teams so it shouldn’t be too hard to figure out where the perception comes from.
what actually concerns me though is the growing trend of “winning ugly” mentality – the last two world cups have been won in this manner and if this continues, it’s simply bad for rugby. how is the game supposed to grow and attract new audiences if it’s played in a slow, kick-a-thon manner. sure there is great forwards skill in scrums, rucks and mauls, slowing the ball down and earning penalties, but how do you think this looks to someone who is new to the game? in a word: BORING.
September 20th 2011 @ 11:58am
ChrisT said | September 20th 2011 @ 11:58am | Report comment
You know niwdEyaJ, I wonder if you’d classify the Ireland Wallabies game at the weekend boring? Because you know, it had all the elements you claim constitute boring rugby.
As a neutral I found it a fascinating contest and was far from bored but then again, I understand something about rugby union and the two teams facing each other. I’m not sure I care about attracting the passing housewife, the feckless youth or the basketball fan. The bar’s crowded enough.
September 20th 2011 @ 3:44pm
Muzza said | September 20th 2011 @ 3:44pm | Report comment
I agree the Aus-Ire result on paper was dull but from an intensity point od view the game was terrific. Until the end there it could have gone either way, same as tbe Sam-Wales, Arg-Eng and a few other matches – all great entertainment despite the lack of tries.
Given that all of this is for a bigger trophy than any regular rugby series or match, I don’t mind the lack of tries. Going back to regular rugby year in, year out though, if all 3N and EOYT’s were tryless, maybe I’d lose some interest. I suspect others would agree.
September 20th 2011 @ 4:24pm
Ben S said | September 20th 2011 @ 4:24pm | Report comment
’2003 was a long time ago mate so if that’s the only other example you can think of where England have played attractive rugby then I think my point has been made.’
Well no, your point was that England had never played like that before. Even when England beat Australia in Australia last season they were chucking the ball about for goodness sake…
‘at the end of the day, the tri-nations have made up the top 3 of world rankings for the majority of the last two decades and 5 out of 6 world cups have been won by SH teams so it shouldn’t be too hard to figure out where the perception comes from.’
The perception simply comes from people who don’t watch rugby, but then comment about what they haven’t watched or don’t know what they’re talking about, as if there is this SH v NH divide in terms of style, when in fact SA play boring rugby (but are lumped in with this mythical SH brand), and Australia have only started to chuck the ball about when Kurtley Beale was fortuitously transferred into the Australian side when Hornre was injured.
Anyway, the 5/6 record fails to take into account the general failures of the higher ranked 3N sides.
September 20th 2011 @ 9:46am
Kuruki said | September 20th 2011 @ 9:46am | Report comment
Why is it that NH sides play so well against the Wallabies?
As an All Black fan i pose the same question about the Wallabies. Why is it that they play so well when they face the All Blacks and then drift off and put in under par performances against teams like Scotland Samoa England Ireland.
September 20th 2011 @ 2:16pm
jokerman said | September 20th 2011 @ 2:16pm | Report comment
Niwdayj, nice post. I feel Australia really peak for The All Blacks, especially of late since for a moment there, they had lost 9 in a row or something. That became their target, and really putting everything into that game, and the next All black game, and how to stop The All Blacks…They come off the high and face a side like England or Scotland, and that high is now with them. Australia don’t seem to continue with it. Very similar how when a team upsets The All Blacks at world cups they always lose the following match, as everything went into that one game.
There is also a gap between their performance and the reality of their form. They win one game, and they start believing in their hype. They are, is it Y generation or something? Filled with optimism, no fear from the past…but the foundation is not there and reality hits.
Reality is your clarity…you think you are that good? Well, we will find out, the universe seems to say.
September 20th 2011 @ 7:51am
Pot Hale said | September 20th 2011 @ 7:51am | Report comment
Why is it that NH sides play so well against the Wallabies?
Because they’re not as good or as intimidating to play as New Zealand. Simple as. NZ have a near perfect record against NH teams on tour. Australia and South Africa don’t.
NH teams don’t win that often, particularly away from home, but enough for them to give the Wallabies a go every time.
Don’t forget, as Brett points out above, there was nothing new in what Ireland did. Ireland played the exact same way against England in the 6N, and nothing they did on Saturday night was any different, except it had less intensity than the England game – Ireland’s backline didn’t really fire at all, despite getting a lot of ball, which they wasted by kicking it back to the Wallabies, or up the touchlines. They were only at 80% of where they should be, but it was an improvement.
Rugby World Cups have one great thing going for them – everybody gets a good amount of time to prepare, get their troops trained properly and arrive fit and fresh (in as much as modern rugby players can be.) June and November tour matches are always infused with one side being rusty and the other flogged at the end of a long season. It’s a level playing field come RWC time.
Gimme more.
September 20th 2011 @ 7:55am
Seiran said | September 20th 2011 @ 7:55am | Report comment
I’m in agreement with niwdEyaJ. I’ve said the same thing in another post, that I am actually happier that we are likely to face the boks rather than Wales in the QF. To me, Wales look the better team and would most likley give the Wallabies a greater run for their money.
We have had a pretty good run of late against the Boks, and we know exactly how they are going to play. We’ve know that for 4 years.
That, of course, can all change if Italy have a blinder against Ireland and put the Wallabies back on the other side of the draw. And I wouldn’t put it past Italy to do just that.
September 20th 2011 @ 8:06am
niwdEyaJ said | September 20th 2011 @ 8:06am | Report comment
go the Azzuri!!!!
September 20th 2011 @ 2:28pm
jokerman said | September 20th 2011 @ 2:28pm | Report comment
Seiran, who are you kidding? You would rather play the boks, than the All Black in a semi, at a ground you have not won at in 25 years?
It’s always good to be positive in life. Though be truthful always, not try and rearrange, what is, to a position that looks more appealing, when it is not. The Irish beating Australia, was not good for the Australian team, on a positive, they still have a life.
September 20th 2011 @ 8:21am
Pot Hale said | September 20th 2011 @ 8:21am | Report comment
Lol!
I was just thinking about all the conspiracy theories of who might throw a match in order to get into a perceived favourable path to the final.
First up is NZ/Fra.
Might Henry throw the match to get into a quarter playing England and a semi against Wales or Ireland?
Crazy Marc might have other ideas though and ensure he stays in second spot to grill the Rosbifs and trounce Ireland once more in the semis. He puts Yachvilli and Parra in the front row just to see what happens.
Meanwhile, along comes P Divvy and his troops against Samoa. Maybe he should come second and get to play Ireland in the quarters, and then play Eng in the semis (if they haven’t been beaten by NZ or France who are now thinking of throwing the game against Tonga to get their second place back.)
Meanwhile Kidney is slowly plotting as it comes down to the final pool match against Italy. He’s been up all might trying to work out the permutations, and whether he should cross over or stay onside because Eng are now on the other side having beaten France who decided to beat Tonga after all. He’s still trying to work it out when Semezato scores in the corner to win the game and Italy go through since Ireland forfeited the match against Russia cos they forgot to turn up as they were too busy working out whether they should get a bonus point or not.
Meanwhile, when no one’s looking, Dingo Deans sneaks into the trophy room and nicks Bill – Julia Gillard awards him Convict for Life status as Sydney goes into meltdown. Quade Cooper retires from the game and says he’s moving to New Zealand where he’d be appreciated.
September 20th 2011 @ 8:28am
Brett McKay said | September 20th 2011 @ 8:28am | Report comment
so Pots, with all this posturing and game throwing over the next two weeks should we lock in the QFs as this:
Canada v Georgia, Scotland v Tonga, Australia v Fiji (because we don’t need to throw games!) and Samoa v USA?!?
Only overthinking rugby fans could turn the RWC into a race to lose games
September 20th 2011 @ 8:34am
Nick-KIA said | September 20th 2011 @ 8:34am | Report comment
I think this is an early leader for post of the rwc. Brilliant stuff ph
September 20th 2011 @ 8:45am
sheek said | September 20th 2011 @ 8:45am | Report comment
Pot Hale,
All jokes aside, anyone who thinks of throwing a match is the ultimate in moronic imbecility. And I’m not being moral!
You can try to be too cute about this, but what usually happens is that you end up stuffing only yourself.
The only way to throw a match is to have everyone in on the whole process (that is, all the teams) – who loses where, who wins ultimately, & we all split the winnings & take the secret to our graves. Yeah, like hell!
Anyway, anything worth winning, is only worth winning by beating the best along the way. Which might be the Wallabies grand plan – South Africa, New Zealand & one of England/France/Wales/Ireland.
Although I doubt they seriously meant it to be this way, don’t you!!!!!
September 20th 2011 @ 8:55am
Brett McKay said | September 20th 2011 @ 8:55am | Report comment
Sheek I did see a comment over the weekend that said it’s always been the Wallabies preferred route to a RWC Final: beating NZ in the semis!!
September 20th 2011 @ 9:09am
sheek said | September 20th 2011 @ 9:09am | Report comment
Brett,
We shouldn’t overly rely on that theory either – before last Saturday night, we hadn’t lost to Ireland at the world cup either!
September 20th 2011 @ 10:00am
Pot Hale said | September 20th 2011 @ 10:00am | Report comment
“before last Saturday night, we hadn’t lost to Ireland at the world cup either!”
Sheek, I must confess to a certain sneaky thrill when I read sentences like that.
And I’m so looking forward to being asked that perennial question, when was the last time Ireland won a match against a SANZAR team away from home? Oh, eh let me think now….
September 20th 2011 @ 7:09pm
Muzza said | September 20th 2011 @ 7:09pm | Report comment
Brett, I think everyone’s preferred journey to the RWC final involves another team knocking out NZ in the Semi. Especially if it is France who would use all their powder in the effort.
September 20th 2011 @ 10:00am
Kuruki said | September 20th 2011 @ 10:00am | Report comment
South Africa sent a non event to New Zealand and Australia for the first two games of the Tri Nations. Does this not count as throwing a match??
Japan selected a second string side against the All Blacks is this not also exactly the same?
No team is going to go onto the field and hope to loose. That is not going to happen. But coaches may decide to throw out a second string side to use this as a opportunity for game time, knowing that a loss would not be such a bad thing should it occur. It happens all the time when the result does not outweigh the need for players to rest or others to be given a run. To think these acts have no bearing on the result of games is moronic imbecility.
September 20th 2011 @ 11:08am
Riccardo said | September 20th 2011 @ 11:08am | Report comment
Brilliant Pothale. Dingo Dean awarded Convict for Life status by Gillard. Superb!
September 20th 2011 @ 9:07am
sheek said | September 20th 2011 @ 9:07am | Report comment
Brett,
Lack of consistency will drag this Wallabies team down, as evidenced by its loss to Ireland.
And the inconsistency comes from flaws in the team’s overall structure, starting with a front-row that struggles to gain parity with the opposition, & cascades outwards from there. And those two great playmakers – Genia & Cooper – showed their youth, immaturity & lack of alternate skills when not being allowed to play their natural game.
As if opposition teams are going to let you play the way you want!
I’m emotionally neutral about the Wallabies loss to Ireland, because I’ve never bought the tenuous idea that this is a great team. It has the potential perhaps to be great in the future. But it’s not great right now.
Anyway, with all the injuries & illnesses in the Wallabies camp, Deans might be forced to play most of his backups against USA. I would suggest the following team – Beale, Ashley-Cooper or O’Connor, Horne, Barnes, Mitchell, Cooper, Burgess, Palu, McCalman, Higginbotham, Simmons, Sharpe(c), Slipper, Polota-Nau, Ma’afu. Bench: McCabe, O’Connor/A-C, Phipps, Samo, Elsom, Alexander/Kepu, S.Fainga’a.
This would mean Horne, Barnes, Sharpe & Ma’afu getting their first appearance at this cup, while Mitchell, Burgess, Palu, Higginbotham, Simmons & Slipper would be getting their first run-on appearance.
That would leave Phipps & S.Fainga’a hoping to get their first appearance at this cup off the bench.
September 20th 2011 @ 9:27am
Brett McKay said | September 20th 2011 @ 9:27am | Report comment
Sheek, I think some changes have to made for this weekend even if only to confirm that the current first XV is the best team. So I’m not sure if there would be mass change (the USA are a decent defensive side themselves), but I wouldn’t be surprised to at least see elements of your team named..
(And Saia Fainga’a came off the bench late on Sat night, didn’t he??)
September 20th 2011 @ 10:22am
sheek said | September 20th 2011 @ 10:22am | Report comment
According to scrum.com, he was a listed reserve who didn’t take the field. However, I don’t recall him coming on. Obviously I wasn’t paying close attention by the end of the game…..
September 20th 2011 @ 10:50am
Brett McKay said | September 20th 2011 @ 10:50am | Report comment
I have to admit I reworded that question before hitting submit – I can’t recall either..
September 20th 2011 @ 11:46am
Handles O Love said | September 20th 2011 @ 11:46am | Report comment
I don’t think he did. But he should have. I think he should have started, and played 30-40 minutes, with TPN coming in later.
September 20th 2011 @ 11:53am
Brett McKay said | September 20th 2011 @ 11:53am | Report comment
Handles, the lineout throwing couldn’t have been much worse..
September 20th 2011 @ 11:28am
Justin said | September 20th 2011 @ 11:28am | Report comment
Logically you would like/need to give the B side a run this week, then play the A side in the last match to keep up their “touch” the week beofre the KO stages start.
Players under pressure to hold their A spot IMO are – AAC, AF, McCabe, Elsom, McCalman, Simmons, Kepu, TPN, Alexander.
AAC – one good match this year and not a whole lot else
AF – should be playing 12 but is always first subbed off so the 3 blind mice must have him in their sights
PM – great defense but precious little else and 2-3 crucial turnovers lost on w/e.
RE – lacking impact in attack and defnse, lineout good. Madness that he is playing 70+ minutes in his current form
BM – I dont mind him, he works hard but isnt top class. Feel he gets arough ride from the public and did more than Elsom on Saturday. Still no back up 7 isnt his fault
RS – Sharpe has it all over Simmons, simple as that. Despite what most say Sharpe constantly bends the line and gets us on the front foot. He is a mountain and always retains possesion
SK – he was buckling under a hell of a lot of scrums. He has a bent back and his butt is too high hence he is scrummaging down constantly.
TPN – just not fit or match fit to be playing 80mins in acrucail match – amazing he wasnt replaced at all on Saturday. We needed energy and SF would have provided that.
September 20th 2011 @ 9:14am
johnny-boy said | September 20th 2011 @ 9:14am | Report comment
I wouldn’t say the tournament has been turned on it’s head Brett. We always thought the tournament would turn up a few surprises. We just didnt want it to be us ! After Suncorp we thought we had finally turned the corner and Deans had finally got 90% of his selections right and the right captain. I quite like McCalman as a steady backup number 8 or 6 but as a 7 ? Insane. Just as insane as starting TPN or even considering Horne, or not getting Higginbotham on early (why does he hate Higginbotham ?) . Unfortunately Deans loves his favorite ‘projects’ even if it means sacrificing team success (cos obviously that doesnt concern him too much for obvious reasons).
.
I’m sure there will be a few more shocks to come in the Cup, hopefully we have had ours !. Life is patterned fractal growth and setbacks. First the initial surprising growth (up to Suncorp?), then irregular uncertain significant setback (Italy and Ireland ?), then very strong growth (towards the final ?), followed by irregular sideways sort of movement (close semi’s or quarters?), followed by a peak, which I hope is the final. Ha ha – it’s just a theory
How to keep the Wallabies focus a la Suncorp is the main problem. Deans and his co coaches are obviously incapable of it. Horwill is just new and will get the hang of it eventually but he needs big support from the senior players right now and he needs to ignore Deans weak soul destroying waffle. You see at Suncorp, Deans didnt have time to poison Horwills mind with all his babble. He just went out and lead the team on instinct and determination. I’ve seen this with the All Blacks, the less time Henry & Co have tp prepare with them often the better they play, one game against France the best example. Henry was so suprised as he said they had minimal preparation. He just couldn’t see it, not surprisingly. So boys, shove Deans out the back and just do it, for yourselves, your family, your country and even just a little for your long suffering fans (emphasis on the suffering). We know you can do it, so do it !
ps Quade for gawds sake stop prancing round like a show pony and kick the bloody ball downfield when faced with multiple defenders will you. This really brasses us off and makes you look like a fool..
September 20th 2011 @ 10:00am
Tissot Time said | September 20th 2011 @ 10:00am | Report comment
johnny-boy in retrospect the lesson from Suncorp should not be the result and the great first half performance but how quickly the Wobblys surrendered a 17 point lead in such a short time and how the ABs did it.
Methinks there would have been a certain complacency in the Wobbly change room at half time on the weekend. Ground Hog Day if you will in being level at half time. Were’t we 6 all against Italy last week and then what happended?
September 20th 2011 @ 10:22am
johnny-boy said | September 20th 2011 @ 10:22am | Report comment
TT – I’ll say it again. They took their foot off the pedal. You’ll understand this as kiwis use this excuse all the time. We do complacency particularly well tho. We probably have the IRB number one ranking for it, especially since the walking blamange took over as coach
September 20th 2011 @ 10:39am
Tissot Time said | September 20th 2011 @ 10:39am | Report comment
johnny-boy whether they took the foot off the pedal or not the ABs changed their game plan and became more direct through the forwards. Yes, take the Wobblys on in the forwards especially when they take their foot off the pedal. What I saw on the weekend was that the Wobblys were stuck in cruise control. Ground Hog Day.
September 20th 2011 @ 9:43am
Gary Russell-Sharam said | September 20th 2011 @ 9:43am | Report comment
I wished for a better performance by the Wallabies but I’m not surprised by their defeat by the Irish. It is in perfect keeping with the overall performances by the Wallabies over the last 4 years. They win one or a couple then implode, I read on another post a question on Deans’s discipline or his respect by the younger members of the team. The question was that Deans doesn’t appear to have much respect shown to him by the younger members and they don’t seem to listen to him or follow the game plan (if there is a game plan?). I have to say I’m tending to look at this with a view to saying this could be quite on the cards. Deans coaching persona seems to be very stodgy and loath to change and you get the feeling that he is not connecting with members of the team. To be a successful coach you have to get inside the heads of your team and be on the same wave length, there has to be a connection. The team have to listen to what you are saying and they have to believe in what you are saying for there to be some success. I’m starting to come to the belief that Deans doesn’t have that connection when it comes to the Wallabies, he seems dumbfounded by the performances of his team and I have to think he doesn’t have the answers. I have seen a scenario like this many times where you have a great coach with a great team but they just don’t get the results that they should then the coach changes and they click. Some what like Mackenzie with the Reds. I’m not saying that Mackenzie is the panacea that will solve these maybe real or not real problems but I’m tending to think that Deans is not the coach for the Wallabies that we might have hoped for, not doubting his ability, but doubting his and the Wallabies lack of combination.
September 20th 2011 @ 10:03pm
ThelmaWrites said | September 20th 2011 @ 10:03pm | Report comment
Two sentences stand out in my memory:
Ewen Mckenzie on the Reds: “They are teachable.”
Digby Ioane on Deans: “I want to play for him.”
September 20th 2011 @ 10:07pm
mother teresa said | September 20th 2011 @ 10:07pm | Report comment
GRS. you are of course right.deans 3yr build up for rwc was irrelevant nonsense billed as the youthful.disciplined side timed to make their run perfectly for 2011 rwc..samo,vickerman;and oconnor make mockery of this supposed foundation.added to that is the dumping of his capt weeks before rwc and the non selection of a back up no 7.such consistency is unreal.gone from 2 no 7s on field last year agst SA to only one in rwc squad.looney tunes or gifted?
getting nowhere? a bit confused?well why not copy what the reds a doing successfully and grab their capt to make sure it transforms to wallabies.
one problem with piggybacking is deans is not part of the successful culture and has trouble organising a bench let alone the charisma required for team harmony.suggestions from within are deans is a richard not a robert.
September 20th 2011 @ 9:47am
Ryan O'Connell said | September 20th 2011 @ 9:47am | Report comment
Brett, I know you answered this question last week, but in light of our performance against Ireland, I would once again argue that our centres combination are currently glorified dummy runners in attack.
I know you’re against moving O’Connor into 12, but what about giving Berrick Barnes some game time? His measured, cool head could be the perfect antidote to Quade’s rush of blood decisions.
Dare I say it, Giteau could have been useful in this department too. But we won’t go there. . .
September 20th 2011 @ 10:17am
Brett McKay said | September 20th 2011 @ 10:17am | Report comment
Ryan, I think Barnes certainly comes into calcs now, yes. I mentioned in the Q&A last Friday that as much as I can’t fault the current thinking for the centres, it wouldn’t at all surpise me if (and I’d be just as happy with) a Barnes-McCabe/Fainga’a/Ashley-Cooper centre pairing is where we end up..
September 20th 2011 @ 10:28am
sheek said | September 20th 2011 @ 10:28am | Report comment
Brett,
I actually agreed with your reasoning re McCabe & Fainga’a in your reply to Ryan last week. But it still had the look of a “temporary” fix about it.
For a long time now I’ve believed it was necessary to have Barnes at 12 to complement & control Cooper. The Barnes-Cooper combo offers a lot – twin attacking options from midfield; Barnes can kick when things are tight; Barnes is a good defender; Barnes can control Cooper’s excesses.
I’m not saying it’s the ideal combo, but probably the best we could have at present. Besides, it draws on the Ella-Hawker example of long ago.
Ryan,
Re Giteau, if you watched him these past 12 months or more, he had become a shadow of his former self. The harder he tried, the more confused he became in everything he did. In all honestly, he just didn’t have it anymore. Besides, not having Gits in NZ is the least of the Wallabies’ problems.
September 20th 2011 @ 10:44am
Ryan O'Connell said | September 20th 2011 @ 10:44am | Report comment
Sheek, I completely agree that Gits had become a shadow of his former self, but I found it hard to fathom that he still wasnt’t in the best 30 players in Australia. Be that as it may, he’s not, and it’s time to move on. I probably shouldn’t have even mentioned it.
My point is that our centre combinations lacks potency and a cool head in attack. I think McCabe and Fainga’a, whilst I like them both, are too similar in their style. I think it’s time for Barnes to get a run.
September 20th 2011 @ 10:48am
Brett McKay said | September 20th 2011 @ 10:48am | Report comment
Sheek, I’d agree with that, the temporary feel, but with all the attacking options around them, it just made sense, much like having a specialist 9 and another centre on the bench made sense, becuase all the utility options are already on the field.
But there’s always been a lot to like about Berrick Barnes at 12..
September 20th 2011 @ 1:36pm
sheek said | September 20th 2011 @ 1:36pm | Report comment
Brett/Ryan,
What’s that saying about keeping something to the point of failure?
Deans probably knew that McCabe/Fainga’a weren’t his ideal or preferred centre pairing, but while the team was winning, & Barnes & Horne were working overtime on their fitness, he had to run with it.
Besides, Ashley-Cooper was required firstly to cover O’Connor’s indiscretion, & then Ioane’s injury, freeing up a centre berth.
And as you say Brett, with attacking options inside & out, Deans could afford to use McCabe & Fainga’a as “crash-ball” runners.
But since it all went to mush against Ireland, Deans will be forced to reassess.
Ryan,
I guess once it became obvious Giteau was no longer a 1st XV player, & his only remaining value was utility, he was definitely on the outer.
The other thing to consider is that Barnes can do what Giteau used to be able to do, & currently is doing it better (well, in club footy anyway).
September 20th 2011 @ 3:02pm
Ryan O'Connell said | September 20th 2011 @ 3:02pm | Report comment
Yeah, I’m not sure how much you can read into Barnes form for Sydney Uni, but it’s better than him not playing well at all.
And I think you’re slightly downplaying Gits utility value – the ability to legitimately cover 9, 10 and 12 shouldn’t be sneezed at.
But my mail is that Gits omission had nothing to do with his form anyway. It was more to do with him questioning Deans in front of the squad on numerous occasions.
September 21st 2011 @ 7:25am
Capital said | September 21st 2011 @ 7:25am | Report comment
sheek agree on a number of issues
Cooper Barnes is the only way forward. You cannot play RWC knock out rugby with sole reliance on a player like Cooper – he is too erratic, bordering on brilliant and mercurial at times, and other times a complete certified idiot.
Add to that a very inexperienced centre pairing – both of whom are very good players in their own right; and you are asking for upsets.
Our back 3 even with bench changes is always our strong point.
Barnes to 12, Faiinga / McCabe share 13
11 14 JOC, Ioane, Mitchell, AAC 15 Beale
On Giteau, he has been past it for a while, his form this year was impressive in an immature side, but his place in the wallabies has never been secured.
I appreciate he may be in our best 30, but is he in our best 3 for 10 12 13? I would say no to all 3.
We have already struggled to give players match time who require it – Mitchell, Horne, Palu.
I think a bigger issue is Deans use of his bench. Again, I thought he had it until the Ireland game – but at 55 60 65 we should have been ringing changes – TPN was shot from 40, rotate a centre out, bring JOC into 12, Higginbotham on for McCalman. So obvious during the game !!!
If there is any good news, this mob are now sudden death – and if that doesn’t put that on edge to play committed rugby, I will be supporting the ABs through the finals – because these guys are one more pathetic effort from joining us in Australia.
September 21st 2011 @ 9:01am
Justin said | September 21st 2011 @ 9:01am | Report comment
A great match day coach like Kevin Sheedy (AFL) would have been laughing at the lack of flexibility shown by the AUS coaches on Saturday night.
September 20th 2011 @ 9:51am
Cap'n China said | September 20th 2011 @ 9:51am | Report comment
BRETT – if Barnes does really well against the Eagles at 12 will Deans think about trying him at 10 against Russia with a view to keeping him there for the Boks game? Would Queensland secede if he did this? If Horne does well, might Deans stay with him and play JOC at 12 to get some spark going? Lastly, what are the chances of Sharpe replacing Vickerman? Sharpe’s great in the lineout and always gets across the gain line carrying. What’s your call on the best 15 these days assuming Digby is okay to play in the quarters?
September 20th 2011 @ 10:04am
Kuruki said | September 20th 2011 @ 10:04am | Report comment
Dean’s will not drop Cooper for the big games. Deans knows someone like Barnes may be more composed but like previous encounters he does not have enough to get Australia over the line in the big games. Cooper is hit and miss, and Deans needs him to hit if he wants to win this world cup.
September 20th 2011 @ 10:27am
Brett McKay said | September 20th 2011 @ 10:27am | Report comment
Cap’n, my answer to Ryano above probably covers you too – I think the perference will be to keep Cooper at 10, and I’m pretty comfortable with that, but Barnes would certainly be an option at 12 now. Reckon we’ll see Cooper-Barnes in play for the US and Russia games with a view to them leading the attack into the KO stage.
The best XV? Probably what we saw in Brisbane, and also against Italy would be pretty close to the first choice XV, albeit with the midfield tweaks that I think we’re all expecting now…
September 20th 2011 @ 11:49am
Handles O Love said | September 20th 2011 @ 11:49am | Report comment
The last 5 years should tell us that when Sharpe takes the field, the scrum gets WORSE. We can’t afford worse. We can’t even afford consistency!
September 20th 2011 @ 1:40pm
sheek said | September 20th 2011 @ 1:40pm | Report comment
Cap’n China,
I believe this is exactly what Deans should do – play Barnes at 12 beside Cooper against USA, then at 10 against Russia to give Cooper a rest.
Not with a view of replacing Cooper, but being familiar playing at 10 should Cooper get injured. I have no doubt the best 10/12 combo for the quarters and onwards, should it continue, is Cooper & Barnes.
Ashley-Cooper should return to 13, Beale & Genia are set at 15 & 9, Ioane should return to one wing, leaving O’Connor & Mitchell to dispute the remaining wing position.
September 20th 2011 @ 5:56pm
Bob McGregor said | September 20th 2011 @ 5:56pm | Report comment
Sheek I like your backline except for AAC at OC – I continue to believe Horne is the man – strong,fast and doesn’t shirk defence. A brave player. AAC tucks the ball under his ‘wing’ and telegraphs to defenders he will not pass it no matter what. Defenders know how to tackle at this level and a turnover is often the result. A bench player in my eyes.
I’m of the opinion that Barnes, Horne, Mitchell, TPN, Palu, Higgenbottom and Sharpe must play in the next two games – possibly Burgess as well to get game time before the KO stage.If we can’t beat USA & Russia in our final pool matches with these players pushing for a permanent starting position in the A team – then we don’t deserve to progress further.
Time for player accountability as I expressed in an earlier posting.
September 20th 2011 @ 10:18am
Frank said | September 20th 2011 @ 10:18am | Report comment
Good question CC. Brett? Your best 15?
September 20th 2011 @ 10:51am
Brett McKay said | September 20th 2011 @ 10:51am | Report comment
“Probably what we saw in Brisbane, and also against Italy would be pretty close to the first choice XV, albeit with the midfield tweaks that I think we’re all expecting now…”