Restore the faith Robbie Deans
Columnist By David Lord, 7 Jun 2012 David Lord is a Roar Expert
- Tagged:
- robbie deans, Rugby Union, scotland rugby, wallabies
159 Have your say
2,558 readsIt’s a sad indictment on last Tuesday night’s Wallabies that I had more faith in them than they had in themselves. Admittedly, the conditions against Scotland in Newcastle were atrocious for the entire 80 minutes.
But it was the same for both sides, and no excuse for the Wallabies to show no flair, no lateral thinking, and no urgency.
Constant kicking in previous internationals was replaced by persistent pick-and-go. And when that wasn’t working, it was replaced by more pick-and-go.
Aimless and fruitless.
The Wallabies should have won that Test by 20 points with the mountain of possession and territory they enjoyed. But they didn’t believe in themselves, nor trust each other.
Given the same conditions, the Alan Jones coached 1984 Grand Slammers would have beaten the conditions, and the opposition.
So too Bobby Dwyer’s 1991 Rugby World Cup champions and Rod Macqueen’s 1999 RWC winners, who also beat the British and Irish Lions in a three-Test series for the one and only time in 2001.
Adaptability and vision.
With forwards who delivered quick and controlled ball, half-backs who were incisive, and fly-halves who either made the break or swiftly sent supports on their way with perfect passes running onto the ball, and not having to reach high, or stop to take delivery with the pass behind them.
Elementary.
In 1984 it was Nick Farr-Jones and the mercurial Mark Ella in the 9-10 jerseys.
In 1991, Farr-Jones and Michael Lynagh; in 1999 George Gregan and Stephen Larkham; and the same in 2001, with Elton Flatley playing the third Test.
Great combinations that gave the Wallabies of the day positivity and thrust.
And crowd pleasers. That’s what Wallaby rugby used to be all about: making the entertainment dollar worth it.
That doesn’t exist any more. But it can. My faith hasn’t been totally destroyed.
Yet.
Come Saturday, let’s have the Wallaby pack hunting as one, delivering quick and controlled ball. And let’s have Genia positive and looking to run, not looking like the six years that Gregan overstayed his welcome, condemning the far better performed Chris Whitaker to the bench for 75 internationals, 49 of them for the full 80 minutes.
And let’s have a backline moving forward at Suncorp with BALL-IN-HAND.
The Wallabies did it in the second half against France at Stade de France in November 2010.
Down 16-14 at the break, playing ordinary rugby, the Wallabies piled on six superb tries to thump the then Grand Slammers 59-16, with 45 unanswered second half points.
So stop stuffing around men-in-gold and just do it against Wales. Unleash them, Robbie Deans.
- Explore:
- robbie deans, Rugby Union, scotland rugby, wallabies
June 7th 2012 @ 7:01am
RedSkippy said | June 7th 2012 @ 7:01am | Report comment
Take off the rose colored glasses. Still the same grey skies of Tuesday where I sit!
June 7th 2012 @ 7:19am
Handles said | June 7th 2012 @ 7:19am | Report comment
What is really depressing is that, the last time we played Scotland, they won. We enjoyed a mountain of possession, and played dumb, one dimensional rugby, and were beaten by a great defensive performance. I am overseas, and have not even seen this match, but know exactly what it will look like if I bother to watch when I get home.
June 7th 2012 @ 7:22am
David Lord said | June 7th 2012 @ 7:22am | Report comment
Handles, don’t watch it.
June 7th 2012 @ 7:44am
Justin2 said | June 7th 2012 @ 7:44am | Report comment
My suspicions have been realised!!!
Wayne Smith in the Australian wrote this morning –
“One wonders, for instance, why Deans bothers including Reds hooker Saia Faingaa in his match-day 22 if he has no intention whatever of using him. Better to suit up a battle-weary Tatafu Polota-Nau on the off-chance that Stephen Moore goes down.
And why was Pat McCabe not sent into the fray on Tuesday night? Deans stuck with him through the critical stages of the World Cup when everyone could see his lack of a passing game would completely stifle the Wallabies’ wide attack. Yet on an atrocious Newcastle night when a non-passing, hard-running inside centre could have been gainfully employed, McCabe sat shivering on the bench, also unused.”
After the Scotland match I wrote this on Spiro’s thread –
Justin2 said | June 6th 2012 @ 8:10am | Report comment
who knows mania but using just 3 of 7 (one was for injury) and taking off the linchpin of the scrum to be replaced by a LH is unfortunately not surprising.
Why does he continue to shun Saia? If you dont have faith in putting him on the field in tests (think back to Ireland RWC) then stop farking picking him in the squad. McCabe was made for last night and Harris should have been subbed out, as we made nothing from him all night.
And I also wrote this on the match thread –
“Justin2 said | 10:01pm | Report comment
Why continue to pick Saia if he has ZERO faith in him? Same thing v Ireland. fresh legs are needed and you may as well pick another hooker if you dont trust the one you have.
McCabe sat the bench while Harris did nothing all night. Those conditions are made for a big hard running centre!!!”
So ladies and gentlemen (loose term) the professional journo’s certainly do read what is said on here and do “take ideas” or use our thoughts in their own pieces!!!
June 7th 2012 @ 8:26am
Jono said | June 7th 2012 @ 8:26am | Report comment
I think it’s obvious that Deans has his favorites. He’s been like this for a while. Gives reason for inclusions of Simmons, McCalman, Phipps and a host of others. I think if he doesn’t like you, you’ve got buckleys of having a run, regardless of form or situation. Sharpe was in my mind our best lock last year, yet he seemed to always be on the outer and a lucky inclusion at best.
Same goes for Saia here. Given TPN’s injury concerns, and the obvious backlash that would result from not having a back up in the 22, Saia got given the bench spot. Only there in case of injury.
McCabe is a bit of an enigma in that sense then. He continued to use him despite his inefficiencies in the world cup, yet now that he has found some skills and form in 2012, he sits on the pine. Not surprising though considering the way things have played out over the last few years.
June 7th 2012 @ 9:58am
Jutsie said | June 7th 2012 @ 9:58am | Report comment
Hey justin can u post the whole article? I dont want to donate any money to the murdochs so cant read wayne smith’s article anymore.
June 7th 2012 @ 11:11am
Justin2 said | June 7th 2012 @ 11:11am | Report comment
Juts – easiest way is to go to the Australian and copy the article headline, whack it into google and then click on the link (usually one of the first) and it brings it up in its entirety.
June 7th 2012 @ 11:30am
Jutsie said | June 7th 2012 @ 11:30am | Report comment
Nice, thanks for the heads up.
June 7th 2012 @ 12:19pm
Handles said | June 7th 2012 @ 12:19pm | Report comment
It is actually a free article anyway, and one of Smith’s better efforts.
June 7th 2012 @ 12:25pm
Jutsie said | June 7th 2012 @ 12:25pm | Report comment
really? when I went to the Aus website, the article had the gold pass icon. But Justin’s method worked so I got to read it.
It is a good article, he hit the nail on the head about the expanded amount of tests including playing wales and the barbarians after the RWC. Honestly after the disappointment of the world cup neither the players or supporters would have had any interest in backing up for a test against wales.
June 7th 2012 @ 12:41pm
Justin2 said | June 7th 2012 @ 12:41pm | Report comment
I had the same as Juts, wasnt free when I looked
June 7th 2012 @ 12:38pm
Ash said | June 7th 2012 @ 12:38pm | Report comment
I can’t believe it. He has Horne and McCabe in the centres for saturday night.
This is a joke!
Deans has to go. We have to have an Aussie in the job.
June 7th 2012 @ 7:55am
kingplaymaker said | June 7th 2012 @ 7:55am | Report comment
This doesn’t worry me much: Scotland are the ideal team for a gale which effectively outdates the game to before the 2009 law interpretations changes and the whole game up there is suited to this kind of play. Also anyone who watched the Six Nations carefully would have seen that Scotland produced some of their best rugby in years: fully warm to international rugby against a first match Wallabies it wasn’t so hard.
In any case a team with Australia’s problem of player depth will always struggle to win with a weakened side and the ARU should have factored this into consideration when scheduling two matches in a week. Australia doesn’t have the playing depth to cope and this was proved here. It was a pretty bizarre move of the ARU to put out two half-strength Wallaby teams in one week against full-strength sides, after a weekend of Super rugby and with one training session. It also shows contempt that ferociously motivates the opposition: why do the ARU have such contempt for other rugby countries? It’s amazing that the ARU who set up this loss by crippling their own team will completely escape censure.
I would also say it tells us nothing about the debutants: no one can be expected to thrive in a first cap in these conditions. At least Tomane did well and Timani had a very high workrate, silencing their absurd critics.
What matters is whether Deans can beat the All Blacks: that’s what counts and will be the litmus test. Deans should also castigate the ARU in public for laying a trap for him like the scheduling of this test.
June 7th 2012 @ 8:04am
kingplaymaker said | June 7th 2012 @ 8:04am | Report comment
‘Deans was happy with the performances of rookie winger Joe Tomane and second-rower Sitaleki Timani so it is likely they will retain their places in the run-on side.
“They were trying conditions for a winger,” Deans said. “He (Tomane) looked to get involved and his impacts were good.
“Timani, in difficult conditions for a forward, was accurate, his frame was evident and he was effective around the contact.”‘
Deans must stick with these two on saturday.
June 7th 2012 @ 8:31am
Justin2 said | June 7th 2012 @ 8:31am | Report comment
Deans had a tougher than usual fixture, granted. But he is the one who attempted to get through Scotland with a less than 100% team. He gambled and lost, though the players must also take responsibility.
He now goes into Wales with half a team backing up 4 days later and a loss on his record. And an embarrassing loss at that.
June 7th 2012 @ 8:38am
kingplaymaker said | June 7th 2012 @ 8:38am | Report comment
‘But he is the one who attempted to get through Scotland with a less than 100% team.’ That was the ARU’s decision, not Deans’.
Also, those conditions were thought by some of the players the worst they had been in, like playing ‘in a hurricane’. I would like to see how his team does against Wales in a non-hurricane, and then against the All Blacks to make a judgement.
June 7th 2012 @ 8:43am
Shungmao said | June 7th 2012 @ 8:43am | Report comment
KPM, Timani’s work rate was on par with the front row for hit ups, was way off the pace for tackles made in the tight 5, below most forwards for number of rucks( but in seven he entered he cleared out well) These stats remain true even when you average out the less minutes he played. But as we know stats are just stats because if they were all the perfect indicators we would of won by 50 on Tuesday night. My issue with Timani is he doesn’t run with the ball in hand aggressively, he lumbers into contact and gets taken off his feet to quickly, he has strong leg drive but no balance and he still doesn’t understand that running on to the ball at depth at 120 kg of force will make a big difference, rather than running flat hit up lines. It is the tahs role to highlight and fix these areas of weakness, deans can’t do it in a 3 week test schedule. I honestly believe if Timani can up the aggression and more than just bend the line with ball carries but actually break the line more often he has the potential to be a successful Wallaby lock.
June 7th 2012 @ 8:48am
kingplaymaker said | June 7th 2012 @ 8:48am | Report comment
Shungmao I’d like to see Timani given more than the occasional absurd test such as this, in a Wallabies team that’s playing well, i.e. the chance that the regulars have repeatedly got. Then I think it will be easy enough to judge him. But that game was ludicrous, 54 minutes in a gale, the worst conditions possible. Maybe with a few matches he will get into his stride and do better and better. I think it would be better instead of everyone to write of their own debutants, to actually try and put some faith in them developing if given a run.
June 7th 2012 @ 11:19am
Justin2 said | June 7th 2012 @ 11:19am | Report comment
KPM those matches are made for the tight 5!
June 7th 2012 @ 2:00pm
jeznez said | June 7th 2012 @ 2:00pm | Report comment
sure are Justin – and great fun they are too!
June 7th 2012 @ 8:58am
Red Kev said | June 7th 2012 @ 8:58am | Report comment
I don’t know what game you watched to post “Timani had a very high workrate” with a straight face. To repost from yesterday:
My impression from watching the match was that Timani was anonymous. The only times I saw him where limpy falling into rucks. His “runs” were poor and to be honest less effective than Sharpe’s (who has been doing the same rumble to contact and drop for the last 10 years).
Contrary to popular opinion the scrum actually held up fine with Simmons and Sharpe in the second row. It didn’t come apart until Palmer was replaced by Alexander for the last 10 minutes.
Perhaps more importantly Simmons came on and did his job, i.e. made an impact. He made 2 or 3 good gains from his pick and drives and actually got the ball over the line which is more than anyone else can say.
I can only find one set of stats for the match at the moment – SMH / Rugbyheaven.
Timani had a very poor work rate 7 runs for 16m, 4 tackles and 7 ruck involvements in 55 minutes.
When compared to Sharpe (18 runs for 39m, 10 tackles and 17 ruck involvements in 83 minutes) and Simmons (6 runs for 19m, 4 tackles and 5 ruck involvements in 28 minutes).
I have never trusted any stat sites (nor people that post them as proof – I tend to trust my impression from watching a match instead), but I have never once sat down to make my own set, too much work.
As for Tomane – he did well with the limited chances he had to do anything, but it should also be noted that a defensive misread from him on the right wing allowed Scotland to make their only linebreak of the game. Not a sacking offence and certainly I would like to see him given another cap against Wales, but something to note and make sure he doesn’t do again.
June 7th 2012 @ 9:09am
kingplaymaker said | June 7th 2012 @ 9:09am | Report comment
RK Timani is here being compared to a player with over 100 caps and another with a decent amount of experience. With more experience I think a fairer comparison could be made. Also I think he should be given some mitigation for making what was more or less a debut in such unbelievable conditions. Some may write him off but I would like to see him have a run and get into his stride and then judge him then. Besides I think players once they have got this far should be given something of a run to be judged.
I’m keen to see what Tomane can do against Wales if there isn’t another hurricane.
June 7th 2012 @ 9:14am
Red Kev said | June 7th 2012 @ 9:14am | Report comment
So we should excuse poor performances from Wallabies on debut because they’re on debut? We should persist with a player who is performing worse than others because he’s newer?
Once he earns his spot in the Wallabies I’d be happy to give him a go. But he hasn’t performed even to Super Rugby standard this season. Being big isn’t enough. He has not been performing on the field at provincial level, there is no reason to suspect that will suddenly change at international level – especially not from inexperienced players (very experienced players often will – like AAC or Nonu who always seem to play better in national colours).
June 7th 2012 @ 9:19am
kingplaymaker said | June 7th 2012 @ 9:19am | Report comment
Yes, a new cap deserves leeway. He had a good workrate and wasn’t there long and there was a hurricane so he didn’t exactly have a great chance, nor way the team doing so well.
With a better situation in terms of the match and team performance and a run to move up to international rugby which is a higher level, then I would like to see how he does. He’s here now and should be given a run. Abandoning talent is not the way forward: giving it a fair chance and developing it is.
June 7th 2012 @ 9:28am
Red Kev said | June 7th 2012 @ 9:28am | Report comment
He might be there, but he’s there based on nothing more than size. He hasn’t performed at provincial level. Locks in Australia this year that have performed better than Timani run like this: Fardy, Carter, Pyle, Neville, Simmons, Wallace-Harrison, Douglas, Sharpe (I leave off Horwill because he’s injured). If Timani earned his spot he would be deserving of some leeway, but he hasn’t. If you reward poor performances you get more, and that is all Timani has turned in thus far in 2012.
Developing is not done in test matches, that is what Super Rugby is for.
June 7th 2012 @ 9:31am
kingplaymaker said | June 7th 2012 @ 9:31am | Report comment
Well we don’t agree on how well Timani has played so won’t get far down that route.
I think that he should be given another two tests against Wales now that he’s had one. Once injuries come along I think all the locks will actually get a good chance this year too.
June 7th 2012 @ 9:39am
Ben S said | June 7th 2012 @ 9:39am | Report comment
Can you stop saying that there was a hurricane please. There wasn’t a hurricane.
June 7th 2012 @ 1:11pm
apelu said | June 7th 2012 @ 1:11pm | Report comment
Whta have you been watching Red Kev? You probably had blinkers on, because Tomane has shown far more for the Brumbies than you have imagined. He’s not going to be perfcet in a whole game. You saw only the negative. what about the try he saved by getting back when Morahan couldn’t field a high kick? It’s a good thing you’d never come close to selecting the team, because you are obviously a very biased person and no aprreciation of skills and other aspects that make a great player!
June 7th 2012 @ 1:22pm
Red Kev said | June 7th 2012 @ 1:22pm | Report comment
Wind your neck in you scrub.
And learn to spell.
I addressed Tomane very briefly and said “As for Tomane – he did well with the limited chances he had to do anything.”
I mentioned the mistake he made because it was potentially costly and resulted in the only linebreak of the game by Scotland. If you don’t think that is a significant point in evaluating someone’s performance then you’re stupider than even your spelling would indicate.
June 7th 2012 @ 10:53am
Ben Farell said | June 7th 2012 @ 10:53am | Report comment
You will see Giant George North run over the top of Tomane.
June 7th 2012 @ 10:57am
kingplaymaker said | June 7th 2012 @ 10:57am | Report comment
No will see overrated North stepped by talented Tomane.
June 7th 2012 @ 1:21pm
Jutsie said | June 7th 2012 @ 1:21pm | Report comment
Ah so KPM your on the same page as me, size isn’t everything. We don’t need giant wingers just because the opposition does and the same goes for centres. Our strength has always been speed and flair in the backs not brute force, unfortunately due to injury and form we have neither atm.
June 7th 2012 @ 1:41pm
kingplaymaker said | June 7th 2012 @ 1:41pm | Report comment
Sadly not
!
June 7th 2012 @ 3:57pm
Ben Farell said | June 7th 2012 @ 3:57pm | Report comment
Overated haha. I can’t wait for North to smash Tomane in defense and in attack to prove to you that it is Tomane and friends who are horribly overated.
June 7th 2012 @ 2:24pm
bluerose said | June 7th 2012 @ 2:24pm | Report comment
i would rather have Timani playing instead of Simmons
June 7th 2012 @ 11:37am
jeznez said | June 7th 2012 @ 11:37am | Report comment
Red Kev, I said yesterday I didn’t trust the rugbyheaven stats and that I thought they looked low from my recollection of the game. I couldn’t force myself to watch the whole match again but just watched the first ten minutes and the last ten minutes before half time.
Timani -
Runs – 3. One in the the first ten minutes, 2 in the thirty thu forty period. Crossed advantage line twice, got given a bad ball behind the ruck in the other and we lost the ball when he has tackled and they drove over the top.
Tackles – only 1 but it was a beaut, absolutely smashed the guy and forced a turnover.
So far pretty low right? One turnover lost and one turn over won. That said the key general play stat I look for from my heavy second rower is the breakdown.
Rucks – 27 (remember this is just a 20 minute period of the game I was watching). 13 in the first ten minutes, 14 in the ten before half time. of those 27, I classified 7 as being strong high impact cleanouts, 17 as reasonable efforts and only three as weak. There were a further 7 times he arrived and elected not to commit and positioned in the post position.
I’m very happy with those numbers he was much more involved in the rucks than Sharpe (who I thought had one of his better games).
Got no idea how rugbyheaven can get it so wrong when I count 27 in twenty minutes and they count 7 in fifty five.
June 7th 2012 @ 11:43am
Red Kev said | June 7th 2012 @ 11:43am | Report comment
I imagine they don’t count defensive rucks.
It is either tackle/tackle assist, turnover, or ruck when in possession. I would hope they don’t count seagulling ruck involvements.
I still have the game on tape – I may check it out if I get bothered, but I bet for all money I find your figures inflated.
June 7th 2012 @ 11:58am
jeznez said | June 7th 2012 @ 11:58am | Report comment
So you think I’m a liar or just deluded?
He is definitely in 27 rucks and mauls in that period, the classification of what is strong, reasonable or weak may differ since that is interpretive and I’m positive on the guy while you are clearly not.
I stand by the total number. I rewatched those two ten minute sections with the remote in one hand and a pen in the other. I’m confident in the figures. If you want to tell me my figures are inflated then watch and count the involvements yourself.
I picked those periods to see him at his freshest – and since he went off fifteen minutes into the second half I thought the ten before half time would see him at his most fatigued.
Anyway – feel free to doubt my word all you like – it annoys me but as I say, I’m confident in the numbers I chucked up there.
June 7th 2012 @ 12:09pm
jeznez said | June 7th 2012 @ 12:09pm | Report comment
ps RK. I just went and took a look at the rugbyheaven stats – they quote 190 rucks in the entire match on the match stats page, if you sum the Wallaby ruck involvements from the team stats page there are only 126. Given that there is almost always more than one Wallaby in any ruck their numbers are clearly way off.
Feel free to bet me all the money that my figures are inflated though.
June 7th 2012 @ 12:15pm
Red Kev said | June 7th 2012 @ 12:15pm | Report comment
Sorry for the repost, but I guess you didn’t read it the first time.
I imagine they don’t count defensive rucks.
Or maybe (and here’s a shocking thought) you don’t get credit if you go off your feet.
June 7th 2012 @ 1:05pm
jeznez said | June 7th 2012 @ 1:05pm | Report comment
I saw you say they might not count defensive rucks. It is obvious given the vastly differing results that they use a different methodology – I took that as a given and didn’t think we needed to dwell on it.
Since you’ve brought it up again – I’ve looked at their numbers further and they record 126 rucks for the Aussies and 64 rucks for the Scots – their individual player ruck involvements match those two numbers perfectly so they must just count one person in each ruck that a team wins – you’d assume the first person to arrive but it may be more interpretive than that.
In my opinion the rugbyheaven ruck numberr is a pretty meaningless stat to try and judge workrate on since the later arriving players, and the opposition players in a breakdown have heavy influence on the ball security, speed of recycling and amount of effort being made.
I stand by my count as being a better guide to workrate. Indeed from watching live where I thought Timani was solid, based on the twenty minutes I re-watched last night I upgrade my opinon from solid to good.
June 7th 2012 @ 1:17pm
Red Kev said | June 7th 2012 @ 1:17pm | Report comment
And I posted that I didn’t trust any stat sites – and that is why, because they don’t tell you how they allocate the stats – for instance it is doubtful that tackle assist is counted too when it should be.
But since no other stat sites have anything that I can find, you can at least use the stats on Rugbyheaven comparitively. After all they are using the same criteria for everyone. If you say 7 rucks for Timani was in fact 27, then surely the same is true of Sharpe’s 17 and Simmons’ 5.
That is why I trust my impression from watching a match more, and watching it live I thought Timani was anonymous. I may rewatch and upgrade that to “okay”, but I doubt I can be bothered rewatching such a poor game, even if it is to win something as important as an argument on an internet forum.
June 7th 2012 @ 1:53pm
jeznez said | June 7th 2012 @ 1:53pm | Report comment
That’s alright in the meantime you can not re-watch it but suggest my figures are inflated.
To be fair I’m not even sure what the argument is anymore. I was trying to argue against the people who say Timani had a low workrate in that game – 27 breakdowns in 20 minutes is not a low work rate – it is actually a high work rate.
If the rugbyheaven overall stats are correct and there were 190 rucks in the game. That averages to 47 in a twenty minute period. They guy hit 27 in that period which is more than every second breakdown. It is a very good work rate no matter what anyone else did – whether they were better or not is not relevant to what I’m trying to argue.
I’m just saying the guy was not lazy and did exactly what I want him to which is to clean out breakdowns. If he was fit I would have kept him to start this weekend.
What are you trying to argue?
June 7th 2012 @ 9:07am
Red Kev said | June 7th 2012 @ 9:07am | Report comment
Litmus test? Are you on drugs? Deans is not a new coach testing the waters – he has had this group of players and this gig for four years now. We know what he can deliver against the All Blacks – 2 wins and 10 losses. If the Wallabies execute the basics with intensity and precision they can match the ABs like at Suncorp last year, but there is no specific plan or strategy to overcome the All Blacks, no tactical variation to try and expose or exploit weaknesses.
Deans is a poor coach for the Wallabies. He cannot communicate. And that is the ball game. He can’t articulate coherent messages to his players or to the media. It doesn’t matter if he has a great rugby brain if he can’t communicate. Whatever it is he does (and I am giving him the benefit of the doubt that he actually does anything) it clearly doesn’t work in Australia.
Obviously it worked in Canterbury, but he is a poor match for the Wallabies. There is no arguing that point. There are people who stubbornly believe Deans is the messiah (O’Neill for one, KPM for another) but he might well be; but he’s not the Wallabies’ messiah.
June 7th 2012 @ 9:10am
kingplaymaker said | June 7th 2012 @ 9:10am | Report comment
Hang on RK, if Deans can win the Bledisloe and Four nations he will be doing very well. That will be the test. If Australia did that they would be the number one team in world.
June 7th 2012 @ 9:30am
Red Kev said | June 7th 2012 @ 9:30am | Report comment
And if I can win the lottery I’ll be rich.
June 7th 2012 @ 9:31am
kingplaymaker said | June 7th 2012 @ 9:31am | Report comment
RK I’ll quote you if it happens.
June 7th 2012 @ 7:56am
Bellringer said | June 7th 2012 @ 7:56am | Report comment
Why would they chance themselves and attack all the time? Could you imagine the backlash if they did that and lost. Unfortunately they’re in a no win situation because of Australian rugby fans ridiculous expectations and their blatant disregard of the ability of other teams.
–
Comment left via The Roar’s iPhone app. Download The Roar’s iPhone App in the App Store here.
June 7th 2012 @ 8:04am
Uncle Argyle said | June 7th 2012 @ 8:04am | Report comment
Faith Lordy, faith. Without it what is the point of going on. Faith that things will get better. I am sure they will but its the method in which progess is achieved. I fear Robbie Deans might become a PDV type figure, the man JON wants and the team plays whatever type of rugby ‘they’ want.
I for one do not think we will win against Wales on Saturday.We are not right in the head! If you read my previous posts I did not think we would beat Scotland. The big difference between the great Wallaby sides and coaches you mentioned and this current side is the great teams were settled; we knew who the front row was, we knew the combinations were. Etc. I have been privy to some conversations with Red’s players who like Peter Slattery said its good to play for Australia but its great to play for Queensland.
Ewen McKenzie’s Reds have a wonderful team culture, they are a settled unit (injury free) and they play for the team and the fans. I can’t say the same about Robbie’s Wallabies. Yes there have been some great wins under Deans but also some monumental losses. The man has not achieved settled consistency in the Wallabies which were hall marks of great teams.
As Wayne Smith eluded to in yesterday’s Australian, it appears Robbie is never responsible for the failure’s of his team. We all know he is O’Neills man and O’Neill wants to save face. This is not a culture that is congruent with winning which is evident by the teams performances.
Have faith Lordy, like Job, we will go through much, loose everything and then it will come good again, much better than we expected if we keep the faith in the ‘Australian style of game’ and back ourselves. Maybe we should be saying to Robbie “Let my people go’!
June 7th 2012 @ 9:05am
sheek said | June 7th 2012 @ 9:05am | Report comment
Uncle Argyle,
General comment.
I do get amused when the positive-vibers tut-tut the nay-sayers over all their negativity, even when it’s intended to be constructive criticism.
I have it on hearsay the British generals & admirals in Singapore in 1941, had much the same attitude – “we can’t have people going around criticising our defences as hopelessly inadequate, lest it upset the general population”.
And we all know what happened there, don’t we?????
I would much rather any day, have some honest, in your face home-truths, than a pretence that all is okay. Because the first step in fixing a problem, is the ability to acknowledge it.
Australian rugby has some massive problems, evident since 2002-03, that it has continued to deny or pretend doesn’t exist. Some 8-9 years later, & we’re still muddling around…..
June 7th 2012 @ 9:44am
Uncle Argyle said | June 7th 2012 @ 9:44am | Report comment
Yes but unlike Singapore we are not surrendering and we are not under British leadership. This hole we find ourselves in is of our own doing. It is up to us to get out of it.
Now I am for honesty, but also moving forward in a positive manner. Honestly O’Neill is not up to it, nor Deans but my mail is the ARU and sub unions are petrified of the bloke. Why I will never know.
There is a problem and it is a cultural one. The All Blacks and New Zealand sporting public revere the game and the jumper. We do not. We have lost our perspective. We are not in Singapore man, we are run in a manner similar to that of an Austrian corporal bunkered down planning offencives with make belive armies. Compounded by non of his generals having the pills to pull him on.
Courage and faith Sheek is whats required otherwise these New Zealander’s will have it over us for another 10 years…bugger that!
June 7th 2012 @ 11:00am
sheek said | June 7th 2012 @ 11:00am | Report comment
The hole is most certainly our own doing.
Faith?
Our bright moments are like dotted islands in the vast Pacific ocean – few & far between – 1927, 1933-34, 1949, 1963, 1979-80, 1984-86, 1991-94, 1998-2002.
Our success has usually relied upon an exceptional group of players coming together at the same time. Hardly a sustainable system of dominance, don’t you think…..???
I rabbit on about a need to change the domestic structures simply because they haven’t been as historically grand as we would like to think they have…..!
June 7th 2012 @ 12:18pm
Uncle Argyle said | June 7th 2012 @ 12:18pm | Report comment
Sheek,
mate you are right that our domestic structure does not produce consistent success however there are factors which contribute to that.
1) – Rugby is not the game of the people as say AFL/Rugby Leauge is. Rugby is a niche sport in this countryand we should do more to protect our nurseries such as the GPS/CAS/CHS systems. AFL is now a sport at many of these schools. We do not have the cultural link nor financial clout to compete with the other codes. Solution defend what we have.
2) – Request entry of 2 or 3 Australian teams into the ITM cup. Pay the NZRFU a fee. It is a proven competition that will require little in the way of us organising but will obtain a benefit of exposing good grade players to a level of rugby currently void in the Australian domestic market. However I don’t expect the Kiwi’s to do us any favours as I remeber in 2003 the great Jon O’Neill dudded them out ofco- hosting RWC 2003. That little chestnut will probably come home to roost.
3) – Recognise that for Australian Rugby to be a success the Wallabies must win, often. These ‘cash-cow’ tests are blowing up in our face and show us loosing to lesser ranked sides like Scotland and Samoa and devaluing the Wallaby jumper becuase ‘Its just another test’ that the boys are getting paid $10K to win, loose or draw.
4) – Bring back the Dick Marks/PeterCrittle inspired national coaching development program that was developed circa 1975. Crittle and Marks may have their detractos but that coaching manual and development was no fluke. By 1977 we had a great schools team, we beat Wales & New Zeland in 1978 etc. You get the pucture. I know you do Sheek.
5) – Attract quality coaches to our shores now to bridge that gap. Guys like Jake White, Nick Mallett and Eddie O’Sullivan to coach provincially.
6) – Remove Jon O”Neill and his board and his coach. Move Jim Carmichael and Ewen McKenzie into their respective roles. No ego and no agenda apart from getting Australia to number 1 like they did with Qld in 2011.
7) – Employ a NO D*&K HEAD POLICY in the Wallabies. I don’t how good a player you may be if your a DH there is no place for you in our team.
Thats a start I reckon Sheek…if Pompey Elliott or Monash were alive I would get them on the board!
June 7th 2012 @ 3:40pm
rob said | June 7th 2012 @ 3:40pm | Report comment
Nice piece Unc. My theory has a few layers re the start of the Test season 2012.
1. The ARU need the money and they took the “gamble”
2. It was a bit of a Barbarians exercise for Deans. (I can’t reconcile Dean’s Crusaders record with his Wallabies record so far. perhaps the way NZ rugby youngsters are blue printed versus the Australian counterparts causes different responses, his talk of “mana” etc does not seem to get traction here? Mind you Jake White is getting some results which may mean that we are more closely aligned to the SA psyche than NZ?
3. Deans can’t play the game for them, no not a Deans apologist but I’ve always thought he was of the view here’s your chance son, step up, show your “mana’ a few newbies guided by some old heads for last Tuesday’s Test (dirt trackers, who by the way from memory have lost a few on past tours), so if you have what it takes son, let’s see it. I can’t believe every single player is on a robotic remote control instruction program and can’t use some initiative within the structure to get some go forward, “follow me chaps”
4. I also think the overall game plan such as it was, also has its roots in NZ rugby culture, stay focused keep driving, keep doing and our process will prevail and they will fall off, even if its in the last 10 minutes.
5. It seems to me Deans is still searching for a definitive game plan where the best combinations will emerge and produce music. To use a musical analogy all the members of Led Zepplin were competent musos before they came to LZ, but in combination they were HUGE. Maybe we got a glimpse of that v the French 45 unanswered points in the second half. I am sure Deans would love to get that kizmet again. I am sure its there, how does he unlock it because there are definitely some very good players in the Wallaby squad.
June 7th 2012 @ 3:33pm
jeznez said | June 7th 2012 @ 3:33pm | Report comment
Uncle A, “We are not in Singapore man” – I am!
June 7th 2012 @ 9:52am
stillmissit said | June 7th 2012 @ 9:52am | Report comment
Sheek totally agree. These problems were here before Deans and unfortunately it looks like they will be here when he’s gone.
It is a bit like what happened to communism, Rod McQueen starts off with a great idea and has fantastic results. The idea of strong defences and structured moves gets into the Wallabies DNA and Australian rugby. It then gets watered down by Eddie Jones into defend, don’t loose the ball and play the game down their end and I will judge you on stats. Then all we have left is a Russia gone broke.
When will the McQueen wall come down and a new wall built?
June 7th 2012 @ 9:13am
kingplaymaker said | June 7th 2012 @ 9:13am | Report comment
I disagree, how much has the ARU been blamed for its scheduling this test, making players roll out three days after Super rugby, after one training session and with a severely weakened team because of another match four days later?
June 7th 2012 @ 9:24am
sheek said | June 7th 2012 @ 9:24am | Report comment
KPM,
This is an isolated example. A case of too little criticism a little late in the saga.
These meaningless tests didn’t start this year. O’Neill has been using the Wallabies as a cash cow for some time now.
Meanwhile, more compelling problems such as low player participation numbers & archaic structures remain…..
June 7th 2012 @ 9:28am
kingplaymaker said | June 7th 2012 @ 9:28am | Report comment
sheek indeed though I fear arguments as sophisticated as yours are lost on the mindless mob that are Australian rugby supporters at moments like this. He really went too far in scheduling it in a way that weakened the team this time though.
I just saw Dave Gallop resigned: maybe he could solve this and all other problems? In fact, given that JON is supposed to go next year the timing of Gallop’s resignation is little coincidental.
June 7th 2012 @ 9:50am
Ian Whitchurch said | June 7th 2012 @ 9:50am | Report comment
Sheek,
“O’Neill has been using the Wallabies as a cash cow for some time now.”
Because of the crap crowds that rugby union gets at other levels, if he wants money to pay for development work and refill the coffers, he doesnt get a choice in this.
Regrettably, this means the test players want to be paid, as they are the ones generating the income.
There are, what, 8 games of non-club rugby union played in Sydney between February and July ? How do you expect to run a professional team on that ?
June 7th 2012 @ 9:57am
stillmissit said | June 7th 2012 @ 9:57am | Report comment
Ian Whitchurch – the sound of logic in a sea of ideas. We seem to be in a funnel and our income is being stifled by the size of the orifice constantly reducing.
It is in the hands of coaches to make the most of this Chinese puzzle that is the Wallabies.
I personally think speed is the answer for us but I am not sure there are a lot who agree. I am sick to death of slow controlled rugby.
June 7th 2012 @ 10:55am
sheek said | June 7th 2012 @ 10:55am | Report comment
Missit,
The famous American collegiate basketball coach John Wooden used to advise his players, “be quick but don’t hurry”.
In other words I guess – pace without panic.
June 7th 2012 @ 10:52am
sheek said | June 7th 2012 @ 10:52am | Report comment
Ian,
I have said elsewhere that not only the Wallabies, but also the Waratahs, Reds, Brumbies, Rebels & Force all need to play a more compelling game of rugby to get more fans through the turnstiles, & more kids playing rugby.
This is the quickest & best cost-effective way to turn around the misfortunes of Australian rugby.
But the message is lost on these pampered players & coaches…..
June 7th 2012 @ 12:09pm
sittingbison said | June 7th 2012 @ 12:09pm | Report comment
couldnt agree more sheek.
To Mitchells credit the Force did play with verve and contrary to popular belief also some modicum of success (Roar has not posted my article – come on Mods). Graham instituted a brain dead aimless kicking game and sacrificed the backs, result no success and unenthralling play that is starting to impact even the sea of blue. Thankfully Blake has gone back to ball in hand running and passing rugby, and we desperately hope the new coach continues that trend and comes up with a “Force Style” that suits the team and WA full of attacking endeavour.
I am devastated the Wallabies have also fallen into this malaise that is Tah. The Wallabies do not play grinding forward game they are meant to play fast attacking clever entertaining rugby. Live by the sword and die by the sword. If they lose playing with expected style and endeavour then so be it and I dont think we would see the storm of frustration we are seeing now. How did it all go so wrong at the RWC after 2010? Has the man lost his mettle? Something is not right in that team, and it needs to be sorted pronto.
And its not just missing attacking weapons Cooper Beale and Judas, there are other options that play with style (if less skillfully) they are just not being selected.
June 7th 2012 @ 8:05am
Jack said | June 7th 2012 @ 8:05am | Report comment
It looked to me that Genia has hypothermia He has very little experience in the cold that he faced on Tuesday. Pocock lives in Perth. He played a hard 80 minutes but was shivering when he came off. I’ve played football in that sort of weather and I’ve never come of shivering. I grew up in Cooma and played in Canberra. The guys were ambushed by the weather and good man management would have seen Genia replaced. His game was in slow motion and I;ll bet his body temperature was too low for him to think properly. He’s a world class player and has won tests for us. Get off his back. The Wallabies are specials to beat Wales.
June 7th 2012 @ 8:06am
Jerry said | June 7th 2012 @ 8:06am | Report comment
It did show a fair bit of inexperience how few Wallabies were wearing any extra layers.
June 7th 2012 @ 8:40am
Justin2 said | June 7th 2012 @ 8:40am | Report comment
Not a bad point actually Jerry. My memory has only Morahan with skins on…may have been one or two others?
June 7th 2012 @ 8:42am
Ben S said | June 7th 2012 @ 8:42am | Report comment
I’d swap the word inexperience for stupidity. Surely the coaches would have insisted on them? Also, whatever happened to those handling gloves that were so vogue around 2003?
June 7th 2012 @ 9:03am
Jono said | June 7th 2012 @ 9:03am | Report comment
Digby and Barnes were wearing the skins too from memory.
I think the gloves went with Wendall Sailor once his tenure finished up.
June 7th 2012 @ 9:59am
stillmissit said | June 7th 2012 @ 9:59am | Report comment
BenS I am pretty sure I saw the base of Harris’ boots and he had those cleats on in that weather. Stupidity to the max.
June 7th 2012 @ 10:06am
Jutsie said | June 7th 2012 @ 10:06am | Report comment
If thats true that is ridiculous. When morohan was show on the screen my flatmate commented that all the players should be wearing skins and gloves and I responded “any bet a few of them are stupid enough to wear moulded boots instead of long sprigs”
June 7th 2012 @ 9:15am
STU said | June 7th 2012 @ 9:15am | Report comment
JACK,Genia is world class but a fair weather personality which includes climate;you are right.
June 7th 2012 @ 9:21am
jameswm said | June 7th 2012 @ 9:21am | Report comment
It’s a big issue. My 12yo kid had to do running training last night, in abominable weather (wet, a bit windy, and 10 degrees). Despite warming up in full trackie, wearing a long sleeved t-shirt over a short sleved one and a singlet, and knee length skins under his shorts, he said he (esp his legs) were freezing the whole session, and he couldn’t function properly.
You’d think professionals would be aware of this and take the necessary precautions.
June 7th 2012 @ 8:06am
rabbitfan said | June 7th 2012 @ 8:06am | Report comment
Your right Lordy, this is a team of robots that cant think for themselves, no plan B or C, If Deans didnt see the obvious at halftime Should Pocock have taken it upon himself in the 2nd half and say to the team Bugger it Lets get it out to the backs this isnt working. Would he have had the balls to do it? I wonder.
June 7th 2012 @ 8:19am
Fetus said | June 7th 2012 @ 8:19am | Report comment
Your man timani was a passenger all night kpm he does not deserve another chance. He locked well in the scrum but was USELESS around the field. There are better options then him but he isn’t the only problem
–
Comment left via The Roar’s iPhone app. Download The Roar’s iPhone App in the App Store here.
June 7th 2012 @ 8:40am
kingplaymaker said | June 7th 2012 @ 8:40am | Report comment
He had a very high workrate in his first test in a year and only second, played only 54 minutes and took part in a match played in a hurricane. He did well and should get another chance in a reasonable test match instead of a joke like this.
June 7th 2012 @ 8:42am
Justin2 said | June 7th 2012 @ 8:42am | Report comment
He wasnt the worst but I oukdnt say his work rate was “very high”. Someone else flashed the stats v Simmons and he had more in half the time.
June 7th 2012 @ 8:43am
Ben S said | June 7th 2012 @ 8:43am | Report comment
What did he do well? You’re being typically vague.
June 7th 2012 @ 11:44am
jeznez said | June 7th 2012 @ 11:44am | Report comment
I’ve chucked some numbers higher up the thread – Timani’s breakdown work rate was excellent in the twenty minutes I could force myself to go back and watch.
June 7th 2012 @ 8:33am
Riccardo said | June 7th 2012 @ 8:33am | Report comment
David,
I would argue they had too much faith in themselves and not enough respect for the opposition.
I really hope the All Blacks don’t make the same mistake. It’s one we’ve made before and the French, for one, have made us pay.
I think all the finger-pointing is unhelpful too. Understandable but unhelpful.
As a Blues supporter let me assure you that the surest side-effects of complacency and entitlement are the absence of urgency and comraderie, the ability to execute a game-plan or the on-field leadership to right the ship when she’s being battered. Playing with and for each other in the cauldron with patience and belief.
Saturday is an opportunity. But if the blame game continues to dominate the necessary analysis the Welsh, who are licking their lips right now, will dish out more punishment.