RATHBONE: Rugby Championship shapes as an awesome series
Columnist By Clyde Rathbone, 26 Jun 2012
116 Have your say
3,377 reads
New Zealand's Piri Weepu (centre) stands as he leads the Haka before the start of the match. AAP Photos
Related coverage
Despite an appallingly unimaginative name, the upcoming Rugby Championship is shaping up as mouth-watering treat for rugby fans.
Argentina’s introduction into the competition has added spice to what was becoming a dated Tri Nations. In recent years the Argies have shown that on their day they’re able to claim the scalps of the best in the Northern Hemisphere.
The challenge they face will be lifting their game to compete with the three southern hemisphere heavyweights. There can be little doubt that the championship will boost the standards of rugby in Argentina to new heights.
Which brings us to the form of the Wallabies, Springboks and All Blacks.
The Wallabies were pushed hard by Wales, survived an almighty scare two weeks in a row and have yet to consistently produce the type of rugby that captured the Tri Nations last season. But the Welsh series has produced some encouraging signs.
David Pocock has shown his leadership metal and it’s been impressive, it’s clear that the group respect him greatly and he’s exhibited calmness under pressure that is a fine cue for what is still a young international team. Leading the team has clearly done nothing to hamper the effectiveness Pocock’s play. He has been simply outstanding.
With our forward pack relatively settled and with many big names due to return from injury it will be interesting to see how Robbie Deans and his selectors juggle the composition of our backline.
Our current selections have limited our ability to play with the type of width that best suits our style. JOC is a key figure in addressing this and ensuring he receives plenty of ball in play making positions should be a priority.
Our lack of depth means that to be competitive in the RC we cannot afford a litany of injuries in the later part of Super Rugby. Injury free and with our best on the park we’re a great chance to stick some silverware in the cabinet in 2012.
South Africa showed against England that they will adopt an aggressive and typically Springbok style of play. The power running of their forwards dominated England and though lacking in subtlety the effectiveness of such raw physicality cannot be ignored.
The Bok backline is dominated by names that have been around for some time and while vastly experienced it appears to lack the penetrative qualities their AB or Wallaby counterparts. At home the Boks will be brutal but could well fail to deliver on the road.
Unsurprisingly, the All Blacks will enter the championship as the frontrunners.
Their punishing deconstruction of Ireland reminded all that this AB team is still ranked number one in the world. The backline depth in NZ is astonishing and injury to Dan Carter has done little to unsettle the AB juggernaut.
If there is a current weakness in NZ rugby it’s in the possibility that they may fail to identify their premier combinations. Sometimes choice is a double-edged sword, and no coach has more difficult choices than Steve Hansen.
So whilst there is still the small matter of Super Rugby to focus on it’s exciting to begin to preview some classic match-ups due in August.
Former Wallaby Clyde Rathbone has returned to Super Rugby with the ACT Brumbies, following an injury-forced retirement from all forms in 2009. He writes guest columns for The Roar, and will blog his journey back to professional rugby in 2013.
- Explore:
- All Blacks, Clyde Rathbone, Rugby Union, The Rugby Championship, wallabies
June 26th 2012 @ 4:00am
The Werewolf said | June 26th 2012 @ 4:00am | Report comment
I think the addition of Beale into fullback, despite that he was rusty, was what the doctor ordered going forward with two play makers and two straight running powerful tackling centres.
Playing two running centres has brought us in line with all the other big boys and i do hope we do not go backwards.
Playing with width against a side like the welsh who spread out the length of the field is not the answer. Having patience and doing the hard work up the middle to manipulate times when the opposition defensive line is short out wide is the key. Just playing with width would’ve been playing into their hands.
June 26th 2012 @ 7:31am
Justin2 said | June 26th 2012 @ 7:31am | Report comment
WW – how come Beale in his first match back was able to employ a run around move with Sharpe to create doubt and width which put Barnes into a gaping hole yet we saw none of this VERY simple play from virtually anyone else. Remember there is no combo with Beale and sharpe but they were able to perform this on the fly.
I am staggered at how absolutely uninspiring our back play is. It is so far from acceptable it’s not even funny.
By just bashing it up we just played into their hands. You can’t do just one thing. The lack of variety in attack leaves so many questions about the coaches.
June 26th 2012 @ 11:49am
redsnut said | June 26th 2012 @ 11:49am | Report comment
Agreed. It has become standard that when one of the centres gets the ball he’s just going to run at the opposition and die. In fact, in the last match, that’s all any of the back 5 did most of the time.
And Beale wants to keep that silly back-flip pass for when the recipient is ready for it, instead of doing it willy-nilly.
June 26th 2012 @ 4:43pm
Mike said | June 26th 2012 @ 4:43pm | Report comment
I saw a lot of good passing combinations by the Wallabies back-row, particularly in that last test.
You have to give credit to the Welsh – their defence was stretched but they did a very well to hold our backs out most of the time. And the Welsh clearly are good defenders – very few tries were scored against them in 6N
June 26th 2012 @ 4:57pm
The Werewolf said | June 26th 2012 @ 4:57pm | Report comment
We won didn’t we?
June 26th 2012 @ 10:30pm
Sneaky Samurai said | June 26th 2012 @ 10:30pm | Report comment
It must have pleased Mark Ella no end to see Beale do the wrap around.
He’s been banging on about it for aeons in his weekly Weekend Australian column. Long may more of this sleight of hand continue!
June 26th 2012 @ 3:57pm
Kuruki said | June 26th 2012 @ 3:57pm | Report comment
Werewolf. I agree you have to earn the right to go wide, but in saying that i really don’t think those two running tackling centres have the ability to go wide even when it is earned. A brilliant back three is useless with that current midfield.
June 26th 2012 @ 4:54pm
The Werewolf said | June 26th 2012 @ 4:54pm | Report comment
Your living in the past. Beale si the second receiver. We just have two running centres instead of one. It’s a better formation.
June 26th 2012 @ 5:05pm
Justin2 said | June 26th 2012 @ 5:05pm | Report comment
Not so far, they’ve barely looked like scoring in 3 tests. Regale me with a move scored by the backs that invloved more than one pass or an individual like Genia making something from nothing?
Yes we won at home to a side that by most fair pundits was not playing that well. Its great we are winning (though we lost to Scotland) but we serve up predictable uncreative stuff like we just have in the 4N and who will we beat?
June 26th 2012 @ 5:14pm
Mike said | June 26th 2012 @ 5:14pm | Report comment
“they’ve barely looked like scoring in 3 tests” – surely the quality of the defence has to be consdiered, or this is just a meaningless statistic, in any match?
June 26th 2012 @ 5:18pm
The Werewolf said | June 26th 2012 @ 5:18pm | Report comment
We’ll beat all the rugby championship sides this year at home and perhaps 2 of them away to be realistic.
The welsh IMHO have one of the best defensive structures there is. We scored more tries than the rest of the 6 nations combined against them.
It’s test match rugby not the rabbitohs v panthers…
it’s rarely going to be the try-a-thon you hope. Even the all blacks the week before last against the woeful ireland almost lost and struggled to score tries. That’s what happens in test match rugby.
Every now and then it will all go our way, remember France 18 months ago, but there will be series and games where defences reign supreme.
June 26th 2012 @ 5:43pm
Demon Dez said | June 26th 2012 @ 5:43pm | Report comment
We couldn’t even beat Scotland at home… do u really expect us to win all RC home games this year? Dream on… The All Blacks didn’t “almost lose” to Ireland… they almost drew 19-19 all, until Carter’s dropped goal…
June 26th 2012 @ 5:55pm
Mike said | June 26th 2012 @ 5:55pm | Report comment
Why not? Anything is possible. In 2011 Australia lost to Samoa (which I think was ranked 9th at the time), but then proceeded to win both matches against SA and one match and one loss to All Blacks, to take the 3N trophy. I wouldn’t rule out anything.
June 26th 2012 @ 6:01pm
biltongbek said | June 26th 2012 @ 6:01pm | Report comment
Mike that was last year, you pummeled a second rate Springbok side at home, a non first XV NZ side, and then barely survived the SA onslaught in durban, was it not for our inability to finish you would have lost that match.
June 26th 2012 @ 6:25pm
Mike said | June 26th 2012 @ 6:25pm | Report comment
Bek, its not my aim to put down the Springboks, but I think our record against them over the past two or three years speaks for itself, not just in one series.
My point was merely that the Wallabies are unpredictable and are capable of beating any team on their day, regardless of whether they lose to Samoa or Scotland a month before, therefore no-one should make firm predictions now about what will happen in August-September this year.
If it makes you feel better to believe otherwise, go right ahead. We will all know in a few months, one way or another.
June 26th 2012 @ 9:29pm
biltongbek said | June 26th 2012 @ 9:29pm | Report comment
Beat everyone at home?
Not sure about that mate, the Wallabies will have to step up to do that.
Two sides away?
Meh, maybe Argentina, SA will be a different ball game, that draw did us more good than harm.
June 26th 2012 @ 9:30pm
Ben S said | June 26th 2012 @ 9:30pm | Report comment
‘The welsh IMHO have one of the best defensive structures there is. We scored more tries than the rest of the 6 nations combined against them.’
It’s not really as simple as that. 3 games at home is different to one game either home or away. 3 games gives sides the opportunity to really size each other up and get a grip with each other and the respective structures. Given that a lot of Welsh players hadn’t played a game of rugby in months, and given the fact that Australia had recently beaten Wales with something approaching comfort, 5 tries is not really that much of an achievement. England only conceded 4 tries during the 6N, so they were better defensively than Wales, and look how many tries SA scored against them.
June 26th 2012 @ 9:47pm
biltongbek said | June 26th 2012 @ 9:47pm | Report comment
“Look how many tries SA scored against them”
Yeah, with those self same much touted boring rugby.
June 26th 2012 @ 9:49pm
The Werewolf said | June 26th 2012 @ 9:49pm | Report comment
Ben
You need to get your facts squared away fella
The english conceded 4 tries in the 6 nations to Wales 3 tries conceded?????
I’m no mathematical genius but how is that better?
Also a couple of the welsh had not played in awhile most had been playing write up to the end of their season including the pro 12 final 2 weeks before the june tests and they’d had warm up matches against the baa baas.
The springboks scored a mammoth two tries more than us in their series against the english who are an inferior side to the Welsh.
I agree as you get familiar with a side that makes a difference but that works both ways Ben.
June 26th 2012 @ 9:52pm
Ben S said | June 26th 2012 @ 9:52pm | Report comment
‘The english conceded 4 tries in the 6 nations to Wales 3 tries conceded?????’
Sorry – wasn’t paying attention. My bad.
Still… one more try doesn’t exactly make a difference to my position. Whatever way you look at it, the Australian attack was not especially impressive.
Inferior based on results in February/March.
Wales should never have been that close to Australia IMHO, just as they weren’t the last two times they met. If Australia play like that against NZ and SA then it’s going to be a summer of discontent.
June 26th 2012 @ 10:00pm
The Werewolf said | June 26th 2012 @ 10:00pm | Report comment
Why should Wales have not been so close… apart from the obvious patriotic notion of australian sporting superiority?
The teams as I had written articles about were so similar in ability that it was only ever going to be a close series.
and yet we won 3nil. How can fans not be happy with that? Is it arrogance, because we won 2 world cups 13 and 21 years ago respectively?
June 26th 2012 @ 10:05pm
biltongbek said | June 26th 2012 @ 10:05pm | Report comment
Werewolf, the boks scored that in 3 matches, the Six Nations is 5 matches.
June 26th 2012 @ 10:21pm
The Werewolf said | June 26th 2012 @ 10:21pm | Report comment
BB i think you’ve misunderstood.
Ben was stating that the boks had scored a plethora of tries against the english… 7 of them compared to the 5 we scored against the welsh.
My point is that 2 more tries in the respective June series, is not an amazing statistic to have been brought up by Ben when the Welsh are a mcuh better defensive and side in general.
That’s not to discredit the Saffas, they played well in the first two matches.
June 26th 2012 @ 10:28pm
biltongbek said | June 26th 2012 @ 10:28pm | Report comment
Yeah sorry, you right, I do agree that comparing OZ vs Wzles and SA vs England is moot.
Wales had a solid defence where as england struggled to defend for those brief periods where we did turn it on,
June 26th 2012 @ 10:54pm
Ben S said | June 26th 2012 @ 10:54pm | Report comment
‘when the Welsh are a mcuh better defensive and side in general.’
Based on what? That’s highly debatable.
June 26th 2012 @ 11:25pm
The Werewolf said | June 26th 2012 @ 11:25pm | Report comment
Ben oh i don’t know the fact that they are grand slam 6 nations champions!
June 26th 2012 @ 11:31pm
Ben S said | June 26th 2012 @ 11:31pm | Report comment
‘Ben oh i don’t know the fact that they are grand slam 6 nations champions!’
This old chestnut. If you want to work on that level then fine, but there’s other factors at play. Firstly, all 6Ns following the WC and Lions tour are generally poor. This was a rebuilding tournament for Italy, England and France. Wales were good in patches, but hardly the stuff of legend. England contained Wales pretty easily, and had Scott Williams not scored that individual try then Wales wouldn’t have won the 6N. Look where Wales finished in the two preceding 6Ns and consider the fact that prior to this recent series Australia dispatched them pretty comfortably. England absolutely rolled SA in 2004, but the fact SA had recently won the then 3N wasn’t much of a relevance. Likewise when France dished SA in 2009. You take sides on their merits, on a game-by-game basis, not history, unless their recent form is consistent and compelling.
The fact that Wales won the 6N is seemingly being used to account for the fact that Australia were, by and large, pretty unimpressive. I haven’t seen any real improvements from either side, and you haven’t offered any analysis as to why Wales are better than England. On current form they certainly aren’t and Wales haven’t beaten any top sides of note in recent seasons to demand as much SH attention as they have garnered.
June 26th 2012 @ 11:40pm
Mike said | June 26th 2012 @ 11:40pm | Report comment
“The fact that Wales won the 6N is seemingly being used to account for the fact that Australia were, by and large, pretty unimpressive.”
Right, Ben thinks Wales unimpressive, therefore 6N victory doesn’t count… got it!
“you haven’t offered any analysis as to why Wales are better than England. On current form they certainly aren’t”
Okay, Wales beat England, doesn’t mean anyhting special … got it!
“Wales haven’t beaten any top sides of note in recent seasons to demand as much SH attention as they have garnered.”
He’s got a point there Werewolf – they’ve only beaten England and France who are not “sides of note” – Ben wins!!!!!
June 26th 2012 @ 11:51pm
The Werewolf said | June 26th 2012 @ 11:51pm | Report comment
Okay Ben 6 nations means nothing. How did England do at the world cup compared to Wales?
June 27th 2012 @ 12:21am
Ben S said | June 27th 2012 @ 12:21am | Report comment
‘Okay Ben 6 nations means nothing. How did England do at the world cup compared to Wales?’
The 6N doesn’t mean nothing, but too many fans (specifically SH fans) are placing too much emphasis on a tournament which didn’t really reveal Wales to be a particularly impressive team. It’s no coincidence that so many Australian Roarers have apparently been surprised by the brand of rugby Wales played. Why? I’d suggest that not many Australian Roarers watch European rugby either because they can’t or don’t want to. To those who have watched Wales regularly, their performances against Australia were not surprising. For the same reason fans are taking the results of the 2011 3N with a pinch of salt, just like they did in 2007.
England had a poor WC, but what did Wales do? They lost to SA … again, scraped past Samoa, beat Ireland well (fair enough), but then lost to a poor France, and lost to Australia, who won pretty comfortably. That pretty much sums up Wales. They have shown an inability to win games that count over recent seasons. England have won away in Australia, smashed Australia at Twickenham, drawn in SA and won a 6N in far more convincing fashion. You name me one really convincing performance that Wales have put in over the past 10 Tests.
On the one hand Australian Roarers want to lament the loss of Cooper, Beale, JOC and Mitchell, and on the other they want to paint Wales as a good side. If Wales go on to win some games against the SH this November, and then do well in the following 6N fair enough, but on current form they are limited, and Australia were always favourites to win.
June 27th 2012 @ 12:34am
The Werewolf said | June 27th 2012 @ 12:34am | Report comment
Wales lost by 1 point to SA at the RWC and were the better team. They beat Samoa by 7 points and South Africa in comparison beat Samoa by 8 points. And against France they were reduced to 14 men when Warburton got sent off and lost by a couple.
They’re a lot better than you make out. Shall we call it a day. You don’t rate Wales. I do. You think the wallabies should’ve smashed them by loads of points, I don’t.
June 27th 2012 @ 12:38am
Ben S said | June 27th 2012 @ 12:38am | Report comment
So in recent seasons the only big game they’ve won was against Ireland in the WC, which kind of proves my point.
They’re really not that good a side. If they were then they wouldn’t have so many Ls in the results column, and so many unconvincing performances.
June 26th 2012 @ 5:23pm
Justin2 said | June 26th 2012 @ 5:23pm | Report comment
Lads I am not expecting us to run in tries left right and centre.
What I am expecting, and I do not think its too much to ask, is to see some semblance of a decent back line attack.
You know with perhaps a passage of more than one pass, with a clear purpose, change in running lines, deception, decoys, a wrap around, a dummy switch a second wave of attack. Perhaps even a combination of a wrap around and a miss pass to someone hitting the line at a different angle.
Anything!!!
When was the last time this year in a Wallaby game you said to yourself “oh great move” or “gee I liked that, hadnt seen that before”
None of what I have mentioned should be remotely difficult. One of you mentioned league. Well guess what, I have no time for that game but the last 4 Tests have been just that!!!!
June 26th 2012 @ 5:35pm
Jutsie said | June 26th 2012 @ 5:35pm | Report comment
Wholeheartedly agree with this sentiment, with a (hopefully) full compliment of back line players to choose from for the Rugby Championship and more preparation time I would like to see the back line fluidity we saw back in 2010.
On another note I am a huge digby fan but I have been thinking that the over reliance of him is actually too much of a good thing. Our whole backline strategy is based around counter attacks/one phase line breaks by either him or genia.
Also the back three of beale/DIgby/AAC does not have the link/passing ability of the mitchell/JOC/Beale combo in 2010.
June 26th 2012 @ 5:39pm
The Werewolf said | June 26th 2012 @ 5:39pm | Report comment
the last time i thought well that worked well was on Saturday when the backline made some breaks.
June 26th 2012 @ 5:49pm
Justin2 said | June 26th 2012 @ 5:49pm | Report comment
WW – the only time from memory, and I am happy to be corrected, was Beale and Sharpe! Beale then fired a great ball to Barnes.
Were there others?
As I have said before if Beale/Sharpe can do it “on the fly” then the other backs should be more than capable and being taught instructed on how to break down defences.
You can just expect to run straight through good defenders. You need passing, angles, deception, pace and power in combination.
June 26th 2012 @ 5:58pm
Mike said | June 26th 2012 @ 5:58pm | Report comment
Justin, there were lots of others, particularly on Saturday. There was extensive passing by the Wallabies, with the ball going through many sets of hands, with switchbacks and changes.
If you restrict it to only those that resulted in tries, then you will miss 90% of what happened, particularly in a low-scoring series. The fact is that the Welsh are great defenders with a proven record, but you don’t appear to want to give them any credit at all for that.
June 26th 2012 @ 5:58pm
The Werewolf said | June 26th 2012 @ 5:58pm | Report comment
From memory Horne was put through a gap with a lovely pass from Mccabe very early in the match. Ioane made a good break and Barnes from a lovely backline move in the lead up to us eventually scoring the match winning try.
Yes Horne should’ve passed it to the winger. He has some homework to do but we must be pleased with his performances in attack and defenc in general with a caveat to pass to his wingers Conrad Smith style.
June 26th 2012 @ 6:13pm
Justin2 said | June 26th 2012 @ 6:13pm | Report comment
Mike – there was some passing and switching, I agree.
How much of it was actually done with a purpose to put a man into space as part of a deliberate strategy?
Id argue very little and Id also argue there has been bugger all work done by the coaches to specifically break down the Welsh defence with the things I talked about above. I admit the Welsh have an excellent defence but for the 1000th time they were barely challenged by a very dull attack. There is no escaping that, particularly Test 1 and 2.
Beale was the major spark in anything on Saturday.
WW – thats the play I was talking about. I also recall the McCabe pass. You know why is was so nice? Because probably like me, you were actually surprised he threw the pass. Lets face it those passes should ALWAYS be thrown.
Lets not give too much praise to something that is a basic skill at Test level.
As for running metres being a stat to hang your hats on – with the amount of possession AUS had through the series and the amount of ball the backs individually HOGGED its not surprise they had decent run metres. I’d guess Horne got 40m with a clear run to the line.
June 26th 2012 @ 6:16pm
Justin2 said | June 26th 2012 @ 6:16pm | Report comment
Let me also say I am not really having a crack at these players as I believe they are more than capable of so much more.
It frustrates the hell out of me though when they just tuck the ball under the arm and run til tackled the majority of the time, hence my league comments.
Let the ball do the work and back up your wingers would be a nice start.
June 26th 2012 @ 6:18pm
Mike said | June 26th 2012 @ 6:18pm | Report comment
“I admit the Welsh have an excellent defence but for the 1000th time they were barely challenged by a very dull attack.”
I think we are just going to have to agree to disagree on this one. As WW pointed out, we scored more tries against the Welsh in 3 matches than the 6N scored in five, and we scored 72 points against them in the three matches, compared to the 6N’s 58 points in five matches. Apart from that, my view was that the Welsh were stretched to the limit in this series. But I appreciate you saw it differently.
June 26th 2012 @ 7:11pm
The Werewolf said | June 26th 2012 @ 7:11pm | Report comment
And also that lovely chip and chase right after half time! except Ioane ended up catching a pass from that Barnes-Beale play with his feet-hands as someone’s being calling them. lol
and what about Horne’s try in the second match.
There’s plenty to be happy about if you stay positive.
June 26th 2012 @ 10:47pm
Sneaky Samurai said | June 26th 2012 @ 10:47pm | Report comment
Did anybody else notice Ant Fainga’a passing the ball early and often to the outside backs?
June 26th 2012 @ 11:32pm
The Werewolf said | June 26th 2012 @ 11:32pm | Report comment
G’day SS.
Faingaa touched the ball twice so to say he was passing the ball often is a bit of an exaggeration although his pass to AAC at one stage was definitely early and the right thing to do.
June 26th 2012 @ 5:43pm
Kuruki said | June 26th 2012 @ 5:43pm | Report comment
Lets be brutally honest. The Welsh were ready to be put to the sword, yet the Wallaby backline was as blunt as a butter knife. Every center playing international rugby can run. To beat South Africa and New Zealand you are going to need to score tries. God help the Wallabies if McCabe and Horne are going to spearhead the Wallaby attack in the Rugby Championship. As a combination they are dreadfully dull. I did not see anything resembling a slick backline movement that flowed through the midfield. Horne either cannot pass or he is selfish. He bombed a try by being greedy and he almost bombed another one for being greedy again. In comparison Conrad Smith barely held the ball for a second before putting his winger away into the corner. I Barely noticed McCabe on attack and only really noticed Horne because i wanted to know who i was about to yell at.
I can think of a fair few combinations i would pick before i would ever consider these two together.
June 26th 2012 @ 5:46pm
Justin2 said | June 26th 2012 @ 5:46pm | Report comment
Thank you!
June 26th 2012 @ 5:53pm
The Werewolf said | June 26th 2012 @ 5:53pm | Report comment
Horne carried for a tick over 160 metres for the series which was only a few less then Davies. MCcabe carried for a lot more metres than Beck and he was brilliant at getting over the advantage line and popping little passes. The pass he put Horne through a gap on saturday was delightful.
It astounds me the lack of credit given by many of us. The sky commentators raved about the aussie centres yet there are so many aussies that only see negatively.
Why were the welsh ready to be put to the sword?
June 26th 2012 @ 6:06pm
Jutsie said | June 26th 2012 @ 6:06pm | Report comment
I’m with you werewolf.
I saw alot to like with horne’s game, he not only made big hits but he made big hits that stopped 3 man overlaps. I also noted the excellent work him and AAC put into pressuring the welsh 2nd rowers at kick off time. They worked really well as combo, AAC would jump at the 2nd rower and horne would “crumb” the dropped ball, it was similar to ruckmen/onballer play in the AFL.
I think Mccabe has the sort of gritty determination sorely lacking in most wallabies. Having the two of them in the same backline may not be the answer but players like them are definitely needed to balance the smaller “flair” players like JOC/Cooper etc.
Another thing of note is that in the modern game its not enough to make your tackles when playing in the centres you also need to stop the opposition getting across the advantage line. Playing guys like JOC and barnes in the centres will allow the roberts/SBW/JDV’s of the world to make at least 5mtrs before giving the offload to support.
June 26th 2012 @ 6:10pm
Mike said | June 26th 2012 @ 6:10pm | Report comment
Whilst I have a lot of respect for Kuruki”s analysis, I also have a problem with the Welsh being “ready to be put to the sword” (although its a good graphic image!)
As WW already observed, Welsh had a small amount of tries scored against them in 6N, and didn’t drop a match.
I am not saying our back-line doesn’t have real issues to deal with. It is not at it full potential by any means. Kuruki has some great insights on it. But the Welsh should not be undersold – after all, whether a team plays to their potential depends to a large extent on whether their opponents let them. Both Wales and Australia fought hard to nullify their opponents strengths in this series, and they were often successful.
June 26th 2012 @ 7:26pm
Kuruki said | June 26th 2012 @ 7:26pm | Report comment
The only reason the Welsh hung in and made a contest of it was because the Wallabies failed to put them away and allowed them to hang to that hope. i didn’t see a polished Welsh side. i saw rather average Welsh performances met with average Aussie performances. They were there and ready to be taken to the cleaners, but once again Australia only played to the level of the opposition. Both teams were capable of better rugby. it was a close series on the scoreboard but as far as an epic encounter it was not. i’m sure other then the 3-0 result most Aussie fans are not entirely impressed with the performance. I’m not, because i have seen much better rugby played by both sides.
I did not see brilliant punishing defence i saw bumbling disjointed attack. That is why i say the opportunity was there to put them to the sword had the backline fired a shot.
IMHO had Australia played to the level they do when they play the AB’s and the Boks they would have won that game by 20 points, as the Welsh were below par from what they are capable of.
But that’s just how i saw things. Both teams had massive room for improvement and neither capatalized on the other being below par. There were very good individual performances from Barnes Genia and Pocock . But on the whole I have seen much better from the Aussie side and the Welsh.
June 26th 2012 @ 7:37pm
The Werewolf said | June 26th 2012 @ 7:37pm | Report comment
Jutsie your last paragraph was bang on.
The key to the modern game is phase play not 1st phase play any more. So you’re centres need to be able to contribute to this phase play in attack by running the ball over the advantage line and/or by clearing out backrowers. In defence they need to be able to knock over crash ball runners from opposition first phase and also to make classic outside centre tackles in phase play.
A JOC or a Barnes at 12 does not suit the modern game. They used to when first phase from the set piece was king but those days are over. what we need to do is keep the likes of Beale at fullback to join in the attacking line where appropriate and keep the two like for like centres at 12 and 13. Whether they are MCcabe and Horne or Faingaa and AAC whoever, that’s the way forward.
The AB’s and SA made this move a long time ago, we’ve only just caught up.
Mike I also agree that sometimes a good opposition will limit your strengths as they no doubt plan to do.
And again with Kuruki’s idea that the welsh should have been put to the sword i’ve ben racking my brain and can’t remember the last time the welsh were really put to the sword by anyone. They are a very very good side. IMHO the equal of everybody bar maybe the AB’s but I wouldn’t be surprised if they had the AB”s measure as well.
June 26th 2012 @ 7:59pm
Kuruki said | June 26th 2012 @ 7:59pm | Report comment
Werewolf- I think you may be plastering over a few truths. I will give credit where credit is due and i know a good performance when i see one. Sadly i didn’t see it. It was not great rugby by either side. How on earth you think those performances by the Welsh would have had the measure of the All Blacks is astonishing. Like i said before the irish team you are calling abysmal, in the second test played a similar intensity and quality to the game they beat the Wallabies in the world cup.
Yes the Welsh are Six Nations champions and the Wallabies are Tri Nations champions but that means absolutely nothing because neither team played anywhere near the level they did when they were crowned.
June 26th 2012 @ 8:06pm
The Werewolf said | June 26th 2012 @ 8:06pm | Report comment
Kuruki it was good rugby it just wasn’t fairy floss spectacular rugby which is what I think you would like to see. There is a difference and you are not going to see the fairy floss stuff often when two very good defensive sides come together.
As for how the Welsh played in the 6 nations yes they were slightly better but that’s because they didn’t come up against the wallabies. In saying that I don’t recall them ever scoring more than 20 odd points or scoring more than 2 tries in any match.
Again this is because test match rugby is test match rugby.
June 26th 2012 @ 8:15pm
Kuruki said | June 26th 2012 @ 8:15pm | Report comment
“The AB’s and SA made this move a long time ago, we’ve only just caught up.”
Wrong wrong wrong. The only similarities between Horne and McCabe and the Nz paring is that they can run and tackle. That’s the basic foundation of every rugby player. Mate you are way off track when you think those two are bringing Australia into line with the style that Nz are playing. Conrad Smith is a distributor he is closer to the style Berrick Barnes plays then Horne or McCabe. Smith is not a crash baller, he is not just there to break the advantage line and setup phase play.
SBW is so much more then just a straight runner, he has vision he can pass long he can offload he likes to think he can slide the grubber thru. Don’t be fooled into thinking all you need is two big guys who can run hard and straight, you had that for the last month and imo it failed to conjure up anything. Even Nonu has developed into a distributor, he has an excellent passing game and often uses the pass to better effect then his run. It’s not as simple as having two big guys who can run hard and straight and tackle. They need more strings to the bow and if that is too much to ask then you balance it out and have one hard running crash-baller and one distributor/play-maker.
I really have concerns for the future of Wallaby rugby if that is considered a strong pairing. I’m not trying to put anyone down but it’s simply not good enough. There are much better options. And you really need to worry about playing to the strengths of your own team rather then worrying about what everyone else is doing. Australia strikes fear into opposition outwide, not through the middle, you are banging your sword against a rock having McCabe and Horne in the midfield.
June 26th 2012 @ 8:37pm
The Werewolf said | June 26th 2012 @ 8:37pm | Report comment
Kuruki when was the last time the NZ team pt out a second five as they call it?
For the last four years they’ve mostly had Nonu an ex winger and SBW an ex rugby league second rower playing at 12.
As for the rest of your comment. Please don’t put words into my mouth. I never called conrad smith a crash baller. he is a powerful runner though and a great defender. the fact he has a great passing game makes him a stand out in his position but he’s not exactly a second five nor is SBW.
My point is the second five style of 12, the Giteau/JOC/Barnes is no longer a valid selection at test rugby. They are 10-20kgs too light and the second play maker comes from somewhere else ie fullback as in the wallabies case.
You need to get used to Mccabe at 12 because he isn’t going anywhere and rightly so.
June 26th 2012 @ 8:57pm
Mike said | June 26th 2012 @ 8:57pm | Report comment
I’m inclined to agree with Kuruki on this one, for what that’s worth.
I don’t dispute the commitment of either of you to your points of view, and in particular, Kuruki the kiwi is calling it exactly as he would call it if this were the All Blacks, i.e. what he genuinely sees as Australia’s best option. So it comes down to a real dispute about strategy and methods.
Its not that I don’t think McCabe and Horne are good players, and I agree they have more to their game than they are often given credit for.
But nor do I agree that a “small” man at #12 will always get monstered. In particular, O’Connor is 1 inch shorter and 5 kg lighter than Tim Horan in his prime. The idea that size alone means he cannot make an effective Wallaby 12 is absurd.
Nor is there anything wrong with playing a second five. I don’t agree with the idea that because a tactical fashion has changed (assuming that is the case) that therefore we must slavishly follow suit. We need to suit our tactics to the particular talents and characteristics of the players available to us.
If we are going to keep Barnes as the 10 (which is not a bad idea when he seems to be adjusting to the position, having spent much of his test career at 12) then it makes most sense to put JOC at 12. He supplies the flair and danger factor that Barnes lacks, but without the rushes of blood that characterise Cooper. He will distribute the ball, but he is also prepared to take it straight up on occasion in the style of Trinh-Duc and that keeps opponents on their toes. I think he would make a good 5/8, but he is much better suited at 12 than Barnes who is not a strong defender.
I agree McCabe and Horne have done well and are underrated, but that doesn’t mean everything should revolve around them. McCabe is not Horan and Horne is not Mortlock.
June 26th 2012 @ 9:32pm
The Werewolf said | June 26th 2012 @ 9:32pm | Report comment
When Mccabe ran straight through o’connor earlier this year to score for the Brumbies he ran through any chance JOC would get selected at no 12 for the wallabies in the near future because it demonstrated exactly why Robbie Deans prefers a ‘centre’ at 12 rather than whomever our 2nd best 5/8 is at the time.
At no stage over the past 8 years has the playmaker at 12 worked for us in any real forceful way for it to be considered a must to return to. no other side in test match rugby persists with it either.
JOC will only play 10 or 15 for the Wallabies. Perhaps 14 if need be.
June 26th 2012 @ 9:37pm
Ben S said | June 26th 2012 @ 9:37pm | Report comment
Beck only started two Tests and he is a rookie.
June 26th 2012 @ 9:44pm
The Werewolf said | June 26th 2012 @ 9:44pm | Report comment
Ben
Beck played just under 2.5 games as did McCabe.
McCabe played 10more minutes of rugby in the series.
rookie is irrelevant.
June 26th 2012 @ 9:55pm
Ben S said | June 26th 2012 @ 9:55pm | Report comment
Fair enough, but I don’t think rookie is irrelevant. Nobody would say that SBW played well against Ireland because he carried more than Keith Earls did, if you get my drift.
In the last Test Australia made nearly double the amount of passes and runs that Wales did, so that obviously would affect the stats of the midfield. They’re not similar players either, so it’s not exactly a fair comparison.
June 26th 2012 @ 10:33pm
The Werewolf said | June 26th 2012 @ 10:33pm | Report comment
Mccabe only played 35min on saturday and only carried 3 times.
He did carry almost twice as many metres as his opponent in roughly the same amount of game time so I think that is relevant as I do that Horne and Davies were almost identical in metres gained.
The other thing that shows how much better our centres were than are getting credit is that all the centres from both sides made between 18-20 tackles for the series each yet both McCabe and Horne missed 0 tackles.
Davies missed 6 and Beck missed 4.
June 26th 2012 @ 11:03pm
Ben S said | June 26th 2012 @ 11:03pm | Report comment
‘Mccabe only played 35min on saturday and only carried 3 times.’
What stats are you using? I have McCabe as carrying 4 times.
‘He did carry almost twice as many metres as his opponent in roughly the same amount of game time so I think that is relevant as I do that Horne and Davies were almost identical in metres gained.’
But Beck isn’t a crash and bash merchant like McCabe is. Getting over the advantage line is basically his entire game. It’s still not a relevant comparison.
‘The other thing that shows how much better our centres were than are getting credit is that all the centres from both sides made between 18-20 tackles for the series each yet both McCabe and Horne missed 0 tackles.’
I have Beck and Davies missing 3 tackles in two Tests as a pair. Not exactly gut-wrenching.
Well, if you think they played well then fair enough, but I think the Wallaby attack is dysfunctional, unbalanced and reliant on individual brilliance.
June 26th 2012 @ 11:22pm
The Werewolf said | June 26th 2012 @ 11:22pm | Report comment
rugbystats.com.au
Dysfunctional huh. Strong words. It’s almost as if the welsh didn’t just roll over and let us score a bunch of tries. Buggers.
I didn’t think any of our good play was individual apart from Genia’s try.
June 26th 2012 @ 11:35pm
Ben S said | June 26th 2012 @ 11:35pm | Report comment
Fair enough. Let’s see how far McCabe and Horne take you during the 3N.
June 27th 2012 @ 6:31am
Justin2 said | June 27th 2012 @ 6:31am | Report comment
The back line isn’t dysfunctional it is just a very blunt axe right now.
The amount of possession we had and they lack of ball movement and strategy is really quite obvious. I think we can do so much more and I don’t think there are too many outside WW and Mike who believe its going well
June 27th 2012 @ 12:47pm
Mike said | June 27th 2012 @ 12:47pm | Report comment
I think there is plenty of room for improvement, so I don’t know it is correct to say that I “believe it is going well”. I think they did a number of things well in the last test, which is not the same thing. Maybe I am just defining it differently.
As I’ve already indicated I would be finding places for JOC and Twodads in key positions, and that may be at the expense of McCabe and/or Horne, at least starting. Obviously WW disagrees with me on that one!
June 27th 2012 @ 4:19pm
moaman said | June 27th 2012 @ 4:19pm | Report comment
New Zealand 42-9 Wales, Carisbrook, Dunedin, 19-06-10 Werewolf?
June 26th 2012 @ 4:17am
biltongbek said | June 26th 2012 @ 4:17am | Report comment
Yeah, Clyde, not so sure there’s no penetration in our backs, Frans Steyn is pretty much a gainline player, and Habana and Pietersen have shown some nice running lines and broke the line a good number of times.
June 26th 2012 @ 10:52am
Sprigs said | June 26th 2012 @ 10:52am | Report comment
Nice? You are allowed to boast a bit on Roar.
Habana has been brilliant, and Pietersen not far behind.
June 26th 2012 @ 12:54pm
Dassie said | June 26th 2012 @ 12:54pm | Report comment
Both are over-rated. The Wallabies target Habana’s wing because his defence is poor and the gaps he leaves. Look at the tries against him in last years tri-nations.
June 26th 2012 @ 4:34pm
biltongbek said | June 26th 2012 @ 4:34pm | Report comment
Dassie, I am just hoping the Wallabies anf All Blacks also think they are over rated.
In fact it would be good for us if everyone sees our backline as unimaginative and non threatening.
June 26th 2012 @ 9:46pm
Ben S said | June 26th 2012 @ 9:46pm | Report comment
Habana did some very good things, as did Pietersen, but for the majority of all matches they were playing behind a pack on the front foot. Both players still make rudimentary errors. For example, the first try that Alberts scored from the scrum in the second Test came about due to an error from Habana. He was carrying the ball in the wrong hand and and so couldn’t palm off and the move died with Bismarck du Plessis on the wing. On the back foot both players are still error prone.
June 26th 2012 @ 5:07pm
Sprigs said | June 26th 2012 @ 5:07pm | Report comment
You might be right, but he looked great against the English to me.
June 26th 2012 @ 6:37am
Matt said | June 26th 2012 @ 6:37am | Report comment
Have to agree that the stage is now set for a great championship!
The Argies have shown against France that they’re building some good depth and are deliberately taking the game to the provinces around the country, not just BA. Both aspects are vital to the long term success of the game there. They need to capture the attention of as many fans and potential players as possible and showcasing the national side to the youth in places like Rosario and Tucumen will see more kids giving Rugby a go. And the more young players who are exposed to top level rugby, the greater the depth of talent the coaches can call on in the future.
They are also serious about building a sustainable improvement to their systems, not just a top heavy system centred on Los Pumas alone. Graham Henry is coaching the coaches, which will filter it’s way down through the various levels. Plus Los Pumitas have shown at the Junior World Trophy that Argentina is bringing through future generations of players who can compete with the best players in the world in their age group. There is definitely a surge in the game there and who knows what kind of team could be arriving in England 2015 after playing 4 consecutive seasons of top notch test rugby! You can be certain that it’ll be a better side than without the Rugby Championship and who would bet against Los Pumas picking up a scalp against all 3 of their SH rivals by the time the Webb Ellis Cup goes on the line again.
But even without the revamp and new sparring partner the Tri-Nations sides would already have offered a new and exciting prospect in 2012. The Wallabies haven’t quite carried through their momentum from 2011, partly due to key injuries and some indifferent Super Rugby form. Last season the Reds were red hot and the World Cup loomed large for a young and fast rising side. 2012 seems to have seen that growth stagnate somewhat, but with the 1st line rectruits set to return soon the men in gold will still very much fancy themselves to be the first to have their name incribed on the new trophy.
The Boks have seen a changing of the guard on the field and in the coaching box. Many thought that PDV would depart to see South Africa starting to deliver on the great performances and talent emerging through their now flourishing Super Rugby sides, particularly the Stormers and Bulls. However I don’t think many foresaw how much their new coach would take the Bokke back to their roots. Many thought that the rugby world had moved on from the pressure and power game of the 2007 world cup, but Heneke Meyer seems to be showing his hand and it reads ’10 man rugby’.
With a host of top players out for the England test the Bok pack still looked as formidable as ever. But the backline seems to have gone backwards and the recent selections have suggested that hot steppers like Gio Aplon and Juan de Jong might be watching more test match rugby in from of the TV then they would have under De Villiers.
The AB’s seem to have taken the most selection risks leading in the RC, many of them not immediately necessary given that most of the world cup winning squad have stuck around. The young brigade performed incredibly well against Ireland but the RC will be a big step up and the young forwards in particular (Romano, Cane, Rettalick) will find Los Pumas and the Bokkes don’t concede the gain line or possession quite so easily. The AB’s backline has an incredible look about it, despite the absence of guys like Nonu, Jane and Kahui. The question will be how much investment in the future is Hansen planning to take and will he be willing to potentially forgo the Rugby Championship title in order to win the world one in a few years time. Henry, Smith and Hansen made it clear of their belief that World Cups are won by experienced teams (ala England 03, South Africa 07 and then NZ 11). So he will feel he needs to start pencilling the core of his likely squad even now, in order to get them the ‘crunch time’ experience they’ll need in 2015. But laying foundations in a raging storm like the RC will be a lot harder than against the more mild weather of a light Irish downpour.
What a great tournament it’s going to be, and to think we still have a gripping last few rounds of Super Rugby and the finals to go before then. How lucky we are!
June 26th 2012 @ 10:51am
MR said | June 26th 2012 @ 10:51am | Report comment
Matt good post, all of the visiting teams will struggle against Argentina at home but it will be partularly challenging for WB as
- Puma’s play a very negative forward dominated game (similar to Scotland & England of old)
- Pumas have 60+% win rate at home over last 25 years (though have struggled against SA & AB)
- Australia have only played 7 matches in Arg (3 wins, 3 losses, 1 Draw) with last game in 2002
Here are the Stat Guru Links:
Arg (Home) vs Everyone (25 years)
http://stats.espnscrum.com/statsguru/rugby/stats/index.html?class=1;home_or_away=1;spanmax2=26+Jun+2012;spanmin2=01+Jan+1987;spanval2=span;team=10;template=results;type=team;view=results
Arg (Home) vs Aus (since 1876)
http://stats.espnscrum.com/statsguru/rugby/stats/index.html?class=1;home_or_away=1;opposition=6;team=10;template=results;type=team
June 26th 2012 @ 3:15pm
Samvandamn said | June 26th 2012 @ 3:15pm | Report comment
Here we go.
This will be the thing that Australians grip onto to convince themselves that they can beat the All Blacks after the Wallabies luke warm performance at the beginning of the International Rugby season.
You think that New Zealand’s obscene amount of depth will be their undoing?
Come on now.
Do you really think Steve Hansen and co are really that naive?
Do you really think the coaching staff would risk losing the newly formed Rugby Championship and their number one status all in the name of building combinations?
The country would bay for their blood if the All Blacks put in poor performances against the Wallabies and Springboks and seeing Steven Hansen has been signed on a 2 year deal he would not risk it.
The only time they would ever consider something like that would be during a world cup year not the year after one.
And only the Springboks and the All Blacks have the depth to do this, the Wallabies have to put their best team forward every single game or risk losing to teams like Samoa and Scotland.
Never fear, by the time the Rugby Championship comes along the All Blacks will have formed another strong world beating combination.
They will have retained the majority of the world cup winning squad with 4-5 of their new budding superstars in tow.
The difference between the ABs and the Wallabies is at least the ABs coaches dont wait until one of their main players fall over before they introduce new ones.
June 26th 2012 @ 4:30pm
Kuruki said | June 26th 2012 @ 4:30pm | Report comment
I do think our depth is a positive but can also be our undoing. Look at how many different wingers we have used. With Kahui out for the season only Jane is assured a wing spot. We still have yet to settle on a left winger and until we do a combination between our first choice back three cannot be built upon.
The same goes for our back row, because of the impact Sam Cane had during the Ireland test we could see ourselves moving our captain from his longtime position and reshuffling our back row during the rugby championship. The performance Messam put in on the weekend now has the blindside position back up in the air. Vito was solid. Thomo had great impact scoring two tries off the pine. Messam brought an aggressive punishing defensive display we have not seen since Kaino.
It is very hard to build real combinations when you are yet to settle on your top 15. That could be our downfall. Just look at what Cruden and SBW achieved from being constantly selected together at the Chiefs. This can only happen with consistent selections which is very hard to do when you have so many deserving players. Nonu and Smith built there world beating combination from playing together at the Canes. We will not see this level of understanding between players if they are constantly shuffled around.
Rotation policy builds depth but hinders combinations.
Hansen has done a brilliant job integrating some young talent into the core of our world cup side. From what i have seen, We now have our three test lock rotation. Whotelock, Rettalick, Romano.
A Smith is now our number one halfback and his success has opened the door for Kerr Barlow and imo closed the door on Andy Ellis.
Cruden and SBW will put huge pressure on Carter and Nonu after what i would call 25 minutes of perfect rugby on the weekend.
Why would Hansen need to forgo the Rugby Championship in order to focus on the future? The young talent he has introduced were some of the best players on the paddock last weekend. Cane Romano and Retallick are all deserving of selection in the All Blacks best 22 imo. A Smith is number one. Savea is in a scrap with Gear for the left wing spot. Barret will be our third choice flyhalf. None of these guys are risky selections, they are there because they are the best we have to offer.
June 26th 2012 @ 4:42pm
Kuruki said | June 26th 2012 @ 4:42pm | Report comment
I think one way we can call upon our depth without always throwing out our fluency is to do what Hansen done so brilliantly on the weekend, introduce ready made combinations. Cane/Messam, A Smith/Cruden, Cruden/SBW, Romano/Whitelock, Gear/B Smith all these guys play together week in week out and those are the sort of things we can use to our advantage when selecting sides and resting and rotating players. A simple example of a change made between say playing SA one week and Aussie the next could be-
Carter Nonu Smith vs the Boks.
Cruden SBW Smith vs the Wallabies.
You change your 10/12 completely yet lose nothing in the way of combination or fluency.
June 26th 2012 @ 5:10pm
Samvandamn said | June 26th 2012 @ 5:10pm | Report comment
If you ask me Hansen has identified who he wants in his main 22 for the long run as quickly as he possibly could so that he can quickly start making world beating combinations.
Instead of sending out the whole old team that won the world cup, he sent out a mixture of new and current stars against Ireland and used the 3rd test to clear up any grey areas.
The starting 22 for the first 2 tests could be close to his final product.
Minus Ali Williams of course (worst selection in Shags short reign) and a couple of others.
As much as I am a huge fan of Ben Smith he will most likely be dropped to make way for Cory Jane.
Savea probably needs another year or so to mature and the raw power that Hosea Gear displayed during the 3rd test cannot be denied.
Gear is also a much better defender.
Richard Kahui is gone for the season.
Here is who I think will be in Hansens first choice 22 for this year.
1. Tony Woodcock
2. Kevin Mealamu
3. Owen Franks
4. Brodie Retallick
5. Samuel Whitelock
6. Victor Vito
7. Richie McCaw
8. Kieran Read
9. Aaron Smith
10. Daniel Carter
11. Hosea Gear
12. Sonny Bill Williams
13. Conrad Smith
14. Cory Jane
15. Israel Dagg
Reserves:
16. Andrew Hore
17. Ben Franks
18. Luke Romano
19. Sam Cane
20. Piri Weepu
21. Aaron Cruden
22. Ma’a Nonu
June 26th 2012 @ 4:49pm
Mike said | June 26th 2012 @ 4:49pm | Report comment
Savandamn, the fact remains that the ABs can lose to the Wallabies. I agree trying to predict why that may happen (if it does) is probably a fruitless exercise. The ABs may be favourites to take out the inaugural 4N, but it can’t be guaranteed. Boks have beaten them 5 out of the last 10 games. Wallabies are coming off a 10 match losing streak to ABs, but the fact is they have won 2 out of their last 4 against ABs.
This is not chest beating, but just an observation of a weird truth about 3N and now 4N, the games are unpredictable and in particular the Wallabies are unpredictable. Heck, they are my team and I am unable to predict how they might go in any particular match. I wish that wasn’t so, but it is.
“The difference between the ABs and the Wallabies is at least the ABs coaches dont wait until one of their main players fall over before they introduce new ones.”
We wait because we have to. For whatever reason, we simply don’t have the depth that you do.
“And only the Springboks and the All Blacks have the depth to do this, the Wallabies have to put their best team forward every single game or risk losing to teams like Samoa and Scotland.”
But therein lies the problem with prophesy – the Wallabies can lose to Samoa and Scotland, but they can just as easily beat the All Blacks and the Boks. Despite our lack of depth (I agree with you there) we have beaten the Boks in 6 of our last 7 games. You can predict all you like, but nobody knows how the Wallabies are going to perform in 4N.
June 26th 2012 @ 5:22pm
biltongbek said | June 26th 2012 @ 5:22pm | Report comment
The reality is SA and OZ are very close, of those 6 losses ou are talking about three of them were very, very close and the Boks should not have lost those, not that it is an excuse but let’s look at what happened.
I don’t think I need to remind anyone of what happened in the QF.
Our last test match in Durban we threw the ball around, but made tons of unforced errors, and might has well scored a number of tries.
In 2010 in the highveldt, We had possession in the final minute, then got blown for “sealing” the ball and Beale kicked a 50 meter penalty.
So yeah, those losses were mainly our fualt, but then they were also lottery results.
When SA and OZ play, anyone can win.
When SA and NZ play, at last count it was 5/6 during the PDV era.
And that with a pedantic, unimaginitave game plan.
It’s all in the air, will OZ pull themselves together after a series that by all accounts was not traditional Ozzie play, Will SA reach thir potential under Meyer, and will the All Blacks look as comfortable against their traditional opponents?
We’ll have to wait and see.
June 26th 2012 @ 6:41pm
Mike said | June 26th 2012 @ 6:41pm | Report comment
That’s okay. In that same period we lost two of our matches to the All Blacks by only 1 point, and two more by 4 and 5 points each. We also feel that the Pretoria match in 2010 vs Boks could have easily gone the other way. etc etc.
But as you rightly point out, there are no excuses and only one winner in every match. We can only look forward to the RC for whatever may come.
June 26th 2012 @ 8:00am
apelu said | June 26th 2012 @ 8:00am | Report comment
What about the PI teams, Clyde?
Before the IRB ensured Argetina did not slip away, Samoa had no problem defeating them, because all they have are big props. Have a look at the RWC 1991 and see what Samoa did then, to both Wales and Argentina. Since then, the IRB has encured the teams from non-white countries never get a leg up, but had given able support to Wales, Scotland, Ireland, Italy and Argentina. Rugby has the appeal to go global, but the IRB remain chained in the past.
June 26th 2012 @ 8:56am
Garbage said | June 26th 2012 @ 8:56am | Report comment
Samoa gets the assistance due to it’s size in population. If anything it is a lot more than Argentina does.
And, Argentina is a Latino nation not white! On top of this, Australia, NZ and Britain accepts people of all races.
June 26th 2012 @ 4:50pm
Kuruki said | June 26th 2012 @ 4:50pm | Report comment
I see no positive future for Samoan rugby as long as their president is controlling who can and cannot be selected. Also i think the risk that the money could be used for everything but Samoan rugby is another reason why the IRB has not been so eager to give. Samoa needs to work out it’s own internal issues before they can be helped to any great extent by anyone else. I really hope this happens because Samoa are a brilliant nation and i think with the right support and leadership can become a rugby power to rival those of the top tier nations.
June 26th 2012 @ 9:36pm
Recalcitrant said | June 26th 2012 @ 9:36pm | Report comment
Thought Samoa was an outpost of the USA like Puerto Rico. So their decent players can go and represent the USA Eagles.
June 26th 2012 @ 8:52am
The Battered Slav said | June 26th 2012 @ 8:52am | Report comment
Well Apelu, while I agree that neglecting the PI nations is terrible, I do believe that this article was about the rugby championship, which no PI teams are involved in.
On to the article. Not bad insight from you as usual Meneer Rathbone. While I don’t think that the Boks have the dangerous backline the Wallabies at full strength are blessed with, Biltongbek makes a fairly good point that they do indeed have some strike runners in JP and Bryan (F Steyn’s skills as a penetrative runner are rather questionable, but he does have a fairly well rounded game).
Australia’s key battles will be in the forwards. If we can achieve parity against the likes of RSA and Arg up front, we just need our backline to hold on to their passes and find some gaps. Against the ABs, I feel that we might need a lot more than parity up front and good handling out back, we will need to be really humming along if we expect to come close to beating them and that means being at the top of our game….something we haven’t seen so far this year.
Come on Wallabies, I can’t wait for this new comp and good luck to the Argies, they’ll need it if they’re to have any success in the first year.
June 26th 2012 @ 9:40am
moaman said | June 26th 2012 @ 9:40am | Report comment
The first 20 minutes of the second Test showed up the ‘Boks can play a very powerful forward game.If they can replicate that and sustain it over 80 minutes and then a whole campaign I think RSA would be very hard to beat.NZ and Aus have issues with their respective packs to sort,whilst Oz will need their injured ‘stars’ back in the big numbers if they want to compete atall.
June 26th 2012 @ 10:27am
Viscount Crouchback said | June 26th 2012 @ 10:27am | Report comment
The Rugby Championship is a very silly name indeed.
It speaks volumes about the chippy, immature approach of John O’Neill & Co that they seem to be more interested in tweaking northern hemisphere noses than in conducting their own affairs in a proper and dignified manner.
June 26th 2012 @ 11:27am
Justin2 said | June 26th 2012 @ 11:27am | Report comment
While I agree, who cares? Most of us I think will call it the 4 Nations regardless. Its just logical.
June 26th 2012 @ 11:44am
Sage said | June 26th 2012 @ 11:44am | Report comment
I agree Viscount it is a silly name but I don’t think any northern nose tweaking came into it. In fact I don’t think you were thought about much at all, sorry about that. We Antipodeans tend to make decisions without northern reference most of the time. One could argue after the recent tours that whoever wins this southern tourny ARE the Rugby Champions but that would be a bit chippy. You did have that one jammy win down here 9 odd years ago.
‘Four Nations’ seems obvious and easy after tri-nations but a bit too borrowed. Would also include more talent than your 6 nations so it just wouldn’t do. Quad nations sounds a bit average also. Any suggestions ? What to call a rugby comp featuring 4 countries all from the superior rugby hemisphere.
June 26th 2012 @ 11:54am
Pogo said | June 26th 2012 @ 11:54am | Report comment
I actually suspect it was to allow the easy attachment of country specific sponsors names. i.e. “The Investec Rugby Championship” in NZ and “The Castle Rugby Championship” in South Africa.
Still a silly name.
June 26th 2012 @ 4:56pm
Kuruki said | June 26th 2012 @ 4:56pm | Report comment
Bang on mate. That is exactly why it was named the Rugby Championship and it will be known as a different name in all of the countries.
June 26th 2012 @ 4:58pm
The Bush said | June 26th 2012 @ 4:58pm | Report comment
Plus they don’t have to change the name again when they add another team…
June 26th 2012 @ 1:39pm
Bob said | June 26th 2012 @ 1:39pm | Report comment
What’s wrong with the Rugby Championship?
1) it says exactly what it is about, the best 3 rugby nations plus an extra playing for the championship. The winner will be the rugby world champion for that season.
2) better than an acronym like KFC and NRL
3) Does not just use a sponsor’s name, like the Hyundai Soccer League.
June 26th 2012 @ 4:56pm
Mike said | June 26th 2012 @ 4:56pm | Report comment
Oh come on, VC, “immature” sure, but “chippy” is pretty hurtful, a searing rebuke that really cuts to the bone.
If our fearless leader shrivels up inside at that jibe it will be all your fauit – surely you don’t want that on your conscience?!
June 26th 2012 @ 10:55am
Sprigs said | June 26th 2012 @ 10:55am | Report comment
May I try to flog off my name for it again, your royal worship VIscount?
The 4 As.
Africa, South
Aotearoa New Zealand
Argentina
Australia
Cheques c/- Roar.
Brickbats c/- Roar
June 26th 2012 @ 4:18pm
biltongbek said | June 26th 2012 @ 4:18pm | Report comment
Personally, I would just call it “The Business”
June 26th 2012 @ 9:09pm
El Gamba said | June 26th 2012 @ 9:09pm | Report comment
Afrique du Sud
June 26th 2012 @ 12:03pm
sheek said | June 26th 2012 @ 12:03pm | Report comment
Well, if we’re coming up with alternate name suggestions to Rugby Championship, how about…..
Southern Cross 4Stars.
I guess this partly explains why they stuck with RC!
June 26th 2012 @ 12:06pm
sheek said | June 26th 2012 @ 12:06pm | Report comment
Or there’s SANZAARC -
South Africa New Zealand Australia Argentina Rugby Championship.
Which, over time, would be simplified to ‘ARC’ (as in, the ark).
June 26th 2012 @ 5:26pm
mace 22 said | June 26th 2012 @ 5:26pm | Report comment
Then we could invite fiji in and then it would become FARC. As in fark or as in f–ck