Dingo Deans’ Wallabies stats (pt 1)
By The Crowd, 20 Jul 2012 The Crowd is a Roar Guru
- Tagged:
- All Blacks, robbie deans, Rugby Union, Rugby World Cup, Springboks, wallabies
149 Have your say
Robbie Deans showed he can win with the Wallabies win over Wales, but the Australian team has capitulated against the All Blacks (AAP Image/Dave Hunt)
Related coverage
- Rugby Union news
- Wallabies news
- Rugby World Cup 2011 news
- New Zealand All Blacks news
- South Africa Springboks news
- Rugby 2011 news
- 2013 Wallabies squad news
With the inaugural Rugby Championship dawning upon us, it is time to make some serious assertions about Robbie Deans’ tenure as Wallabies coach.
Many Wallabies fans are calling for an end to the Deans era, especially with Ewen McKenzie waiting in the wings.
Since taking over the reins in 2008, Deans has failed to deliver a Bledisloe Cup, which was expected by many.
Many of us also expected him to win last year’s World Cup.
The fact that Deans finally delivered a Tri-Nations title, for the first time in ten years, is little compensation for success-starved fans.
So what else has Deans actually achieved in this time? Does whitewashing the Grand Slam-winning Welsh count?
For many, strangely it does not.
What I hear is that we want to see more wins and we want to see more tries and Deans is not giving us enough of either.
So let’s delve deeper. If we look at his overall record, his win ratio stands at 62%.
In this edition, I’m going to look at this win ratio.
If we compare these numbers with his predecessors and other nations, we may be able to gauge whether this is a good or bad result.
If we compare Deans 62% overall win ratio with the Wallabies overall record of 52% we could suggest that Deans is doing relatively well. But we really need to look at win percentages in the modern age to make a better judgement. If we compare his 62% win ratio to the four years preceding his tenure, i.e. the 2004-2007 period, we see that the Wallabies had a win ratio of 59% during this period.
So he has made a slight improvement in winning matches at least.
To put both of these statistics in perspective, we continue to go back in time. If we use each four-year period between each professional World Cup we can make vital comparisons, because each period has a rebuilding phase and ends in relatively tight rugby in the pursuit of World Cup glory. The 2000-2003 period saw a 64% win ratio and, in the 1996-1999 period we see an historic 74% win ratio for the Wallabies.
If we continue to look back, to the amateur period, we see win ratios fluctuating between 73% during the 1992-1995 period, 63% in the 1988-1991 period and 70% in the 1984-1987 period.
If we make a comparison with the Mark Ella-era of 1980 to 1984, we’ll see another Deans failing in comparison. Or do we? Whoops, no, in that period the Wallabies only won 58% of tests.
So Deans’ win ratio is nothing special, but it’s also not an absolute disaster as some suggest. High profile losses to Samoa and Scotland have not helped his cause of course, despite that for two of these matches the side that ran out was full of second string players.
Maybe a better way to make judgement on Deans’ performance to date would be to compare his win ratios against New Zealand and South Africa in comparison to other periods.
If we start with South Africa we see something quite remarkable. Deans’ 2008-2011 period has been the single most successful period against South Africa in Wallaby history.
Deans’ Wallabies have lost only four of the 12 fixtures during his reign against the Springboks, which puts his win ratio against them at an incredible 67%. I say incredible because that is a better return against them than even the mighty All Blacks, who in the same period have only managed a 55% win percentage against the Boks.
If we go back in time again, our overall win ratio against the ‘Boks’ has been 42%. If we look at the entire period of the Tri-Nations, the Wallabies had only managed a 47% win ratio against the Springboks before Deans took over.
Therefore, Deans’ performance against the Springboks has arguably been his strongest and most unsung success.
So perhaps Deans has been making headway after all? Well, not when you look at our record against New Zealand.
Against the All Blacks, Deans has a very poor win ratio in comparison. It currently stands at 20%, which is actually 2% less than the previous four years and arguably why this upcoming Bledisloe is so important for Robbie Deans.
Historically of course, the Wallabies have a poor win ratio against the All Blacks. Australia’s overall record against them stands at a tick under 30% of wins. But since the game has gone professional, the Wallabies have a 33% win ratio against New Zealand.
Before that, in the sixteen-year period from 1980 to 1995, it was a higher 38%. This is what we really want to see. But even Deans must know that Australian rugby fans won’t be satisfied until we are consistently winning at-least 51% of matches against the World Champions.
We may never see that happen again. It once happened during a small period either side of the new millennium, and considering New Zealand’s dominance, we know it is unrealistic. But we can sure aim for it.
It is worth noting that Deans’ combined win ratio of 40% against New Zealand and South Africa is almost exactly the same as the overall Wallaby record of 41% across the sixteen year Tri-Nations period against these two rugby heavy weights.
It must be said that Deans’ 40% win ratio is a lot higher than the four years preceding his tenure. In this period, it was 31.5%.
Deans also has a 71% win record combined against France and the Home nations. This is 5% better than both the Wallabies overall test record against these sides (66%)and the Wallabies record against them since the game went professional (also 66%).
As the famous Lord Courtney once argued, ‘statistics are figures the simplest must understand and the astutest cannot wriggle out of.’
These statistics show that Robbie Deans has thus performed a lot better with our beloved Wallabies than most perceive.
However 2012 is the year to win back the Bledisloe, otherwise it will surely be time for a new coach.
Looking to join The Roar team? We're searching for an experienced Group Sales Manager to lead our team in Sydney. Yes, this does mean you get to work with the site all day long! If you're a digital media sales star, we want to hear from you. Apply now.
![]()
Passionate about your union? Then sign up to The Roar's brand new daily union email, delivering Roaring articles directly to you day-in, day-out. You'll love it!
Click here to join now!
The Crowd Says (149) | Page 2 of Comments
Have Your Say
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Rugby Union articles
- Where is Deans in the pecking order of rugby coaches? (404)
- Wallabies squad announced: Folau in, no Quade Cooper – yet (267)
- Deans: Should he stay or should he go? (245)
- SPIRO’s Lions Diary: Deans goes for experience, plus Folau (242)
- Australia, time to get behind the Wallabies (229)
- Wallabies 25-man Lions squad: analysis (214)
- Quade Cooper misses Wallaby squad selection (209)
- Could Matt Lucas be a Wallaby bolter? (92)
- Australia, time to get behind the Wallabies (229)
- Who can still win the Super Rugby title? (45)
- Deans must forgive Quade: Slack (132)
- SPIRO: Super Rugby TMOs are making too many mistakes (114)
- Rebels’ O’Connor stays on sidelines (16)
- ‘Lucky 29′ journey into despair (part one) (9)
- Australia, time to get behind the Wallabies (229)
- Who can still win the Super Rugby title? (45)
- ‘Lucky 29′ journey into despair (part one) (9)
- My open letter to the ARU (21)
- Super Rugby teams will skin the Lions (116)
- Super B to the rescue for rugby? (53)
- Picking your ‘First V’ for the Wallabies (68)
Recommend this story.
- Explore:
- All Blacks, robbie deans, Rugby Union, Rugby World Cup, Springboks, wallabies


July 20th 2012 @ 8:32am
B-Rock said | July 20th 2012 @ 8:32am | Report comment
Good article Werewolf.
IMO RD has had the Wallabies performing at or above the level they should playaing at over his time as coach. Wallabies fans have this outdated view that we are the rightful #1 team in the world and anything less than that is a failure. By all means expect to win each game but dont be shocked when we consitently get beaten by a better side like the ABs.
If you remove games against the ABs (not that Im suggesting these games are lost causes or dont matter) hes actually performed very well, particularly against the Boks and NH ex Scotland. Lets face it, the ABs have been dominant against everyone ex Boks in SA over the past 10yrs.
As Wallabies supporters we need to get some perspective on the rugby world. The inconsistencies of the Wallabies are due to lack of depth and an average (at best) pack. Coaching can always be improved (bench management, etc) but is not the sole, or even main reason why the Wallabies are where they are.
July 20th 2012 @ 8:49am
KiwiDave said | July 20th 2012 @ 8:49am | Report comment
Spot on B-Rock. He has done a great job with a team that was a mess post world cup 2007
July 20th 2012 @ 5:03pm
The Werewolf said | July 20th 2012 @ 5:03pm | Report comment
B-rock good to say some sensible perspective. There is no quick fix and Deans has done everything to give us a shout at the 2011 RWC. He brought through the right young talent, got rid of the old dead wood and stumbled at the final hurdle losing a semi to the host nation, New zealand, with some injuries to key players not helping.
We’re still ranked 2nd and so we are still in a position to possibly take the no 1 spot in the next 48 months if things go our way. What we must accept is that if we do get to no 1 it will still be temporary.
There’s nothing to stop at least five sides at the moment to push on to being no 1 for the nest RWC.
July 20th 2012 @ 8:47am
KiwiDave said | July 20th 2012 @ 8:47am | Report comment
And it begins AGAIN…….
The Sack Robbie Deans trolls are warming up again, despite going 3-0 against Wales.
Lets clarify a few things to Robbie Dean’s tenure.
First he came up against possibly the best Springbok side in 2008-2009. Certainly the best one they have put together in the last 20 years. And he has had to come up against an All Black side coached by a true master in Graham Henry which will rank as one of the greatest All Black sides ever.
Considering this he has done pretty damn good considering he had to rebuild the Wallabies from scratch. He has the Wallabies going in the right direction, despite their deficiencies so rather than bagging the guy get behind him.
July 20th 2012 @ 8:54am
Red Kev said | July 20th 2012 @ 8:54am | Report comment
I find it very very interesting that All Blacks fans have any opinion at all on Robbie Deans as Wallaby coach – certinaly they have no standing or right to make the claim “rather than bagging the guy get behind him”.
I have no opinion on Hansen as All Blacks coach or Meyer as Springboks coach. Certainly I have opinions on their selections and will contribute to the discussion of who I think would be better in or out of the squad. But as for the actual coach – I could not give a brass monkey’s left testicle.
So why do New Zealanders all jump on the protect Robbie Deans bandwagon?
I don’t think it’s as simple as because he is a kiwi.
July 20th 2012 @ 9:06am
Riccardo said | July 20th 2012 @ 9:06am | Report comment
“I have no opinion on Hansen as All Blacks coach or Meyer as Springboks coach”
Why not RK?
You seem pretty informed generally and this is not.
I would have thought having some knowledge of an opposing coach’s style and gameplan and associated selections talks exactly to the opinions we all form on outcome.
Are you stirring again?
July 20th 2012 @ 9:10am
Red Kev said | July 20th 2012 @ 9:10am | Report comment
No, I’m just honestly curious.
I really do not care who the ABs or Springboks or England coach is. I certainly have an interest in who they select, but not in the coach themselves. I see your point about knowing the coach allowing you to make informed predictions about the team he’ll produce to play your own team … maybe I’m too parochial (I would hate that if it’s true).
I guess I am wondering if it is because Deans is a Kiwi so you take a (completely understandable) interest in his fortunes, or if it is something else (insert conspiracy theory about sabotaging the Wallabies here).
July 20th 2012 @ 9:34am
Riccardo said | July 20th 2012 @ 9:34am | Report comment
Sabotage mate.
Pure and simple.
July 20th 2012 @ 9:59am
gekko said | July 20th 2012 @ 9:59am | Report comment
Riccardo, Never let the facts get in the way of a good conspiracy story …
)
July 20th 2012 @ 10:12am
KiwiDave said | July 20th 2012 @ 10:12am | Report comment
“So why do New Zealanders all jump on the protect Robbie Deans bandwagon?
I don’t think it’s as simple as because he is a kiwi.”
Probably for the same reason most of you Aussies reckon he is a rubbish coach and has a hidden agenda because he is a Kiwi. The guy is a quality coach and is doing as good as almost all coaches could given what he has had to work with. There seems to be a huge blame the coach mentality in all Australian sport but you look at the most successful teams they stick with coaches through the good times and the bad and rally behind the coach. Many wallaby supporters are short sighted and only look back at failures.
July 20th 2012 @ 10:44am
Red Kev said | July 20th 2012 @ 10:44am | Report comment
Sorry but I consider that response to be complete and utter drivel.
“Probably for the same reason most of you Aussies reckon he is a rubbish coach and has a hidden agenda because he is a Kiwi.”
That is not why I consider him a rubbish coach. In fact I don’t consider him a rubbish coach, I consider him a poor head coach but an excellent skills coach, and unsuited to the Wallabies.
To put it succinctly the reasoning is that good coaches get the best out of their players, Deans does not do this with the Wallabies.
In more detail I believe Deans to be a poor communicator, certainly with the Wallaby stakeholders (i.e. the public) and that this must translate to his communication with players which reduces both his and the players’ effectiveness.
I believe Deans to be a very poor selector, very rarely using form as a yardstick and sticking with favourites long past the point where they should be discarded. Added to that selection issue is his penchant for playing people out of position.
I believe Deans to be tactically inept. This manifests itself as very poor bench management. I infer from this that his tactical preparation of the team for specific opponents is poor – I evaluate Deans coaching as performing the basics with intensity and relying on the calibre and motivation of the players to pull off victories. However he does not fire up or motivate the Wallabies – you can see it in their eyes before a lot of matches.
The most apt comparison I can come up with is courtesy of Wayne Smith at The Australian:
One wonders whether Deans watched the Socceroos’ 4-0 loss to Germany in last year’s FIFA World Cup. If so, did he not detect that the Socceroos’ Dutch coach Pim Verbeek was totally out of step with the Australian mindset, that his tactics and selections reeked of damage limitation?
For mostly better but sometimes worse, Australian teams have a go. The more daunting the opposition, the more aggressively they attack it. Small wonder Verbeek lost his players and lost the Australian public by playing for a meek, submissive draw.
It’s not being jingoistic or anti-Kiwi to suggest that some of the New Zealand influences that Deans cannot help but bring to his coaching do not resonate with Australian players.
July 20th 2012 @ 10:59am
Jutsie said | July 20th 2012 @ 10:59am | Report comment
I’ve seen u state ur last point b4 RK, can I ask u question regarding that, is that a fault of dean’s or the fault of pampered aus players that arent willing to adapt to a coach’s game plan and style?
I can understand a criticism of deans not being able to communicate his plan effectively but saying the plan does not resonate with our players because of different styles in different countries does not stick for me.
I cant think of many professional sports where that could be used as a excuse. If u look at the brumbies this year, White was for the most part able to implement succesfully a sth african game foreign to aus players.
In AFL nathan buckley has changed the style malthouse has drilled into the pies for the last decade and the team is still in the top 4.
If a coach has the trust, respect and belief of the players he should be able to implement any style/plan.
The question is does deans? I honestly don’t know the answer to that and I doubt few roar commentators do.
July 20th 2012 @ 11:15am
Red Kev said | July 20th 2012 @ 11:15am | Report comment
That’s a fair point and I will answer in two parts (although I acknowledge and agree with your final sentence, “I honestly don’t know the answer to that and I doubt few roar commentators do.”)
Firstly to your initial question, “is it the fault of Deans or the fault of pampered Australian players…”
The answer is unequivocally Deans.
Deans picks the squad, if he can’t work with certain players, can’t get them to buy into his game plan then he shouldn’t pick them. Personality clash, or an inability to fit into the style of play the coach wants to go with a perfectly acceptable reason for dropping a player (after all that is why McCabe is being selected at 12 instead of Barnes – the style of play Deans wants to use).
Moreover, if he is picking the players in the belief that he can get them to play to his gameplan and they aren’t – that is a clear failure of coaching and man management on Deans’ part.
If the players are the problem, drop them. Pick players that will do what you want them to do. Those left behind will soon toe the line if they want to represent their country.
Secondly, your examples of implementing unfamiliar game plans are good ones. So the question must be asked, why can’t Deans do the same thing?
If you don’t buy “that the gameplan doesn’t resonate” then surely the fault lies with the coach being unable to impress what he wants onto the players?
If the coach either (a) doesn’t have “the trust, respect and belief of the players” and so can’t implement his game plan or (b) is unable to get the players to buy into the gameplan he wants, surely the coach has to go.
Again in my mind it boils down to one very simple metric – is the coach able to get the best out of the players he selects and has at his disposal. Deans has three once-in-a-generation talents at his disposal in Cooper, O’Connor and Beale and the Wallaby attack is … misfiring would be understating it. I think Deans fails.
July 20th 2012 @ 11:19am
Jutsie said | July 20th 2012 @ 11:19am | Report comment
Fair point and like I said deans is at fault for not communicating the plan effectively, but my argument is that the plan itself is not at fault as any professional athlete should be able to adapt to whatever plan his coach implements.
And I just a sidenote, add genia and pocock to that list. It will be criminal if we waste the talent of these 5 brilliant individuals.
July 20th 2012 @ 11:25am
Red Kev said | July 20th 2012 @ 11:25am | Report comment
Fair enough Justie, I can understand that. I guess I’m just a “the buck stops here” kind of guy.
July 20th 2012 @ 1:13pm
WoobliesFan said | July 20th 2012 @ 1:13pm | Report comment
“I’ve seen u state ur last point b4 RK, can I ask u question regarding that, is that a fault of dean’s or the fault of pampered aus players that arent willing to adapt to a coach’s game plan and style?”
How about a bunch of unpampered and self-thinking players who question his ability to coach?
July 20th 2012 @ 1:22pm
jeznez said | July 20th 2012 @ 1:22pm | Report comment
Good comments today RK – my thinking is very similar.
July 20th 2012 @ 1:46pm
Jutsie said | July 20th 2012 @ 1:46pm | Report comment
@wooblies fan, mate if you don’t agree with the coach’s viewpoint you challenge him on it, you don’t stay quiet in the change room and then go out play without intensity/passion. Especially when your representing your country. When your representing your country you should have the same pride and intensity that the wallaby forwards show’d in the tri-nations decider in every bloody match.
You don’t pick and choose when to perform like that just cos u question the coach’s tactics/ability.
Its an issue in aus society not only in rugby but in general that we pander to the feelings/needs of gen-y kids without commanding respect too. I may sound like an old bloke ranting but im actually 28 so am technically a gen y kid too.
July 20th 2012 @ 11:08am
Riccardo said | July 20th 2012 @ 11:08am | Report comment
“It’s not being jingoistic or anti-Kiwi to suggest that some of the New Zealand influences that Deans cannot help but bring to his coaching do not resonate with Australian players”
I don’t agree with everything in your post RK but the above is essentially what I believe the problem to be and is about as accurately summed up as I have seen here.
However, as already alluded to by other posters a some of the resonation problem MUST be the players’ if they need Deans to “fire them up”. They should be sufficiently motivated just by wearing the national jersey and proud of the heritage it represents.
July 20th 2012 @ 11:13am
Jutsie said | July 20th 2012 @ 11:13am | Report comment
It comes down to professionalism and pride in the end, if the players need to be pampered and only perform when adequately motivated by the coach then I think new players are required just as much as a new coach is.
There was an article written by an afl player darren jolly on realfooty.com.au where he compared the coaching styles of the 3 different afl coaches he worked with. He compared coaching to training a donkey, you either use the carrot or the stick to persuade the donkey to perform his tasks.
IMO a coach needs to nurture the players so he has them on side but he also needs to command respect and not be afraid to pull them into line.
I think in the last few years there has been too much emphasis in australian sports in general in nurturing players and involving them in all processes without also commanding respect too.
July 20th 2012 @ 11:26am
Red Kev said | July 20th 2012 @ 11:26am | Report comment
Cheers Riccardo, it’s probably not clear from my post, but that is another Wayne Smith quote so I can’t take any credit for it
July 20th 2012 @ 12:37pm
WQ said | July 20th 2012 @ 12:37pm | Report comment
“For mostly better but sometimes worse, Australian teams have a go. The more daunting the opposition, the more aggressively they attack it.”
Red Kev, you don’t think that most Teams have this mind set?
July 20th 2012 @ 12:44pm
Red Kev said | July 20th 2012 @ 12:44pm | Report comment
Nope.
I’ve never seen an English team in soccer, rugby, cricket or even lawn bowls with the “have a go ya mug” mentality.
Nor do the Springboks every play in this fashion (at least not in the 15 odd years I’ve been watching rugby).
While the situation doesn’t apply to the All Blacks (because there isn’t a team more daunting in world rugby), New Zealand’s cricketers play a similar sort of game. It is a very ANZAC mentality to be honest – at least at elite level. I imagine most school teams play with similar abandon.
July 20th 2012 @ 1:14pm
WQ said | July 20th 2012 @ 1:14pm | Report comment
Red Kev, we need to stick to Rugby surely.
There is very little point in comparing any other Teams in any other sport, after all in some of the sports you have mentioned a draw is acceptable.
By the way the NZ bit in the middle of A and AC of ANZAC stands for New Zealand
July 20th 2012 @ 1:24pm
Red Kev said | July 20th 2012 @ 1:24pm | Report comment
Fair enough – other than the pacific island nations – no, no team plays with that mentality in my opinion (and the PI teams are becoming less entertaining and more structured as more of their players ply their trade in Europe – last years world cup showcased the least interesting Fijian and Samoan games I’ve ever seen).
The Wallabies used to look like a team that went out to score more points than the opposition (the All Blacks are good for three tries? that’s fine we’ll score five), under Deans they play like a team that don’t want to give the opposition too many scoring chances.
Of the rest:
Wales, France and Ireland can all turn it on, but it is not the default mentality for any of them.
SA, England, Scotland, Italy and Argentina all try to shut you out of the match, not blow you off the park.
NZ the analogy doesn’t apply to because I doubt they come up against “daunting” opposition except perhaps once every decade against the Lions (and last time it happened Dan Carter put them to the sword).
July 20th 2012 @ 1:30pm
WQ said | July 20th 2012 @ 1:30pm | Report comment
Your analysis of all of those Teams is accurate if attached to results, however I find it very difficult to believe they all head out with the intention of minimising the loss as opposed trying to win the game?
July 20th 2012 @ 1:36pm
Red Kev said | July 20th 2012 @ 1:36pm | Report comment
Ahhh – but there’s a difference between trying to win the game and having a crack at the opposition. There are many ways to win a game of rugby and slow, grinding, pressure tactics are one way – minimise your mistakes, play for field position, smother the opposition, look for mistakes and penalties. At the other end of the spectrum is fast, wide, expansive all-out attack. This is what I’m talking about. No one goes out onto the field now with the mindset of attacking the opposition from every phase, except perhaps the All Blacks when Carter (or Cruden now) is in the mood.
July 20th 2012 @ 2:23pm
WQ said | July 20th 2012 @ 2:23pm | Report comment
I think a fair bit of that is to do with the quality and skills of the players you have at your disposal. There have been plenty of Teams that I have played in that wanted to attack at all costs and really stick it to the opposition, sometimes we did and sometimes we did not! The days that we did not, had nothing to do with mindset, we entered the game with the same intention but failed. More often than not this was about skills, ability and execution and very little to do with our desire to have a go at the opposition.
We would not have turned up if we did not want to have a go at the opposition!
July 20th 2012 @ 2:42pm
Red Kev said | July 20th 2012 @ 2:42pm | Report comment
Again – that is (I assume and I apologise if I am wrong) not at elite level. The mind set is very different between the majority of rugby players and the elite professional athletes for which rugby is their full time job (and this discussion has focussed on national teams that play in the Rugby World Cup).
July 20th 2012 @ 9:41pm
WQ said | July 20th 2012 @ 9:41pm | Report comment
I don’t think so Red Kev, whilst I accept that there is a perception that elite athletes think differently it is not correct. They don’t think any differently and if there is an elite athlete out there that does not want to tear the opposition to bits, I’ll eat my hat!
July 20th 2012 @ 11:45am
Lats said | July 20th 2012 @ 11:45am | Report comment
Not sure I agree with that. What I do think is that people who dislike Deans are more vocal than those the other way around.
Jesus Christ himself wouldn’t have gotten any more wins out of the Wallabies IMO
July 20th 2012 @ 5:07pm
The Werewolf said | July 20th 2012 @ 5:07pm | Report comment
July 20th 2012 @ 8:58am
WQ said | July 20th 2012 @ 8:58am | Report comment
I think you are spot on here KiwiDave.
I am not a Robbie Deans fan and as a result have some sympathy for the Wallaby fans that are frustrated by him. However they are completely out of order to blame him for their results over the last 5 years.
Quite simply he has coached the Wallabies against an excellent SA outfit in 08/09 and one of the best ever NZ outfits. If you take those things into consideration he probably has not done to badly.
July 20th 2012 @ 9:00am
Jerry said | July 20th 2012 @ 9:00am | Report comment
I’d rank that Bok side of 97-98 above the 09 side. And the Boks of 08 were nothing special – many of the same players, but not really in form.
On top of that, the AB’s of 08/09 were largely rebuilding and Deans still went 1-7 against them.
I agree that a lot of people are overly harsh on Deans but equally a lot of people are extremely lenient on him, and you may be guilty of the latter.
July 20th 2012 @ 9:50am
WQ said | July 20th 2012 @ 9:50am | Report comment
Jerry, I would not argue with you about the 97/98 SA side against the 08/09 SA Team, however the 97/98 Team did not play against a Robbie Deans coached side.
The 08/09 SA Team was an excellent Team and did not start to fall away until 10/11 seasons and I would then agree with you that they were carrying players well past their prime.
The AB’s of 08/09 were not rebuilding anymore than any other time and the nucleus of the side that crashed out of the 2007 RWC remained with the side right through to RWC 2011.
I can assure you there is no leniency towards Robbie Deans from me. I will never forgive him for the part he played in the failed AB RWC campaign in 2003. Robbie Deans and John Mitchell completely derailed what should have been an excellent campaign for the AB’s by making very poor selections and then refusing to change their tactics when things were going badly. The Carlos Spencer days for the AB’s remind me a lot of the Quade Cooper days for the Wallabies!
July 20th 2012 @ 11:25am
Jerry said | July 20th 2012 @ 11:25am | Report comment
“The AB’s of 08/09 were not rebuilding anymore than any other time and the nucleus of the side that crashed out of the 2007 RWC remained with the side right through to RWC 2011.”
If you look at the team that played the 07 Quarter Final, 5 starters (McAlister, Kelleher, Robinson, Oliver & Hayman) plus 2 bench players (Evans & Jack) along with 3 further squad members (Howlett, Mauger and Thorne – that’s about 150 test caps btw).
So a full 3rd of the squad was gone in 08. I think that qualifies as rebuilding in anyone’s book.
The 08 Bok side was a textbook WC hangover. Plus a few injuries (Smit out for most of the season) or senior guys not in form (Matfield was over-played having had no off season due to a six month contract in France). They were still capable of good performances but were generally pretty flat. And of course they had a muppet as a coach.
And, objectively, I don’t actually know if the 09 Boks were really all time great. They had a great run against NZ, sure, but they were 5-4 against their other opponents that season. I don’t think a team with a 66% win percentage is really an all time great squad.
July 20th 2012 @ 12:01pm
Jutsie said | July 20th 2012 @ 12:01pm | Report comment
The boks of 09 just played the rules of that year quite well, however by the end of the tri-nations and heading into the november tests their one-dimensional gameplan was found out and at easily dismantled by the wallabies, ireland and france. Hell even the saracens came close to beating them.
July 20th 2012 @ 12:44pm
WQ said | July 20th 2012 @ 12:44pm | Report comment
“So a full 3rd of the squad was gone in 08. I think that qualifies as rebuilding in anyone’s book.”
Maybe for the Wallabies and their supporters however certainly not for the All Blacks. The AB’s regularly turn off players hence the reason not many AB’s have played 100 Tests.
The 08/09 Boks at your own admission had a great run against New Zealand, whom just happen to be the bench mark of World Rugby, enough said I think Jerry!
July 20th 2012 @ 1:07pm
Jerry said | July 20th 2012 @ 1:07pm | Report comment
I said the 09 Boks had a good run against NZ. The 08 Boks went 1-2 against NZ including being beaten 19-0 at home – only the 5th time in history the Boks had been kept scoreless at home and the first time in over a century.
And losing 1/3 of a squad is still rebuilding time, even for NZ.
July 20th 2012 @ 9:42pm
WQ said | July 20th 2012 @ 9:42pm | Report comment
No losing a third of the squad for the AB’s is just another season, do your research.
July 21st 2012 @ 7:00am
Jerry said | July 21st 2012 @ 7:00am | Report comment
No, it’s not WQ. Show me another time when there’s been an exodus like that.
July 20th 2012 @ 4:48pm
Kuruki said | July 20th 2012 @ 4:48pm | Report comment
IMO Deans done wonders for Australia initially by blooding allot of young talent. He may not have got the results but there was some genuine rebuilding going on.
Heading into the World cup i always felt it was a year to early for them and they would be firing on all cylinders in 2012. Injury to key players has kind of put a halt to that theory for the moment, but when everyone is back on board i would expect this team to start delivering. This is the year i will judge Robbie Deans, he has done the ground work and has developed some very special players who should now be at the top of their games.
JOC Cooper Genia Beale Pocock Ioane. These guys need to step up and deliver this season.
If he cannot get a consistent high level of performance from these guys this year then i will agree he needs to go. He has had the luxury of picking and developing his players for long enough. Lessons should have been learned by all parties over the past few years, there is no excuses not to deliver anymore, there is no more building/developing for this group the time has come to deliver.
There may still be tinkering going on here and there but the core of this group should be able to keep the machine rolling well enough. if i was Deans i would be inviting in some true blue Aussie legends to try and inject a bit of passion into this side before the big games. This is one area i feel they are lacking as a group. Twitter seems to bring out more emotion then the wallaby jumper for some of these metro’s.
July 20th 2012 @ 5:10pm
The Werewolf said | July 20th 2012 @ 5:10pm | Report comment
Well there is some passionate opinion in this chain.
My mail is that the players are big believers in Robbie Deans.
July 20th 2012 @ 7:29pm
Ben S said | July 20th 2012 @ 7:29pm | Report comment
‘Considering this he has done pretty damn good considering he had to rebuild the Wallabies from scratch.’
Really? How so. Please explain, because you keep repeating this as if simple repetition actually makes it so.
July 20th 2012 @ 9:00am
Gary Russell-Sharam said | July 20th 2012 @ 9:00am | Report comment
Red Kev made some relatively good points that I agree with. I do not think that he should be branded as a Dean’s hater and nor should I. What Red Kev was espousing was the deficiencies that Dean’s has as a coach.
I was privileged to hear Tony McGahan speak at a function last Wednesday and do believe that what Red Kev said about his influence on the Wallabies side this season is absolutely correct. If and when the coaching scenario changes I would like to see Tony McGahan stay in the mix for a position with the Wallabies. Perhaps as a McKenzie, McGahan combo.
The post by Uncle Argyle is very interesting and is quite plausible in it’s content. IMO Deans is a good super rugby coach but as has been previously stated by many he just doesn’t cut it at the higher level, at least not with this Wallaby group.
And I tend to agree with werewolf that if deans does not win the Bedisloe this year he should be replaced as the wallaby coach.
One point that I would love to make is I can not understand why Greg Holmes does not get a gig at the loose head side of the Wallabies scrum, he is a proven performer that is in great form at the moment but Deans keeps passing him by. I have watched him this season, quite critically and I can not fault his performance this season. I know we all have our favorites but looking at the front row without favoritism why is he being avoided and others of lesser talent being used. Also he can at a pinch play on both sides of the scrum so he has even better potential than others, I’m mystified at his non selection
July 20th 2012 @ 10:35am
Cattledog said | July 20th 2012 @ 10:35am | Report comment
Gary, good summation as were the points of Red Kev and a good article, Werewolf. Tend to agree with you re Holmes but my mystification continues concerning Dean’s selections and also his use of the game day 22. For these two reasons alone I have become a Deans critic, which is well documented.
WW’s statistics do paint a different picture of Deans, however, I can’t help but think these stats would be so much better if his selections and player use were either deferred to someone with such competence or significantly improved. I think Deans’ great at identifying and bringing through talent and coaching the team in general, but he needs to be much more decisive in his selections and particularly in his replacements.
Whilst I would much prefer see an Australian as coach, at the time I agreed Deans was the best proposition and now tend to think that WW’s final sentence is the crux of the matter. This will allow the succession to a new Wallaby coach more palatable and allow Deans to move sideways if necessary and deemed appropriate. Without a Bledisloe win, it could be ugly.
July 20th 2012 @ 1:00pm
jeznez said | July 20th 2012 @ 1:00pm | Report comment
GSR – it is bizarre, I could not understand why he was ignored during the Welsh series and will remain mystified when the RC squad is completed as I fully expect Deans to ignore him again. I mean they included Alexander in the squad again…….just strange.
July 20th 2012 @ 9:51am
gekko said | July 20th 2012 @ 9:51am | Report comment
Statistics being like a bikini, ‘what they reveal is interesting but what they conceal is vital.’
July 20th 2012 @ 10:33am
Tissot Time said | July 20th 2012 @ 10:33am | Report comment
Nice
July 20th 2012 @ 10:35am
WQ said | July 20th 2012 @ 10:35am | Report comment
Priceless gekko, priceless!
July 20th 2012 @ 10:21am
Dan said | July 20th 2012 @ 10:21am | Report comment
Very good points werewolf, I’ve often wondered too why people fail to recognise the genuine achievement that has been our domination of the Sprinboks for the past 4 years. It’s been quite a strange thing really too, with the wallabies winning many games in which the Springboks have out-muscled them and pushed them all over the park – but it’s happened so many times now that it is clearly no longer just luck; the wallabies just have a game that troubles the ‘boks in a way that other teams (bar the all blacks) do not.
I think what it comes down to is that the Wallabies aren’t a complete package, but neither are any other side in world rugby outside of NZ. The Wales series was also an incredible triumph, as Wales are a very well rounded rugby side and have come off an incredible 6 Nations.
In many ways the results seem to indicate Australia has become somewhat akin to France – capable of unpredictably tenacious and brilliant performances that can see them beat anyone, but also equally are able to become so disorganised that they’ll lose to almost anyone as well. The team is like a bipolar patient in that sense, and that’s not necessarily the worst thing in the world – it’s far better than consistent mediocrity.
July 20th 2012 @ 1:02pm
jeznez said | July 20th 2012 @ 1:02pm | Report comment
Dan, the Boks have generally out-muscled us in the collisions and been stronger in the clean out. But with regards to getting pushed around we have generally had the stronger scrum during this period of success.
July 20th 2012 @ 3:25pm
SandBox said | July 20th 2012 @ 3:25pm | Report comment
have to disagree with the France comment.
We are still winning some close games, and games that the stats say we should have lost. Biggest example is the Boks QF (yes, Bryce played a big part), but look at our d in that game. No chance of winning, even with the 15 penalties going our way, if we didn’t produce one of the best defensive performances I’ve seen in Rugby.
Also v Wales, we won some tight ones there, and didn’t fold like the French would have in at least 2 of the 3
We have been inconsistent, but I really hope we are a way off from being like France. Maybe that’s just wishful thinking on my part.
July 20th 2012 @ 4:09pm
biltongbek said | July 20th 2012 @ 4:09pm | Report comment
Yes, OZ won some very close contests vs SA in the past few years, matches that could have gone either way.
Unfortunately for us the results says 8 wins OZ and 4 wins SA, but those results belie the fact that it has been much closer than that, I call it australian smarts, and PDV idiocy.
Remember in Bloemfontein?
SA lead, 1 minute on the clock, we have posession and pick and drive, the third time we pick and drive we are blown for sealing off and Beale kicks a 50 meter penalty for OZ to win.
Remember last year our Tri Nation match in SA, we attack and attack, lose the match 9-14, once again simplly no execution in the last pass. dropped something like 4 balls with near certain chances to score.
Then the famous QF, well no need to talk about that.
So yes the statistics and results tell us OZ lead 8-4 against PDV, yet it was a lot closer than that.
July 20th 2012 @ 11:00am
Brett McKay said | July 20th 2012 @ 11:00am | Report comment
a great analysis Wolfman, and some really interetsing points being raised here throughout; well played all…
July 20th 2012 @ 1:31pm
Red Kev said | July 20th 2012 @ 1:31pm | Report comment
I agree – everyone seems to have taken sensible pills this morning – well articulated points of view and no flamewars – it’s almost like we’re all adults or something.
July 20th 2012 @ 1:53pm
Brett McKay said | July 20th 2012 @ 1:53pm | Report comment
Kev, of all the things Roares have been referred to in the past, I don’t think ‘adult’ features very often!!
It’s just been interesting to read through it all. I agree with some points more than others here today, but all points are well made regardless..
July 20th 2012 @ 2:07pm
Red Kev said | July 20th 2012 @ 2:07pm | Report comment
I wonder what he has in store for the (pt 2) article?
July 20th 2012 @ 2:05pm
Riccardo said | July 20th 2012 @ 2:05pm | Report comment
Steady on RK.
I’m only an adult again when I get back to the kids after a few quiets tonight.
We need KPM to rev things up!
July 20th 2012 @ 11:02am
Old Alo said | July 20th 2012 @ 11:02am | Report comment
It is too easy to criticise Deans but he and the Wallabies have been let down by the provinces, especially NSW which has been a serial underperformer in the professional era. Despite this, he has raised the Wallabies from No 5 in the world to No 2 at a time when the All Blacks have been dominant and vastly superior to everyone else except the Boks.
If we had a province like the Crusaders or the Bulls in this country, let alone three like the Crusaders, Chiefs and Hurricanes, or the Bulls, Stormers and Sharks, t is almost certain that Deans would have won at least one Bledisloe in his time.
The Rod McQueen era was a golden age for the Wallabies but it was not the norm and to think it was is delusional.
July 20th 2012 @ 11:21am
ohtani's jacket said | July 20th 2012 @ 11:21am | Report comment
You start off by claiming that Robbie Deans’ 62% winning percentage is higher than the four years preceeding him, but Deans is into his fifth year as Wallabies coach. His record in his first four years was 58.9%, practically the same as the 60% winning record that Jones and Connolly had from 2004-07. You also mention the Wallabies’ overall record of 52%, but their record in the professional era has been 64.2%. Deans’ tenure has been par for the course. Couldn’t win the Bledislioe Cup, couldn’t win multiple Tri-Nations titles despite establishing dominance over South Africa, couldn’t go undefeated on an end of year tour or claim a Grand Slam, couldn’t beat Scotland and couldn’t win the World Cup. He replaced a bunch of aging and established test players who couldn’t win anything with young players who couldn’t win anything, except for the odd consolation prize here and there. Legend.
July 20th 2012 @ 11:24am
Jiggles said | July 20th 2012 @ 11:24am | Report comment
“Many of us also expected him to win last year’s World Cup”
Really? you must not have been watching the wallabies all that closely through out the lead up then.
July 20th 2012 @ 11:43am
Jerry said | July 20th 2012 @ 11:43am | Report comment
You mean when they beat the 1 and 2 sides in the world in 3 out of 4 matches….
July 20th 2012 @ 12:18pm
Jiggles said | July 20th 2012 @ 12:18pm | Report comment
I mean in the 4 years of the Deans tenure where we only just beat the All Blacks once in 2008, 2010 and in 2011 all on neutral and home turf. This coupled with defeats to the Scottish, Samoans and English at home why would anyone think we would just turn it on in NZ?
July 20th 2012 @ 12:33pm
Jerry said | July 20th 2012 @ 12:33pm | Report comment
Yeah, I know what you mean. While “expect to win’ is a bit much, they did have to be rated as a very good chance. Good form going in (TN victory), good draw (avoiding SA and NZ before the final if they’d won the pool) etc.
July 20th 2012 @ 5:13pm
The Werewolf said | July 20th 2012 @ 5:13pm | Report comment
I didn’t sayI was one of them!
July 23rd 2012 @ 10:04am
sheek said | July 23rd 2012 @ 10:04am | Report comment
Jiggles,
Yes, I thought that was a very odd statement myself. If most Aussie rugby fans EXPECTED the Wallabies to win the world cup, as opposed to HOPED, then clearly most Aussie rugby fans are living in la-la land.
July 20th 2012 @ 11:29am
Jiggles said | July 20th 2012 @ 11:29am | Report comment
Also where did you get your stats from? they’re not exactly lining up with the source I am looking at.
July 20th 2012 @ 5:18pm
The Werewolf said | July 20th 2012 @ 5:18pm | Report comment
espn
If you’re prepared to do as much research as i did. Go ahead.
I trust you’ll come back and apologise for the inference fella!
July 20th 2012 @ 5:33pm
Jiggles said | July 20th 2012 @ 5:33pm | Report comment
I’m looking at pick n’ go, and they’re still not lining up. Why would I apologise?
July 20th 2012 @ 6:09pm
The Werewolf said | July 20th 2012 @ 6:09pm | Report comment
I don’t count draws in win ratios where as most counts do.
I think that is misleading beacuse IMHO a draw is not a win and as good as a loss. i also took the liberty and rounding down or up as appropriate to make round numbers for ease of reading.
Other than that i can’t think what the problem is. But then you haven’t questioned any specific stats.
my stats were double checked.