O’Connell vs McKay, round 2: a leaguie grills a rah-rah, again
By Brett McKay, 12 Oct 2012 Brett McKay is a Roar Expert
- Tagged:
- Kurtley Beale, NRL, robbie deans, Rugby League, Rugby Union, Super Rugby
Kurtley Beale ruled out of Rugby World Cup semi-final against the All Blacks (AAP Image/Dave Hunt)
Related coverage
Having committed myself to taking a look at the development of Sevens rugby in Australia next week, I’ve jolted my expert colleague, Ryan O’Connell, back into action by deciding to take his grill questions earlier than anticipated.
We love these ‘leaguie grills a rah-rah’ collaborative pieces, because having questions come from a relative outsider forces us to tackle alternate perspectives and observations about our codes of choice. It’s the very point of interactivity that The Roar was built on.
As per the previous round of O’Connell v McKay, and as Ryan explained on Tuesday, I didn’t get these questions until late yesterday, meaning there was very little time for me to put these answers together before earning the promised wrath of a nervous editor.
Anyway, here goes…
Ryan: Matt Giteau said Robbie Deans has poor man management skills. Quade Cooper said the Wallabies set-up is a toxic environment. Richie McCaw stated that Deans doesn’t listen to his assistants. Is this growing evidence to suggest Deans has serious flaws as a coach? Or simply the opinion of three individuals with agendas?
Brett: Whoa, so much for an easy question first. It’s certainly the opinion of two individuals with agendas, that’s for sure. I don’t think either Giteau or Cooper would be too sad to see Robbie Deans moved on.
McCaw didn’t quite say Deans didn’t listen to his assistants in that now widely-publicised book excerpt (and released just before a Bledisloe and in time for Christmas, what a wonderful coincidence!). What he actually said was that Deans didn’t necessarily like to be challenged by his assistants at the Crusaders, which is slightly different. What McCaw is saying is that Deans was more of the domineering head coach, rather than coaching via committee.
Regardless, it’s given those that needed or wanted more evidence that Deans has serious flaws further ammunition, definitely. Frankly, whether a coach prefers the ‘my way or the highway’ method, or a more collaborative model, is neither here nor there to me.
The only currency that matters is the ‘win’ column. And it’s fair to say Deans’ currency in the only exchange that seems to matter – playing New Zealand – has been trading at well below parity. It’s been reported that the ARU board may make a decision after Brisbane, so I guess we’ll see soon enough if Deans’ Bledisloe record is what ultimately costs him his job.
ROC: Now that LeBron James has won an NBA Championship, I think he’ll reach even greater heights with the monkey off his back. I get exactly the same feeling about the All Blacks and their Rugby World Cup triumph. What do you think?
BM: So I see you’ve dealt with the Bulldogs’ grand final loss by moving straight onto the NBA…
Subtle dig aside, I like your analogy and I reckon you’re bang on. The fact that the All Blacks are unbeaten in 2012 adds weight to the theory, too. It must be anything but depressing for those at New Zealand Rugby Union HQ in Wellington to walk past every bloody rugby trophy under the sun, while our friends at St. Leonards walk past dead flies and cobwebs daily. Anyway, I digress…
In the New Zealand press this week, Mark Reason (who’s not everyone’s cup of tea) wrote, “Kieran Read, Aaron Smith and Dan Carter are better than very good. There is a chance that in the next couple of years, they could develop into the best triumvirate of all time. The link between number eight, half back and first five has always defined the great rugby teams and this All Blacks team may yet approach those heights.”
On the surface, this seems like a big call, but when you look at the individuals named – and even with Carter having had a 30th birthday now – it’s easy to see that these three could play for another five years, and upwards of 50 Tests together.
Of the three, only Read has won a Rugby World Cup, and although Carter’s record is still impressive, the hunger of these three will be crucial to sustained success.
As a Wallaby supporter, it’s actually quite sobering to think how good the All Blacks might become between now and then without any major weight of expectation, as you rightly suggest.
ROC: Considering the injury toll, is it difficult to truly gauge the Wallabies performance in this year’s Rugby Championship? Or is that a cop-out?
BM: I’ll guarantee that comments today will absolutely say the injury toll means it’s difficult to gauge the performance in TRC this year. There’s nothing surer.
I get that. It’s an easy out to say this was a third XV, or to point to the 20-odd injuries. And that’s not to say the injuries aren’t a factor in selection; of course they are. But the truth is there are always players unavailable for some reason, as there are in any professional sport you’d care to name.
So that’s why I’ve largely ignored the injury toll in offering my thoughts on games, instead preferring to focus on what played out in front of me. And on that front I think the performance on the field has been disappointing. The records will show the Wallabies finished second in the comp, but you have to dig deeper than that.
The Wallabies conceded more points than they scored, to the tune of more than five converted tries, they scored the equal-least number of tries in the tournament, and they achieved no bonus points at all. Evident skill levels were low and error rates were high.
And any series in which you’re letting in more points than you’re scoring can’t really be viewed favourably, in my humble opinion.
ROC: This time next year, will Kurtley Beale and Michael Hooper be wearing the number 10 and 7 jerseys, respectively, for the Wallabies?
BM: Beale definitely should be wearing the no.10 next year, for both the Rebels and the Wallabies. Berrick Barnes was good in the June series, but Beale now looks the most complete option at flyhalf in Australia.
He definitely deserves to be the chief playmaker to Europe and into the Lions series next year. He’s become precisely the player he was expected to be when he first left school, albeit without the same level of success.
Hooper is not as certain to wear the no.7 though, and that’s despite the outstanding series he’s had in TRC. How he performs in the Waratahs environment next year, and how David Pocock performs in Hooper’s old Brumbies jumper will ultimately decide this one, and I certainly won’t be writing off Pocock. But it is great to have quality options at openside again.
ROC: What would you deem a successful Spring Tour for the Wallabies?
BM: If winning only three from six games in TRC, and the general performance being labelled “disappointing” is the guide, then I’d reason the Wallabies would need three wins from four in Europe to have a successful tour.
That’s not an impossible task, but it will require very good performances – better than anything we’ve seen so far in 2012 – in the opening games against France and England. They should account for Italy in Florence, and Wales haven’t beaten Australia home or away since 2008.
It can be done though, and I’ll be suitably impressed if and when they do.
Brett McKay is a former non-tackling scrumhalf and not-quite-1st Grade middle order stalwart. A rugby and cricket expert for The Roar since July 2009 (having joined in Sept 2008), Brett has written for Inside Rugby and Cricket Australia, and is also PLAY Canberra's rugby correspondent. He tweets from @BMcSport
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.
- Explore:
- Kurtley Beale, NRL, robbie deans, Rugby League, Rugby Union, Super Rugby

October 12th 2012 @ 6:03am
Billy Bob said | October 12th 2012 @ 6:03am | Report comment
Well Brett, or is it Paul?, no-one can call you a fence sitter today.
Nothing is a better sight to me than seeing Kurtley having a good game in gold. And I would never like him to be dropped (remember a few weeks ago many were calling for his axing) but for a master selection stroke we might be still arguing about his value.
But I’m not sure about the length of his pass. I think he could play 12 (or 15) if the team required, or if there was another option at 10.
That said I am happy for him to prove me wrong and lead the wallabies backs to break defences and records at will .
October 12th 2012 @ 8:29am
Brett McKay said | October 12th 2012 @ 8:29am | Report comment
That was quite funny yesterday Billy Bob, I don’t think I’ve ever been mistaken for Paul Cully before (or vice versa, I’d imagine!)
Your point about Beale’s pass is valid, he certainly doesn’t have the same length that Cooper and even Barnes has. But then, he’s got a bigger kick than Cooper, so it’s six of one, half a dozen of the other. Realistically, I think if a flyhalf can put a runner through a gap with a pass, it probably doesn’t matter if the runner is 10m away or 15m away, as long as ball and man and gap all arrive at the same time..
October 12th 2012 @ 12:13pm
Mike said | October 12th 2012 @ 12:13pm | Report comment
“as long as ball and man and gap all arrive at the same time”
Ha! Easy! … :\
From von Clausewitz:
“The important things are always simple; the simple things are always difficult”.
October 12th 2012 @ 5:03pm
soapit said | October 12th 2012 @ 5:03pm | Report comment
super long passes are much overused anyway. as soon as the ball hits the air they can all drift across to where the ball is going. theres a time and a place but they are not that common.
October 12th 2012 @ 6:17am
Red Kev said | October 12th 2012 @ 6:17am | Report comment
Good answers Brett.
I think Beale is being far over-hyped, had Cooper put in those two error-prone performances and created only one try he’d've been hounded on these forums and by the media. When it comes to actually directing a backline and creating opportunities to score Cooper is so far ahead of anyone else we have available it is astonishing. I guess next season, during which I do hope Beale lines up at 10 for the Rebels all year, will be telling.
I was especially impressed at you providing more analysis than “the Wallabies came second” in the inaugural TRC.
The Wallabies scored 7 tries and conceded 12 in 6 matches during the Rugby Championship. For 2012 that brings the total to 12 tries scored and 16 conceded in 10 matches. Harking back to the 2011 RWC the Wallabies scored 25 tries and conceded 7 in 7 matches, but of those 25 only 7 were against “strong” nations (Italy, SA and Wales).
The once feared Wallaby attack is impotent these days.
I was however disappointed that you choose to brush off Cooper’s and Giteau’s remarks based on the fact that both players have “agendas” (which I take to mean egos and are thus disliked by a large portion of the public). Let’s not forget it isn’t just Cooper and Giteau and McCaw, it is also Cullen and Umaga and Oliver, and two separate boards of the NZRU who didn’t think Deans was suitable as a head coach of the All Blacks. Whether Deans is autocratic or collaborative is (as you say) simply a difference of management style, but if a style clearly isn’t working (and no-one could claim the Wallabies are working well) it is an issue.
Serious questions have to be asked about Deans’ communication skills.
I would expect a 3-1 end of year tour. Add in a loss to the All Blacks and a series loss to the Lions (2-1) and we’re left with a 4-4 split from the next 8 matches. Are the board and the Wallaby supporters going to sit on their hands again and say it’s “okay”? For how long must we put up with under-performing Wallabies? Deans’ record is significantly below the professional era average both overall and against the All Blacks.
October 12th 2012 @ 8:50am
Brett McKay said | October 12th 2012 @ 8:50am | Report comment
Cheers Kev..
You are probably right, that there’s a bit of over-hype around Beale at the moment, but I suppose in these times of injury and illness and unavailability, we’ll clutch to whatever hope’s there.
I’ll add the qualifier that in saying Beale is the man for no.10 in 2013, I’m assuming that Cooper maintains his current state of unavailability. Obviously, if Cooper and the ARU kiss and make up, that equation becomes complicated again.
I take your point on Deans’ methods of communication needing to be looked at. Also, I wasn’t really trying to brush the Giteau and Cooper parts of the question away, it’s just that they obvioulsy had or have issues with the coach and so their arguments are always going to be slightly one-sided. That doesn’t take away from your point though.
And as was well discussed yesterday on PAUL’s piece, I do think McCaw’s comments have been blown out of proportion on this side of the creek. I’ve still not seen the book, let alone read it, but having read the two excerpts in their entirety, I think too much has been been made of his ‘choosing’ Henry. McCaw stated that both would do the job well, and that he would happily work with either, but he thought Henry’s collaborative system might work better in the ABs environment than Deans’ authoritarian approach. That strikes me as a business decision almost, certainly not a declaration that Deans is unsuitable, and certainly not side-swiping his Crusaders mentor, either.
Anyway, we don’t need to go into all that again today – as you say, clearly there’s communication issues, and I’d imagine Deans has learned a bit about himself in the last month/six weeks too. It will be interesting to see how he emerges from all this.
And on the Spring tour question, though I said 3-1 would have to be the mark, I’m not sure how confident I am of getting there. I wuoldn’t at all be surprised with a 2-2 return, to be honest, and maybe even that they win a game they perhaps weren’t supposed to, like say France, but then drop the game to Wales. I think this will be a tough tour..
October 12th 2012 @ 9:11am
Red Kev said | October 12th 2012 @ 9:11am | Report comment
You’re right (of course).
I think Deans will keep his 100% record against Italy, France and Wales this tour, England will demolish us though.
Speaking of kissing and making up … KPM – I would like add another item to my list of good things I think of Robbie Deans (since you asked me what if any qualities I liked about him). The reason I think the Wallabies will come away with a 3-1 EOYT split is that Deans has taught the Wallabies how to win the tight matches. It is a skill the Wallabies have not had for a long time and they are getting better at it, obviously it doesn’t always land your way but I now expect them to have an even chance in tight matches rather than almost no chance.
October 12th 2012 @ 9:20am
Brett McKay said | October 12th 2012 @ 9:20am | Report comment
That’s a really good point Kev, and that ability to win tight ones is easy to overlook too. Coming back to win home games in which they trailled at halftime is nothing to sneeze at..
October 12th 2012 @ 5:06pm
soapit said | October 12th 2012 @ 5:06pm | Report comment
however in another time those games we won by tight margins could have been comfortable wins and the games we’ve gone down by plenty in could have been close losses so its not always just a simple number.
October 12th 2012 @ 6:52am
Billy Bob said | October 12th 2012 @ 6:52am | Report comment
If not Robbie Deans, who?
A sacking in itself does no good. Who is better?
I am not agreeing with you about Deans btw. I just want to read the positive side of your argument. A sacking in itself does no good.
October 12th 2012 @ 8:14am
Red Kev said | October 12th 2012 @ 8:14am | Report comment
The answer to your question is – until you see their presentations and ask them questions you won’t know the answer. Call for expressions of interest (including from Robbie Deans if he wants to reapply), short list 5 candidates – invite them to give a presentation before lunch, break, interview them after lunch – one per day on successive days then evaluate.
I also disagree that a sacking in itself does no good. Symbols are both powerful and important. The act of starting afresh cannot be accomplished simply by saying “we’re starting over” you need something tangible to force a mental reset. Providing the Wallabies with a new coach allows everyone to start with a clean slate when it comes to selection on form, when it comes to fan engagement.
The only way you can claim a sacking in itself does no good is if you assume Robbie Deans is getting the Wallabies to perform as well as they will under anyone else. His overall winning average is lower than that of the professional era Wallabies, as is his record against the All Blacks.
Back in 2007 he probably was the best option, but 5 years on he hasn’t worked out. Why is he being kept? Is trying something else really so scary?
Some additional salient points though:
People always trot out Deans’ record as Crusaders coach as some sort of evidence that he’s the best possible candidate the Wallabies could have. No other rugby coach in the world has the sort of provincial record that Deans has – he coached Canterbury to what 23? successive defenses of the Ranfurly Shield, 5 Super Rugby titles as Head Coach of the Crusaders in 7 years?
That doesn’t make him a good international coach, and it doesn’t make him a good coach for the Wallabies.
We’ve seen what he has been able to deliver for the Wallabies, it isn’t good enough.
What was Rod MacQueen’s provincial coaching record before he took over as Wallabies coach? Assistant for 2 seasons at the Waratahs during the old Super 6 days, Wallaby Selector for 3 years while Bob Dwyer was coach, Head coach of the Brumbies for two seasons of Super 12 finishing 5th and 2nd? He finished at national level with 34 wins and a draw from 43 matches (79% wins).
October 12th 2012 @ 10:58am
WQ said | October 12th 2012 @ 10:58am | Report comment
Red Kev, if I didn’t know better it would be easy to think you don’t like Robbie Deans being the Wallabies coach!
October 12th 2012 @ 7:15am
kingplaymaker said | October 12th 2012 @ 7:15am | Report comment
These O’Connell/Mckay exchanges are always fun and long may they continue.
1) Fully agreed.
2) I think they’re more likely to decline than advance given the age of many of the players and the lack of development of much young talent. However’ whether they decline or continue in the same vein won’t matter until a good challenger appears. When or if that happens, the deep conservatism of the approach will come under serious pressure. (Or if Robbie Deans gets some fit players for once, Dad’s army will need considerable rejuvenation).
3) ‘So that’s why I’ve largely ignored the injury toll in offering my thoughts on games, instead preferring to focus on what played out in front of me.’ One could put out a team of 5 year olds or baboons with Wallaby jerseys and then complain that their performance against the All Blacks was ‘disappointing’, but in reality it’s only to be expected, as is a ‘disappointing’ perfomance from a team largely made of reserves in comparison to a team of the best possible, which could actually be an amazing performance by their standards.
4) If Hooper can add turnovers to his game in total he will exceed Pocock, but that is a tremendous card in Pocock’s arsenal. However, there’s little sign of that now. As for Beale, it depends on how the Cooper fiasco plays out.
5) Agree. Interesting to see if there are any new bolters in this squad as the last before the Lions.
October 12th 2012 @ 9:10am
Brett McKay said | October 12th 2012 @ 9:10am | Report comment
KPM, 1-4-5 probably doesn’t need much more, I’l leave them there..
On 2, I’m not sure about the ABs declining, and if they do, it won’t be by much. Already Thorn and Ali Williams have made way for Retallick and Romano in the second row. Messam and Thompson are going to be around for a while yet at blindside. Sam Cane and Matt Todd are willing no.7s. Keiran Read is not quite 27, is already regarded as one of the very best players in the world, and could play another 70-80 Tests easily.
Aaron Smith looks like he’s already played 50 Tests, and Perenara waits in the wings. If Carter goes down again, Cruden is ready to go and Beauden Barrett is already playing beyond his years. Ben Smith, Richard Kahui, Tamati Ellison, even Freuen will ensure midfield is well covered, and that’s assuming Khoder doesn’t send SBW back to NZ. There’s so many back three options it’s not funny. I’m not seeing much decline there…
On 3, thanks for delivering on my guarantee. Even when you say “One could put out a team of 5 year olds or baboons with Wallaby jerseys and then complain that their performance against the All Blacks was ‘disappointing’”, you’re still coming from the angle that the baboons and 5yo’s are only there because of injury to others. I’m saying the skill levels and error rates of the baboons and 5yo’s are still disappointing regardless.
Nick Phipps didn’t fluff passes because Genia was injured. Mike Harris didn’t drop a high ball because James O’Connor was injured. Polota-Nau didn’t mistime lineout throws because Moore was injured. Look at the skills in isolation, and you’ll see them for what they are. And I wasn’t just referring to games against the ABs, either..
October 12th 2012 @ 9:24am
kingplaymaker said | October 12th 2012 @ 9:24am | Report comment
I think the All Black pack is a well oiled-machine where every cog has been perfectly developed to function within a whole. However, I feel as I said in the past that the cogs themselves are not so dazzling as they might be, and it was noticeable how they had to give the ball to Hosea Gear again and again in order to break down the Springboks, with Dagg the other genuine threat in attack. So this glistening machine rolls on unchallenged, and each part is solid and well-intergrated so that victory is normally the result. But I feel that come better opposition, far more backline penetration will be necessary, and Dagg and sometimes Gear are the only two backs really capable of it any more.
I think things are rosier in the forwards though. Hansen has seemed quite happy to bring in new players in the forwards, but far less comfortable with the backs.
Probably the Super franchises must be held ultimately responsible for players possessing skill levels of baboons more than the coach, and this is evident when comparing the New Zealand and Australian Super rugby teams in this respect. It would be nice if these players had the physicality of great apes to compensate for their skill levels though.
October 12th 2012 @ 9:31am
Red Kev said | October 12th 2012 @ 9:31am | Report comment
That’s the definition of a good team though isn’t it KPM? That the whole functions at a level greater than the sum of the individual players’ abilities? The All Blacks certainly have it, the Reds had it in 2011, the Brumbies certainly had it for much of 2012.
How long has it been since the Wallabies really looked like a team playing at a high level?
I rewatched the 2012 EOYT matches the other week and even the demolition of France was not a great team performance, a lot of that win is (in my opinion) down to AAC having the best game he has ever played. The Wallabies still play as individuals looking for “wonder plays from the wonder boys”. The rugby public has turned on Cooper, now Beale is their great hope, what happens when the weight of expectation crushes him?
October 12th 2012 @ 9:40am
kingplaymaker said | October 12th 2012 @ 9:40am | Report comment
RK I don’t want to arouse the anxieties of All Black supporters, but I think since 2011 they have been choosing less and less daring players, and sticking with safer and safer ones. Of course even their safe choices are far better than the equivalents in many countries, including Australia, but these are no longer the most dangerous possibilities. Three years ago a player like Andre Taylor would have been thrust into the team (or rather bench), but now there is thought no need to risk the process of turning a talented youngster into a test player because there are safe options available and the team is winning. The problem, or course, is that when another team becomes really competitive, they’ll need someone like Taylor ripping up the opposition but he won’t be there. In fact without Gear and Dagg’s breaks, would they have won the last match?
October 12th 2012 @ 9:45am
Brett McKay said | October 12th 2012 @ 9:45am | Report comment
I long for the day the Wallabies can pick less daring players and go through a season unbeaten…
October 12th 2012 @ 9:47am
Red Kev said | October 12th 2012 @ 9:47am | Report comment
Ahh, I see your point – reasonable comment. I also note that it matches your selection criticisms of Australian Super Rugby teams and the Wallabies – i.e. that you’d like to see F’Sautia, Tomane, Kuridrani, etc given runs. Dunno if I agree but it is still a good point you make.
October 12th 2012 @ 10:00am
kingplaymaker said | October 12th 2012 @ 10:00am | Report comment
It’s probably something that could be applied to civilisations, businesses, cultures. There’s a dynamic and innovative period which leads to greater and greater success, and when on top the desire is simply to maintain a dominant position, leading to a safer approach. The problem of course is that the factors which made the success in the first place are lost. But of course this isn’t even a problem until a growing rival emerges evincing exactly the same qualities that the dominant figure no longer possesses.
I feel in this sense the All Blacks are stagnating. In the past they would probably have thrust forward the likes of Taylor, Fruean and Ranger, and ironed out their flaws calculating that they would benefit from their talents in the long run (Nonu or Kaino are the Frueans or Rangers from the past who underwent this improvement process). Going into the World Cup they became more and more conservative and got away with it, partly because the players in the team were still mostly on top of their game, and partly because of the lack of an outstanding opponent. But last year already the All Black backline ‘hardly fired a shot’ to quote a journalist at the time. The process has continued this year and I think by next, should a good contender come along they have a very real chance to overtake them, not least because it would take a complete reversal of selection strategy to change the current All Blacks (Steve Hansen apparently didn’t even call Matt Todd after leaving him out, and Andre Taylor’s omission was a huge suprise.)
October 12th 2012 @ 11:01am
Sam Taulelei said | October 12th 2012 @ 11:01am | Report comment
KPM
This is your best explanation of the points you’ve badgered us about over the past months regarding the selection of X factor players over the incumbent “safe” options.
I agree that we played conservatively at the world cup compared to 2010 but I don’t believe it has continued into this season. There have been test matches where our endeavours and adventures hasn’t been as closely matched by execution and basic skills but I’ve definitely noticed that we’re attacking more, particularly from setpieces, this year than last.
Regarding Andre Taylor’s omission from the All Blacks so far, I was one who was calling for his selection but when Steve Hansen explained their reasons why, it made sense and when looking back over the Super 15, Taylor stood out because of his line breaks and broken running skills yet he would sometimes ignore opportunities to create space or tries for players in better positions.
You can get away with this at Super level but at test level where defences are tighter and opportunities are scarcer it’s important that you make better decisions. It’s a flaw that is shared with Fruean and Ranger and previously with Liam Messam.
Don’t know if you’ve been watching any of the ITM Cup competition but you would like the running ability of Charles Piutau for Auckland, he starred for the Blues in their last couple of games this year, the Brumbies match in particular.
October 12th 2012 @ 11:07am
kingplaymaker said | October 12th 2012 @ 11:07am | Report comment
Sam in a sense the more conservative selection strategy since 2011, even if it is less so this year, is highly defensible in that it is the best way of making sure you win matches against weaker teams. It may not be the best way to win matches against nearly equally strong teams, but there are none of those out there now.
So a team built around the notion of safety is ideal for teams that are reliably weaker, as all the teams in the world currently are, but it is dangerous against a hypothetical serious contender.
So basically it’s fine for the moment, but would probably have to change should one of the other teams improve.
Imagine say if the ABs were number 2 in the world. I think many of the the more raw, younger, seriously talented players would be advanced at the expense of the less spectacular but safe incumbents, and their flaws would be ironed out in the hope that their strengths would make up for them and that in the long term they would be better overall than the current players.
However, there’s simply no need now.
But in the future there may be.
October 12th 2012 @ 3:04pm
GWS said | October 12th 2012 @ 3:04pm | Report comment
You’re right there kpm. The team chasing has to take more chances just like being behind in a match.
Makes rd conservative play pointless
October 12th 2012 @ 9:43am
ilikedahoodoogurusingha said | October 12th 2012 @ 9:43am | Report comment
4) That is of course assuming that Pocock doesn’t improve as well……
October 12th 2012 @ 10:08am
Brett McKay said | October 12th 2012 @ 10:08am | Report comment
Guru, that’s precisely what I alluded to in answering the question..
October 12th 2012 @ 12:16pm
Mike said | October 12th 2012 @ 12:16pm | Report comment
Your denigration of baboons disappoints me, KPM
October 12th 2012 @ 12:42pm
kingplaymaker said | October 12th 2012 @ 12:42pm | Report comment
True Mike, drunken baboons perhaps.
October 12th 2012 @ 7:40am
Hoy said | October 12th 2012 @ 7:40am | Report comment
I am an unabashed fan of Cooper, and if he tackled well consistently, then he would be complete for me. His long passing is the best in Australia, Beale doesn’t have the pass that Cooper has.
I also agree with Red Kev. Cooper layed on more tries that were bombed against Argentina on the GC than anyone else in Australia has laid on this year, and still people were all over him about his supposed poor game.
I always thought Beale would be a good league 5/8, and to me that was how he was playing at 10 at the Tahs. Not really creating anything, or doing anything other than just passing to his outside man. Now he has improved his rugby brain with a bit of experience, and he has improved, but again, his passing game is not as good as Coopers. If he develops that, then he can have the job, but if Cooper decides to tackle consistently? What then?
As for Deans, I don’t think it matters what people are saying. The fact remains that our team is digressing in skill. KPM, say what you will about injuries, but they are professional players all of them, and I have argued before that most have been in the set up for a long time now, yet they are all playing like a bunch of individuals in pre-season. Mis-timed passes, poor fitness levels, poor technique etc. I have said before, I am a Deans fan. I want him to improve Australian rugby, but it isn’t working. A number 2 team should have a better win/loss record.
The set move laid on by the backs in Rosario is the first set play move I have seen in donkeys years. Argentina, have been laying on sweet set move plays all year that have been a highlight for me, harking back to better days when backs would forgo dropkick practice to think up new moves they could run, each more intricate than the last. Yet for years now, it seems the only move we have is a second man play to a sweeper, or a crash ball. The lines that everyone ran in Argentina were beautiful. Where has that been? Will we see more of it?
One thing I will say is that Blades is doing good things with our scrum. Even with second stringers now, our scrum is going well. Why has it taken so long to fix?
October 12th 2012 @ 7:51am
kingplaymaker said | October 12th 2012 @ 7:51am | Report comment
Hoy the litany of flaws you criticise the players for are ones they all show for their Super franchises, so maybe that’s where the blame should lie. In addition, maybe that’s as well as the 5th choice full-back and 6th choice right wing can play?
October 12th 2012 @ 8:01am
Jean Polet said | October 12th 2012 @ 8:01am | Report comment
Entertaining exchange. The comments on same are interesting. Do some Roarers really think the NH teams, not counting Italy, are so much weaker than the SH sides that our undermanned Wallabies are going to come back with a winning percentage? Amazing. For one thing, Wales all but beat the Ws in Oz recently. Wales will field somewhat the same team in Cardiff, and they’ll be too good for us at home. Similarly, England’s forwards will be too much for us, and France are most unlikely to collapse in Paris as they did last time.
October 12th 2012 @ 9:14am
Brett McKay said | October 12th 2012 @ 9:14am | Report comment
Jean, I certainly don’t expect the NH teams to be so much weaker, and I say above to Kev that I’m quite sure it’s going to be a tough tour. That last para just outlines what would need to happen for the tour to be declared a success. Whether that actually happens is a whole other story…
October 12th 2012 @ 10:27am
Ryan O'Connell said | October 12th 2012 @ 10:27am | Report comment
Not sure I like the treatment I’m getting on Twitter from you, McKay. Handling my questions with ease, huh?
To be fair, well done. I did try to up the temperature a little. (However, I felt I needed to after your lame questions about halftime entertainment and who’s going to challenge the Storm next year. Yawn!)
In response to your answers:
1. I’m a Deans fan. But where there is smoke there is fire. I don’t think Deans suddenly can’t coach, but something is not right with the Wallabies. I’m sure it runs deeper than the coach, and whilst some argue sacking the coach is a quick fix, the point is, it’s a fix. I totally agree with RedKev – ask for expressions of interest. It can’t hurt, and maybe it will confirm that Deans remains the best choice afterall.
2. I’ll ignore the cheap shot about the Bulldogs. After the way the season ended on and off the field, can you blame me for moving swiftly onto the NBA? I think my question reveals my thoughts about the All Blacks – much like LeBron, I think they’ll go to another level with the pressure off.
3. I’ll leave this one to you. One thing I would say, is that the style the Wallabies were playing, and their tactics, even before injuries really took their toll, was questionable.
4. Yes, it depends on Quade. But I personally have liked what I’ve seen from Beale so far. I also remember watching him at Joeys and feeling almost certain he would be a Wallaby 10 for a long time. So I’m probably biased, but I think he’ll be in the same jersey next year. Pocock vs Hooper is another matter altogether. It’s great to have competition and depth at key positions. It’s just a shame this doesn’t extend across the park. . .
5. I’d be very happy with a 3-1 record at the end of the tour.
October 12th 2012 @ 11:22am
Brett McKay said | October 12th 2012 @ 11:22am | Report comment
Well the lame questions matched the halftime entertainment, didn’t they. So don’t blame me for setting the bar low…
1. I agree where there’s smoke there’s fire. I commented somewhere last week that Cooper’s comments have changed my thoughts on Deans’ ability to hold his job, not because I support Cooper’s stance, but because these things rarely fall on the side of the guy who doesn’t take the field.
2. You’ve just validated the cheap shot, thank you. And we agree on the ‘LeDan’ link..
3. Precisely my point. Injuries or not, the skill levels and error rates this year were disappointing.
4. There’s no question Cooper remains the variable in this equation, but Beale’s the man in the interim. He might even be the man if Cooper comes back, Spring Tour and Super Rugby form will dictate that. And possibly whoever the coach is, too.
5. If the IRB gives us 3-1 now, we could save the ARU a significant amount of money in November…
October 12th 2012 @ 3:24pm
Ryan O'Connell said | October 12th 2012 @ 3:24pm | Report comment
LeDan?
Geez . . .
October 12th 2012 @ 10:33am
sheek said | October 12th 2012 @ 10:33am | Report comment
Excellent work both Brett & Ryan.
Really can’t fault it. Delivered not only with perceptive insight & knowledge, but good humour as well. Makes for both an informative & enjoyable read.
Maybe we should petition the editors to have these “fireside chats” or tete-a-tetes once a month???
Throw you both out of your comfort zones, & discuss other sports as well (you’re obviously TOO comfortable with each other)…..
October 12th 2012 @ 11:38am
Brett McKay said | October 12th 2012 @ 11:38am | Report comment
have your people and their people talk to our people Sheek..
October 12th 2012 @ 3:22pm
Ryan O'Connell said | October 12th 2012 @ 3:22pm | Report comment
Cheers Sheek, very nice of you to say. It’s nice to know that someone has noticed that I carry McKay. . .
October 12th 2012 @ 3:40pm
Brett McKay said | October 12th 2012 @ 3:40pm | Report comment
what’s the smiley for ‘ga-roooooaann’?!?
October 12th 2012 @ 10:36am
kingplaymaker said | October 12th 2012 @ 10:36am | Report comment
‘ It’s great to have competition and depth at key positions. It’s just a shame this doesn’t extend across the park. . .’
One of the real oddities of Australian rugby is the overproduction of players in certain positions (Pocock, Hooper, Gill. Cooper, Beale, JOC, Lealiifano all 10s) with a complete absence of talent in others (abominable centres and in general an abyss of powerful forwards. But perhaps as was once suggested here the kind of powerful players who make powerful forwards and outstandings centres, where mostly players need to be big, are the athletes most in demand, and hence are taken by another code at a young age. What’s left to rugby is the rejected midgets! (Genia, Cooper, JOC, Beale even Ioane in comparison to Inglis, Idriss, Folau etc…).
October 12th 2012 @ 10:54am
Ryan O'Connell said | October 12th 2012 @ 10:54am | Report comment
It’s an oddity, but it’s also extremely frustrating. There is every chance that the prime of certain players careers is wasted because a) there is someone even stronger ahead of them, and b) a lack of team success due to a lack of depth in other positions.
When Darren Lehmann was struggling to get into the Australian cricket team, despite being world class, no one could really complain because the team was dominating and performing without him.
That’s not exactly the case with the Wallabies.
October 12th 2012 @ 11:01am
kingplaymaker said | October 12th 2012 @ 11:01am | Report comment
That’s true Ryan, and there has been a suspicion that it’s in the nature of Australian franchises to always favour the established player, hence Dean Mumm and Rocky Elsom keeing out Sitaleki Timani and Dave Dennis this season, despite the latter two being current rather than past Wallabies. Certainly whatever the cause the result for player development is wholly negative.
October 12th 2012 @ 11:06am
Sam Taulelei said | October 12th 2012 @ 11:06am | Report comment
Spot on Ryan.
Henry received a lot of criticism for not developing ready made replacements for McCaw and Carter. However what hope do you have if you’re a flanker or first five challenging the two best players in NZ for their position and one of them is captain?
Nick Evans obviously thought he had a hopeless case no matter how well he played so he signed for Harlequins.
Frano Botica was NZ’s player of the year in 1986 but couldn’t break past Grant Fox in the world cup and then only received intermittent chances over the next three years. He was too good a talent to waste on the bench so switched to league.