Five years of Wallabies going nowhere
By Red Kev, 23 Oct 2012 Red Kev is a Roar Guru & Live Blogger
- Tagged:
- robbie deans, Rugby Union, wallabies
148 Have your say
Related coverage
Plenty of people are talking up the Wallabies on the back of a messy win over Argentina and an even messier draw with New Zealand to close out the domestic season in 2012.
Such reactions are misguided to say the least. It is just more of the same – the Wallabies have neither improved nor progressed in five years under coach Robbie Deans.
I’ll save the opinion-based observations (about selection, game plan, etc) for the comments section, here are the facts:
Since 1996, when Bob Dwyer retired and the professional era began in earnest, the Wallabies have played 211 tests, resulting in a 134-72-5 (win-loss-draw) record (or a 63.5% success rate), and played the All Blacks 46 times for a 14-31-1 record (30.4%).
Under Robbie Deans, the Wallabies are performing well below these averages.
Here are the historical results broken down by coach in the professional era:
Greg Smith (1996-1997), 19 matches as coach, 12-7 (63.1%), 0-5 against the All Blacks (0%)
Rod Macqueen (1997-2001), 43 matches as coach, 34-8-1 (79.0%), 5-2 against the All Blacks (71.4%)
Eddie Jones (2001-2005), 57 matches as coach, 33-23-1 (57.9%), 5-6 against the All Blacks (45.4%)
John Connolly (2006-2007), 25 matches as coach, 16-8-1 (64.0%), 1-4 against the All Blacks (20%)
Robbie Deans (2008-Present), 67 matches as coach, 39-26-2 (58.2%), 3-14-1 against the All Blacks (16.7%)
A stock line in support of Deans is always, “when Deans took over the Wallabies were number five in the world, now they are number two.” This is factually accurate, but just how much better are the Wallabies now than in 2007?
For starters, the Wallabies were ranked number two in the world under John Connolly going into the Rugby World Cup and only came out fifth due to exiting in the quarter finals, beaten by a lower ranked side.
Connolly had taken over the side from Eddie Jones, after they lost eight of their last nine matches. The turn-around he effected in two years is remarkable. The Wallabies in 2006 and 2007 with Connolly as coach won more often and more often against New Zealand than they have since.
In fact, on review, the 2011 Rugby World Cup performance is not as good as the third place finish would indicate. I do not understand how the unreleased ARU review resulted in a “pass mark”.
The only substantial difference between Connolly’s side in 2007 and Deans’ side in 2011 was that Stirling Mortlock missed his penalty kick in the quarter final, whereas James O’Connor made his.
In 2007, the Wallabies finished top of their pool beating Fiji, Wales, Japan and Canada. In 2011, the Wallabies could only manage second in their pool, losing to Ireland (and beating Italy, Russia and the USA).
In 2007, the Wallabies scored 30 tries in five matches, but only five against quality opposition (four against Wales and one against England). In 2011, the Wallabies scored only 25 tries in seven matches, although seven were against quality opposition (four in 20 superb minutes against Italy, one opportunistic try from turnover ball against South Africa, and an additional two tries against Wales in the third place playoff).
In 2007, the Wallabies conceded four tries in five matches (two to Wales and two to Fiji). In 2011, the Wallabies conceded seven tries in seven matches (three to Russia, one to the USA, one to New Zealand, and two more to Wales in third place playoff match).
When viewed in this light, the play of the Wallabies during the 2011 Rugby World Cup campaign was arguably worse than that of 2007, despite the end result.
This year, the once-feared Wallaby attack has now scored just 12 tries in 11 matches. While their effort in holding the All Blacks try-less for the first time 107 tests (since the 2004 Wallabies did it in Sydney) is commendable, the result in Brisbane also underlines the point that defence doesn’t win the match.
Deans has had more games in charge than any other Wallaby coach in the professional era (Bob Dwyer has had more overall but he coached in the amateur era and over two separate stints) and the team’s winning percentage under Deans is below 60%, despite the professional era average being 64% and despite the ARU setting Deans a 70-75% target when he was appointed.
For how much longer must we tolerate the Wallabies under-performing?
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.
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? (319)
- 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)
- Wallabies 25-man Lions squad: analysis (214)
- Quade Cooper misses Wallaby squad selection (209)
- Quade shouldn’t be fly half against the Lions (184)
- Australia, time to get behind the Wallabies (6)
- Who can still win the Super Rugby title? (4)
- Deans must forgive Quade: Slack (15)
- SPIRO: Super Rugby TMOs are making too many mistakes (11)
- Rebels’ O’Connor stays on sidelines
- ‘Lucky 29′ journey into despair (part one)
- SANZAR mulls sanctions against Henry (5)
- Australia, time to get behind the Wallabies (6)
- Who can still win the Super Rugby title? (4)
- ‘Lucky 29′ journey into despair (part one) (0)
- Super Rugby teams will skin the Lions (116)
- Super B to the rescue for rugby? (50)
- Picking your ‘First V’ for the Wallabies (66)
- Looking forward to the 2015 Wallabies (20)
Recommend this story.
- Explore:
- robbie deans, Rugby Union, wallabies

October 23rd 2012 @ 3:50am
Shop said | October 23rd 2012 @ 3:50am | Report comment
I’m totally with you RK. I was hugely excited when Deans was appointed because I was hoping to see a Crusaders like dynasty start. When that failed I thought we were then going to ‘judge him on the RWC’.
I’m not sure what influence he has had on selections but to be giving him praise for the team that drew on Saturday is ignoring the fact that many of the new players were forced upon Deans when he should have been picking players on form all along. If there hadn’t been all these injuries do you really think Shipperly, Cummins, Tapui etc would have got a start?
Although RK, I’m not necessarily disappointed with the results under Deans (though they are poor – Scotland x 2, Samoa, Ireland in the RWC, Grand Sham…) but he has never consistantly put a well drilled team on the field. The ups and downs have been horrendous and this clearly tells me that the coach is not getting the best out of his players, which is a coaches most important role.
He is obviously a capable coach as his Super record suggests, but he just isn’t right for the WB’s.
I think he would be be doing himself a favor as well as the Australia to start somewhere else a fresh.
October 23rd 2012 @ 5:48am
Ra said | October 23rd 2012 @ 5:48am | Report comment
A crusaders like dynasty starts with a crusaders like front row. Old saying, a front row going forward is a team going forward
October 23rd 2012 @ 8:52am
Markus said | October 23rd 2012 @ 8:52am | Report comment
While there was definitely work needed, I think way too much focus has been on the scrum in the last 7 years, to the detriment of the Wallabies bread and butter – the breakdown.
Even during the 2001 Lions tour the Wallabies scrum was demolished, as badly as any effort I’ve seen in the last 7-8 years, but where they got ascendancy was quick, aggressive, front foot ball at the rucks.
October 23rd 2012 @ 12:59pm
JIM said | October 23rd 2012 @ 12:59pm | Report comment
spot on Markus. Picking front rowers that can scrum but are lazy around the park is destined to fail. Ideally you have a front row that does both. but if you have to trade one away you go with the weaker scrum. Because first and foremost you need to be able to control the ruck. Which is about low body height, commitment, workrate and attitude.
It also helps if you can work with the Super coaches to keep focused on basic skills – like lineout throwing accuracy, ball security and scrum position. Ben Alexander would have to have the worst stance before engagement of any prop in the world. He looks like he has hamstring issues that aren’t being properly managed.
October 26th 2012 @ 2:23pm
jeznez said | October 26th 2012 @ 2:23pm | Report comment
Ra but add to Shop’s players not being selected on form and Deans still wont pick Greg Holmes – I just dont get it.
October 23rd 2012 @ 3:56am
Jiggles said | October 23rd 2012 @ 3:56am | Report comment
Nice article RK with a fair bit of research. I am hopping we might see a change this week before the tour, but I doubt it since JON has 7 days left on his contract. The Wallabies have regressed even more this year, if thats possible. If Deans isn’t pushed then we will loose the Lions tour, probably 3 nil.
October 23rd 2012 @ 4:28am
biltongbek said | October 23rd 2012 @ 4:28am | Report comment
RK, your Wallaby stats look very similar to our stats, and to be honest it simply isn’t good enough for either of our nations.
October 23rd 2012 @ 6:37am
Red Kev said | October 23rd 2012 @ 6:37am | Report comment
The stats that concern me the most are the details not the overall winning record to be honest.
12 tries in 11 matches in 2012 is very concerning.
The fact that Deans has selected 20 different starting centre combinations (21 if you count Fainga’a-Horne as different to Horne-Fainga’a).
The fact that Deans has still not managed to guide the Wallabies to more than 5 test wins in a row (and that those 5 were his first 5 in charge before he’d really put his stamp on the team).
The lack of preparation for the Ireland RWC pool match despite it being obvious it was the important match from the moment the draw was announced.
October 23rd 2012 @ 7:34am
Dasher said | October 23rd 2012 @ 7:34am | Report comment
Imagine if we hadn’t won that very first Bledisloe Test under Deans. By winning it, it set up an unrealistic perception of his skill as coach. That win probably reflected the work of Connolly more so than anything Deans had done by that time.
October 23rd 2012 @ 8:56am
Markus said | October 23rd 2012 @ 8:56am | Report comment
Or of that which shall not be named – the dreaded player power.
October 23rd 2012 @ 10:53am
Kane said | October 23rd 2012 @ 10:53am | Report comment
Since then three wins on the trot is his best
October 23rd 2012 @ 6:34am
Billy Bob said | October 23rd 2012 @ 6:34am | Report comment
It is a subjective argument to point at the coach and statistics during his tenure.
These stats do not prove cause and effect. They do not take into account context.
When I saw the headline I thought surely this is not the same, logically empty anti-Deans rant. Sadly, it was. I’m not defending Deans, but to join your team, I need better argument.
The last 5 years, we could call Australia ‘getting its beans’ for not developing a rugby culture when it had an opportunity in 03.
Or not making structural changes to end the states’ colonial handicapping of the national game. Or not developing the grassroots pathway. Or not repelling NRL poachers at the after game drinks.
And the intellectual dishonesty. This looks a lot like the failed ‘Joh for PM’ campaign, although the candidate is not named. The incumbent is blamed for every structural and cultural flaw in our code.
Even though he has little control over them.
Look at how Sharpe has made a difference to the culture of this team. Look at the passion in these boys. It’s not all about the coach.
And if the coach is causing problems and not just present when they appear, then prove it. Non causal stats don’t prove cause and effect.
Happy to be proved wrong.
October 23rd 2012 @ 6:45am
Red Kev said | October 23rd 2012 @ 6:45am | Report comment
I was not trying to prove cause and effect, I was presenting facts. You want to conjure excuses for Deans – that’s fine, a lot of people do. Sticking you head in the sand is much easier than admitting a mistake and fixing things.
October 23rd 2012 @ 10:07am
Mike said | October 23rd 2012 @ 10:07am | Report comment
But pretending that Australian rugby has only been going nowhere for 5 years is also sticking your head in the sand.
October 23rd 2012 @ 10:37am
Red Kev said | October 23rd 2012 @ 10:37am | Report comment
Find a single post anywhere in which I say the problems “only” came about in the last 5 years. Don’t put words in my mouth.
October 23rd 2012 @ 10:52am
Mike said | October 23rd 2012 @ 10:52am | Report comment
Fine, adjust the headline above to “Eleven years of going nowhere” and it’ll be sweet….
October 23rd 2012 @ 11:16am
Red Kev said | October 23rd 2012 @ 11:16am | Report comment
The reason I didn’t is that I didn’t follow all the ins and outs of selection and yearly progress from 2004 through to 2009; I watched avidly from 1995 to 2003 but only really started paying attention again in 2010.
Although if you go back and watch some Jones and Connolly coached Wallaby matches against the ABs and compare the skill level, shape in attack and execution with what Deans has been serving up … let’s just say you might be asking me to change the title to “Five years of Wallabies going backwards”
October 23rd 2012 @ 9:47am
Shop said | October 23rd 2012 @ 9:47am | Report comment
Billy Bob
You have touched on a very important flaw in Deans’ reign – his handling of Sharpe. Despite being one of the more senior and experienced players he was marginlised until injuries had the Wallabies begging for his services. Instead we had the debacle with Rocky (who in my opinion was an excellent “indian” but no “chief”). A few months before the RWC he was dumped as captain!!!
While to me it was clear that he should have been relieved of captaincy in 2010 to do it JUST before the RWC is outrageous. We will never know how much difference “capitan” Sharpe would have made in the RWC if given the chance and I wasn’t really against Horwill’s selection. However if you look at this in an objective manner does it appear that Deans had a real plan for the RWC or was he just making it up as he went along? There are of course other examples of bad management (e.g take Phil Waugh as back up for Pocock) but I’ll let others have a go.
On another note, I totally agree with you about the wasted opportunity in 2003.
October 23rd 2012 @ 10:54am
Jutsie said | October 23rd 2012 @ 10:54am | Report comment
I was also very disappointed with the way rocky was handled he may have not been the right choice for captain but if that were the case then do it at the end of 2010 or before the test season had started in 2011 (stating it was due to his injuries). To do it on the eve of the WC was very disrespectful to a loyal servant (who took the bad news well and still gave his all for the cause) and hinted that deans and his assistant coaches had lost faith in their own planning and were jumping on board the reds’ success.
Not sure I agree with the handling of sharpe, his form was poor before he was dropped and the dumping was warranted, it sent him a message and made him a much better player. Deans probably should have used this technique more often with other under performing stars.
October 23rd 2012 @ 11:23am
jameswm said | October 23rd 2012 @ 11:23am | Report comment
Making Rocky skipper was close to the worst decision of Deans’s reign, if indeed it was his decision (maybe the ARU forced it on him). Rocky is an individual type player (ever seen him pass), not a natural leader (he didn’t do the talking during stoppages, it was Pocock/Genia) and he even warmed up on his own and didn’t participate in team drills (like ball handling, which frankly he needed).
October 23rd 2012 @ 11:31am
Jutsie said | October 23rd 2012 @ 11:31am | Report comment
Fair enough james but still the timing of his axing was very disappointing. No player deserves that.
October 24th 2012 @ 1:43pm
jameswm said | October 24th 2012 @ 1:43pm | Report comment
Nah the team’s more important than the player.
October 26th 2012 @ 2:33pm
jeznez said | October 26th 2012 @ 2:33pm | Report comment
james, I’ve heard it direct from one of Rocky’s coaches at the Brumbies – Brumby coach asked Dean’s why he picked Rock. Said that compared to Ruben Thorne at the Crueys and Tana for the AB’s that Rocky seemed much more of an individual and didn’t command the same mana – even seemed a little selfish.
Robbie’s reply was that he thought the WB’s needed to be a bit more selfish and Rocky might make that happen.
October 24th 2012 @ 2:13am
Parra said | October 24th 2012 @ 2:13am | Report comment
Rocky a loyal servant?? I was extremely disappointed when he took off to Leinster on ‘commpassionate grounds’. What, somebody died over there and the funeral went on for a year?
Other points relating to this article:
- We had an extremely bad RWC11. You can talk it up (came third) and you can talk it down but some things really highlighted the failure to me. 1. We let in 3 tries to Russia and they dominated for a large part of the game. Yes, we obviously played with our lesser players but any of the top 50 rugby players in Aus should distinguish themselves against Russia (no offence, they’re a rising side and seem to be pretty tough but it would be like Germany playing Iraq in soccer and letting in 3 goals). Unacceptable and embarrassing.. 2. We were embarrassed by Ireland – really taught a lesson in holding the player up and in high balls. Unacceptable. 3. We were absolutely wiped by NZ in the semi, absolutely wiped.
- Statistics are always difficult unless you’re looking over a really long term relative to the subject. For example, RIchie MaCaw has played 112 Tests and won 100, that’s just ridiculous but it says something. On the other hand, that coach X has a winning perc of 60% over 20 Tests says nothing.
- Whether Deans is good or not (you can argue this up and down too) is not really relevant anymore. The time has come to go because there have been too many clangers (we all know the list – Scotland, Samoa, Munster, etc). Normally in modern prof. sport we are far too quick to judge a coach, and a bad season (think McKenzie), even a run of bad games can spell the end. (Graham Henry only barely survived the 2007 RWC disappointment – what a disaster it would have been for NZ to loose him then!). Deans on the other hand has had 5 years and after all the excitement (I was really optimistic when I heard he’d been appointed) and changing the attacking mindset ‘playing what’s in front of you’ etc, it just hasn’t worked out. There are probably more people at fault behind the scenes but as head coach you’re responsible. It’s also poor from Deans that after loss after loss after loss and years of development, he says in a flat voice ‘they’re learning as a group, can only get stronger, it’s part of the territory, we’re better for the loss, will grow, blah..’ That’s acceptable for 1 – 2 years but not 5. 5 years is more than enough, it’s time to go.
October 23rd 2012 @ 2:41pm
soapit said | October 23rd 2012 @ 2:41pm | Report comment
its a results driven business. how else are we to measure whether someone is doing a good job if not by a full set of statistics (not just win/loss i mean)
October 24th 2012 @ 11:59am
Mike said | October 24th 2012 @ 11:59am | Report comment
We also put those statistics in context. Without that, they are meaningless, or even worse, misleading.
October 23rd 2012 @ 11:22pm
bennalong said | October 23rd 2012 @ 11:22pm | Report comment
Great post Billy Bob!
Biased, emotional claptrap from one of a group who can’t remember how bad it was, or recognise the changes that have made our task as Aussies, with three other competing codes (AFL and soccer both more popular than before) way more difficult !
You Reds supporters hate Deans for not rejigging the team after you won the Super 15.
I sorta get that, but you don’t build a cohesive team by changing players annually according to provincial results
Check out the AB’s backline. Only changed by injury (SBW excepted) The forewards also a stable group.
October 24th 2012 @ 11:06am
soapit said | October 24th 2012 @ 11:06am | Report comment
“You Reds supporters hate Deans for not rejigging the team after you won the Super 15″
well at least your not getting caught up in emotional claptrap
October 26th 2012 @ 2:41pm
jeznez said | October 26th 2012 @ 2:41pm | Report comment
benno, bizarre post.. You can be consitent in selection if you have picked the best players to start with…… but if the selections are poor then you need to change. Unfortunately Since the coach picked poorly the first time he is likely to pick poorly a second time, third time, fourth time…..
October 23rd 2012 @ 6:34am
moaman said | October 23rd 2012 @ 6:34am | Report comment
Red Kev; I have a query….You mention the 2 losses to Scotland as areas of concern I guess,reading between the lines,but you include Italy in the “Quality Opposition” category.This baffles me a bit.I know the Italians have improved over the years but since 2000 eg in the 6Nations they have only managed a paltry 14.6% win ratio. The Scots,by comparison,have notched up 30% in the same competition (since 1995) and should surely be rated higher imo.
That said–I agree with the premise of your article.Things haven’t improved.
October 23rd 2012 @ 6:41am
Red Kev said | October 23rd 2012 @ 6:41am | Report comment
We didn’t play Scotland in the RWC – those tries scored bits were regarding the RWC. I called them “quality opposition” as they are members of the Six Nations tournament. I thought about not including them but figured that people would complain about me twisting facts.
October 23rd 2012 @ 2:45pm
soapit said | October 23rd 2012 @ 2:45pm | Report comment
yeah i thought including italy as quality opposition was being generous to the 2011 side.
October 23rd 2012 @ 7:15am
Salada said | October 23rd 2012 @ 7:15am | Report comment
Well said, RK. The question I have for you is this: does a coach have a lot or a little influence over players performing the basics properly? I mean the fundamentals of the game, like not dropping the pill, like not kicking out on the full. Your own Reds play in Brisbane humidity, but they seem able to hold onto the ball. So is it because these Wallabies just aren’t afraid of their coach? Know they won’t get reamed out for being sloppy?
October 23rd 2012 @ 8:32am
Red Kev said | October 23rd 2012 @ 8:32am | Report comment
That’s certainly a bone of contention, the “Deans isn’t out there dropping those balls” line. Certainly enough influence to make a difference is probably the factual answer.
Everyone makes mistakes, it is when they become repetitive that they are a coaching failing. Higginbotham’s running height, Kurtley’s catching, TPN’s lack of ball security in contact for instance – all those are coachable. The restarts are similarly coachable. AAC dropping the highball cold is a one-off pressure mistake. Phipps picking up the ball offside is a brain-snap that in my opinion is indicative of the un-coachable “rugby brain” (or lack thereof).
October 23rd 2012 @ 8:56am
Rob9 said | October 23rd 2012 @ 8:56am | Report comment
Hi RK, great article and I agree with everything you’ve said there. In Phipps defense here though, I believe he made the best decision by picking up the ball- cop an almost certain 3 points by picking up the ball or risk a very probable 7 points by staying out of the play with the closest Wallaby floundering on his date with a pack of hungry AB’s bearing down ready to scoop up or nudge the ball closer to the try line. Personally I believe if he didn’t do it we wouldnt be talking about holding the AB’s tryless in an 18 all draw.
October 23rd 2012 @ 11:48am
Red Kev said | October 23rd 2012 @ 11:48am | Report comment
Maybe Rob, but another ref might have carded him for that, deliberately playing the ball while offside with the opposition on the attack in the red zone with 3 players against 2 defenders … it was a risk, and he got lucky.
October 23rd 2012 @ 12:35pm
Rob9 said | October 23rd 2012 @ 12:35pm | Report comment
No doubt a risk that paid off for him and under the circumstances I’ve got no problem with him taking such a risk and I think he knew what he was doing…. I hope anyways as he’s now our recognised no.2 SH and we can’t afford to have a guy without a rugby brain acting as a backup in such a pivotal role.
October 23rd 2012 @ 9:37am
Who Needs Melon said | October 23rd 2012 @ 9:37am | Report comment
RedKev,
I’m in the Deans-must-go camp myself but he can’t be blamed (at least not too much) for players dropping balls, their running height and general skills. Were they displaying those skills at Super Rugby level and they’ve forgotten once they come into the Wallaby team? Surely catching, passing, kicking, etc. is stuff they would have or should have learnt BEFORE they got anywhere near Deans.
Lack of cohesion in the backline and perhaps at restarts can also partially be excused by being forced to continually try new combinations.
But I’m with you: It’s not just this year and the excuses from injuries, etc. – after 5 years or so, how much longer do we need to watch before we’re supposed to identify some discernible pattern of improvement?
October 23rd 2012 @ 9:43am
Red Kev said | October 23rd 2012 @ 9:43am | Report comment
When Deans selects them for the Wallabies he takes responsibility for their skill level being up to scratch. If the skills aren’t there he can leave them out. If he knows he’s going to need them he can approach the player and his Super Rugby coach during the domestic season and speak to him about them. This is called being proactive and is a prerequisite for being a good coach.
October 23rd 2012 @ 8:16am
Damo said | October 23rd 2012 @ 8:16am | Report comment
Very detailed stats RK. But they only make sense in isolation.
The current AB squad is without doubt the best it’s been since the code went pro.
The fact that the Wallabies seem unable to top them but remain No. 2 in the world proves this.
Your stats although interesting, miss the fact that the draw on the weekend was a display of grit from a heavily depleted W’s squad that is becoming a feature of their game again. Sure it may have been messy but to keep the ABs try less for the first time in 107 tests is a stat worth pondering too. Deans may well be under performing, but his obvious replacement, and I gather from your web name, your choice, didn’t have the greatest SR season either…..
I’d suggest the recent lack of form has a lot more to do with the Ws being overplayed, and perhaps ONeils departure will mean the boys get a bit more downtime in the next few years.
October 23rd 2012 @ 8:45am
formeropenside said | October 23rd 2012 @ 8:45am | Report comment
I assume you are hinting that McKenzie did not have the best season going around? But he coached the top side in the Australian conference, and beat the only other “Australian” coach twice.
October 23rd 2012 @ 11:03am
Damo said | October 23rd 2012 @ 11:03am | Report comment
Aren’t we trying to beat the best…..not the rest formeropenside?
October 23rd 2012 @ 6:23pm
Coxinator said | October 23rd 2012 @ 6:23pm | Report comment
…and they did beat the Chiefs! Boom boom.
October 23rd 2012 @ 8:47am
Red Kev said | October 23rd 2012 @ 8:47am | Report comment
I didn’t mention McKenzie and I have stated over and over that my preferred replacement for Deans is one found through a proper and thorough interview and evaluation process.
Deans has been underperforming for 5 years is the point. Not one isolated test taken by itself. The Wallabies under Deans have always been able to produce sporadic intensity and gutsy wins. The issue is that they do not perform with any sort of consistency. A win and a draw does not make something a “feature” of their game. (Ignore for the moment that at least half of the improvement is in my opinion attributable to one N.Sharpe with a ‘C’ beside his name, a lock that Deans has been trying to axe from the Wallabies for three years).
Deans has changed the Wallabies from a team that the world used to look to for attacking innovation (which they did do during Dwyer’s and MacQueen’s and even the early part of Jones’ tenure) and genuinely feared having to defend against; into a team that doesn’t trouble the try line or ask questions of opposition defensive structures. Deans’ Wallabies do nothing but defend and rely on moments of individual brilliance to score, which is why the Wallabies look so terrible when the pressure gets to one of the ‘wonder boys’ and they fail to produce a wonder play.
October 23rd 2012 @ 8:41am
sheek said | October 23rd 2012 @ 8:41am | Report comment
Red Kev,
Nothing like throwing stats out there – that’ll fix ‘em!
I supported Deans in his entire tenure 2008-11. I thought he was the best candidate for the job when appointed and I believe in people seeing out their contract. Which is why I believed he had to go right to the end of 2011.
While his record wasn’t great, it was far from horrible. He was entitled to ‘run the course.’
I still maintain he was the best candidate for the job. Unfortunately, i don’t possess powers to see into the future and being retrospective won’t change what transpired.
But while I might not be the smartest kid in the class, I’m no dope either. And there’s no point being unnecessarily stubborn, or flogging a dead horse, to use an oft-quoted cliche.
In the wash-up, Deans tenure was less than expected. It happens and in 2012 the ARU should have taken a different course with a new national coach.
Of course, Deans re-appointment, before the 2011 world cup began, had a lot to do with O’Neill’s own ego and for him to believe he had always made the right decision.
Unfortunately, anyone hoping for a decision sooner rather than later on Dean’s departure is likely to be disappointed. And don’t be too aggressive in wanting to see the back of Deans. Imagine Nucifora as his replacement!!!
October 23rd 2012 @ 8:57am
Mike said | October 23rd 2012 @ 8:57am | Report comment
Sheek, rightly or wrongly, it is pretty clear by now that the ARU board was behind Deans’ re-appointment in 2011. Its become fashionable to blame O’Neill but Hawker, Cosgrove and others supported it, and apparently still do, as do new appointments like Eales.
October 23rd 2012 @ 9:02am
sheek said | October 23rd 2012 @ 9:02am | Report comment
Mike,
You’re probably right. If the board re-appointed Deans, then you could argue they have little faith in any of the available/probable alternatives.
October 23rd 2012 @ 9:04am
Mike said | October 23rd 2012 @ 9:04am | Report comment
I wouldn’t guess at their motives. I would have thought Link made a pretty good prospect for a new coach in 2011. But we are where we are.
October 23rd 2012 @ 1:01pm
AdamS said | October 23rd 2012 @ 1:01pm | Report comment
While we all like Link and he would probably do a good job at extracting value from the team, the ARU has to consider the future of the Super XV sides also. Perhaps they see more overall value in the Reds having a few years of continuity and ongoing success rather than pulling Link, risking the Reds taking a dive and taking a chance with him as Wallabies coach.
If they pulled him now and we have a shocker against the Lions all the talk will be Links relative inexperience having only 2 successful years as a SV coach under his belt.
October 23rd 2012 @ 8:54am
Mike said | October 23rd 2012 @ 8:54am | Report comment
The heading is inaccurate – it should read “11 years of the Wallabies going nowhere”.
If Australians don’t face the reality of where they have been, they will never change where they are headed in future.
The inaccurate heading is bolstered by the selective choice of statistics – focussing on performance against New Zealand, and ignoring performance against South Africa. Deans has been the most successful Australian coach of all time against South Africa.
But put it all together and we are brought back to harsh reality – Australian rugby is exactly where it has been for the last 11 years, not just the last 5.
October 23rd 2012 @ 9:06am
Red Kev said | October 23rd 2012 @ 9:06am | Report comment
In 2003 (that’s 10 years ago in case you don’t have a calculator handy to help you with the math) we were in extra time in a Rugby World Cup final.
It is not selective use of statistics. The NZ matches are used because for the majority of the time ABs have been world number one and measuring yourself against the best is what we should be doing. Similarly the Bledisloe Cup is the silverware we are chasing the most.
Deans may be the most successful coach against the Springboks (and you can be sure I’ll check that later and call you out if that’s not the case) but he also coached against the clown coach PdV, and he also managed to have a 0-2 record against Scotland and 0-1 against Samoa who are hardly titans of the rugby world. Inconsistency is the hallmark of the Wallabies under Deans and it isn’t good enough.
October 23rd 2012 @ 9:12am
Mike said | October 23rd 2012 @ 9:12am | Report comment
Red, I’ll save you some time –
* only Australian coach ever to win five in a row against SA
* only Australian coach ever to win at altitude
* only Australian coach ever to win back-to-back in South Africa.
And sorry, but I don’t buy “All Blacks are the only relevant opponent”. We have been through this before and you know perfectly well that Deans’ record is little different from his predecessors – its just a matter of picking selective statistics to try and prove a point. That keeps the focus on Deans and off other issues in Australian rugby, e.g. too much dominance by two states.
“but he also coached against the clown coach PdV” – Is “clown coach” supposed to be objective argument? But fine, let’s go down that path – Deans also coached against Graham Henry, the most consistently successful AB coach of all time against all nations.
October 23rd 2012 @ 9:13am
Red Kev said | October 23rd 2012 @ 9:13am | Report comment
5% is not “little different”. If you think that, send me 5% of your pay every week.
And if you really want to trot out South Africa remember that we haven’t beaten them without Quade.
October 23rd 2012 @ 10:18am
Mike said | October 23rd 2012 @ 10:18am | Report comment
I think it is “little different”. I don’t regard Jones’ 57%, Conolly’s 64% or Deans 58% as acceptable. Nor do I regard any of their records against New Zealand as acceptable, even Jones’ 45%. Others may set their sights low if they wish, but I won’t be doing so.
Why would I have a problem with Quade’s record against South Africa?
October 23rd 2012 @ 9:29am
Red Kev said | October 23rd 2012 @ 9:29am | Report comment
So yes Deans is the most successful coach against the Boks, but not by much and MacQueen was on a four-match streak against them when he retired as coach.
Wallabies v Springboks (since 1996) 23-19-1 (53.5%)
Greg Smith 2-2 (50%)
Rod MacQueen 5-3 (62.5%)
Eddie Jones 4-7-1 (33.3%)
John Connolly 3-2 (60%)
Robbie Deans 9-5 (64.3%)
Certainly there is much more parity between coaches when it comes to Springboks results compared to All Blacks results. Which actually supports the notion that the ABs are a better yardstick for comparison – they sort the men from the boys better.
October 23rd 2012 @ 10:21am
Mike said | October 23rd 2012 @ 10:21am | Report comment
I don’t see why that follows: Jones has a higher percentage (but not an acceptable one) against the All Blacks, yet his record against SA was abysmal. The fact is that none of them are acceptable against NZ, and only Deans is acceptable against SA – no other Australian coach has ever beaten the Boks at altitude, nor managed to win two matches against them at home.
Unfortunately too many Australian fans don’t want to accept the reality of where Australia has been for the last 11 years. As long as that continues, that’s where we will stay.
October 23rd 2012 @ 10:47am
Red Kev said | October 23rd 2012 @ 10:47am | Report comment
So 64.3% is acceptable but 62.5% is not acceptable and nor is 60%.
Do you even bother to think about what you are posting or do you just post disagreeable nonsense because I am the one posting on the other side?
October 23rd 2012 @ 10:55am
Mike said | October 23rd 2012 @ 10:55am | Report comment
You misunderstand me, Red. Deans’ record against SA is acceptable only because he has been able to achieve what no other coach ever has:
* winning at altitude
*winning back to back against SA at home
Those are real achievements and they need to be recognised. But of course I want to see the Wallabies regularly beating SA at home and at altitude, not just once.
and overall, my position remains as set out above: I do not regard the records of Jones, Conolly or Deans as acceptable. We need to aim a lot higher.
October 23rd 2012 @ 4:29pm
Mike said | October 23rd 2012 @ 4:29pm | Report comment
Mea culpa Red. Soapit just pointed out that we have won back to back in SA before (in 1963) and we have won at altitude before (1933).
October 24th 2012 @ 9:16am
Red Kev said | October 24th 2012 @ 9:16am | Report comment
To be fair I just drew a line at Jan 1 1996 when the game became professional so I’m not going to bother to cite a 1960s game as evidence that you’re wrong – it really has no relevance to the discussion.
October 23rd 2012 @ 4:20pm
soapit said | October 23rd 2012 @ 4:20pm | Report comment
mike, only the first of those three points is true.
it has been a while since we had done the other two though but best to be accurate.
October 23rd 2012 @ 4:28pm
Mike said | October 23rd 2012 @ 4:28pm | Report comment
Arrggghh, you’re right. There was an Australian victory in 1933 in Bloemfontein. And two back to back in 1963. Are those the ones?
October 23rd 2012 @ 4:45pm
soapit said | October 23rd 2012 @ 4:45pm | Report comment
1963 was theyear for both (joburg is altitude isnt it?)
October 23rd 2012 @ 4:53pm
Mike said | October 23rd 2012 @ 4:53pm | Report comment
Sorry, Ellis Park, yes. But also in 1933, so I was wrong twice.
October 23rd 2012 @ 11:39pm
bennalong said | October 23rd 2012 @ 11:39pm | Report comment
Mike
Australia is in a much better place now than when Deans took over.
Read Logues’ piece Golden Era for Wallabies. I can’t remember if you commented.
Deans created a new young team, and with it the three amigos, of course, all dismissed by stacks of Roarers before being embraced (or dumped as with QC)
He brought back two old guys, BIG old guys, and two new guys, BIG new guys, when the way the game is refereed took a drastic change away from speed of the ruck ball, on which his earlier sselections were predicated
Ironically injury has doubled our player ranks at test level and finally given us a team that finishes strongly!
Give Deans some credit
October 23rd 2012 @ 8:58am
Skills & Techniques said | October 23rd 2012 @ 8:58am | Report comment
Kev, you seem to think that the only way to save Australian rugby is to kick all things NSW out of the ARU including every idea they ever had. Maybe the QRU are hamstringing Aust rugby by ingraining the factional infighting at a managerial level as well as supervising development of the players childish contract negotiations, appalling adoption of cheap shots during play, self importance and immaturity. It’s very hard to take the Reds fans seriously on the Roar because they “hate” on the Waratahs irrespective of their value to each game.
–
Comment left via The Roar’s iPhone app. Download it now [http://itunes.apple.com/au/app/the-roar/id327174726?mt=8].
October 23rd 2012 @ 9:02am
Red Kev said | October 23rd 2012 @ 9:02am | Report comment
If anyone can see a connection (even a tenuous one) between the utter drivel that Skills & Techniques has posted and a single point in my article please enlighten me.