- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
The last round of the Rugby Championship is done and dusted, New Zealand has once again taken the trophy home and South Africa, Australia and Argentina will again wonder what they have to do in order the wrest away the trophy from an ever impressive New Zealand team.
For each of these three teams there are different challenges, Argentina has come on in leaps and bounds this year – they started with two very impressive performances against South Africa and should have won in Salta.
Their scrum was completely dominant against a South African pack that finished the tournament last year with 100% completion on their own feed – the same could be argued against Australia, it was only New Zealand who found ways to largely negate their scrumming prowess.
Their player of the tournament for me, Nicholas Sanchez, in the early rounds was impressive – his control in tactical kicking was astute and his ability to break the line a number of times against South Africa was a sight to behold.
Prior to the final match against Australia I was going to suggest that they may be running out of steam, but as proven, that was not the case.
So Argentina will continue to look for improvement, South Africa on the other hand, is akin to the tale of two cities. Watching them could be the best of times, but equally the worst of times.
It is when I think about Australia that I ponder whether there isn’t more to their performances than just the obvious.
Sure there is no David Pocock, nor Steven Moore – who for all money has been the best Wallaby forward for the past few seasons.
Will Genia and Quade Cooper in form and uninjured could have made a difference and the forced retirement of Pat McCabe due to injury was a big loss. A few Wallaby supporters even suggested that a certain few overseas players would have bolstered the Wallaby squad and improved their depth.
Rugby is a game of inches, you have to fight for every inch of possession, territory and space you want, and if you don’t you can be damn sure your opponent will.
But it is also about the top two inches.
The ability to read the match situation, the ability to execute, to work as a collective and to be committed to the goal.
For some of the players, that commitment can not be questioned – Michael Hooper has shown his commitment for 80 minutes in every match, the same can be said about James Slipper.
In the absence of Steven Moore, Slipper has taken on the grunt work, his work rate in defence, around the breakdowns and with his trademark drives into the line. He has in my view, been the best Wallaby forward on the paddock.
The problem is though, rugby is a team game, you therefore need the commitment of all fifteen on the field of play.
With regular monotony I have read on the Roar that the Wallaby pack lacks grunt, if that is the case then how did the Wallaby pack manage that performance at Newlands?
Without doubt the Newlands match was by far the most comprehensive performance by them, it was a collective effort by the pack that manned up to a formidable Springbok pack.
If the Australian pack is capable of performing like that, then why did they not perform in that manner throughout the championship?
Logic tells me if you had the physicality in any match, it doesn’t disappear for the next.
Is it really a case of the Wallabies lacking firepower upfront, or perhaps something else?
Scott Fardy was very inconsistent during the Rugby Championship, his initial performances were way below the standard he set in 2013, then at Newlands his performance was a stark contrast to the rest of his performances. Why?
When you compare the individual and pack performances of the Wallabies from one match to the next then a worrying trend of highly inconsistent performances have marred their campaign.
It is also true that technique and ability to read the ruck situation could be the culprit – in the first half of the tournament Matt Toomua was hitting more rucks than many of the forwards, which either suggests that the forwards aren’t reading the situation well enough, or they are unsure what their roles are as tackle assist, first arrival etc.
It is the dawdle of the forwards, either standing out wide waiting for the ball or simply just standing off the contact areas that leads me to believe that commitment is the real issue here.
We often hear the phrase “earning the right to go wide” and it can be argued that the lack of consistent performances by the Wallaby pack influenced the effectiveness of their backs and thus their results.
Whatever the reasons for the inconsistent performances or lack of commitment shown, be it internal politics, player unhappiness or poor coaching, Ewen McKenzie is the one responsible for ensuring all players are well coached and prepared for the job at hand, he is also responsible for team harmony.
Above all a coach is not only a selector and tactician, but also a man-manager and if team dynamics fail, he should be the first one held accountable.
Join The Roar rugby editor Christy Doran, former Wallaby Matt Toomua and a cast of regular and special guests as they look at the biggest issues in the game on The Roar Rugby Podcast. If you’re looking for great odds on the next game check out Aussie bookmaker PlayUp. Chances are you’re about to lose. Set a deposit limit.