Wallabies v Italy at Canberra Stadium. The Wallabies won 31-8 – photo by Brett McKay
As young men in New Zealand we were told always to look at a girl’s mother before getting serious about her. Something of that mantra seems to have rubbed off on John Mitchell, the former All Blacks coach and now coach of the Western Force, when he cast an eye over a very young James O’Connor.
O’Connor had been spurned by rugby league scouts because he was thought to be too small. Had no one told them about Clive Churchill?
The lad started to play rugby union. Mitchell went on his scouting mission. Saw the obvious genius in his play. But more importantly noted that his father was a chunky, well-built man.
Like father, like son, Mitchell reasoned. O’Connor was snapped up by the Western Force. Last season he was called into the Hong Kong Sevens and played so brilliantly your correspondent wrote a blog on him giving him a potential kiss of death by calling him ‘the next Tim Horan.’
Later on last year Mitchell gave O’Connor a start for the Western Force against the Hurricanes. The youngster handled the massive Ma’a Nonu quite comfortably. He was picked for the Wallabies European tour which stymied any chance of the South Africans or the New Zealanders (two other countries he was eligible to represent) picking him up.
And now, in his first Test and still filling out, O’Connor has become the rare player to score three tries on his Test debut.
Admittedly, he ran in a total of about 15m for his tries. But this disregards the fact that there is a high skill to position yourself in a way to make scoring look easy.
Ars celare artem, as Virgil wrote (true art is to hide art).
The great players in any game make their mastery look easy. O’Connor makes scoring tries look easy. But, of course, it isn’t.
When Lachie Turner made that sizzling break after about 4 minutes of play, Stirling Mortlock and Berrick Barnes had come in towards the lineout to create the gap, and O’Connor drifted forward on an outside line so that Turner was able to pick him up as he was tackled near the try line.
This ability to position himself to continue the movement and cross the line if the gap is there is very much an ability that Tim Horan, of blessed memory, the greatest Wallaby inside centre, had. Horan could even read David Campese on the burst, when the great winger himself had no idea where he was going and what he was going to do.
But in the Rugby World Cup quarter-final against New Zealand in 1991 when Campese threw a ‘hail Mary’ pass over his head after a bewildering run, there was Horan to grab it and cross for the try.
Robbie Deans is patiently building up a Wallaby side that is going to be extremely hard to hold this year and even more so in 2011, the Rugby World Cup year.
Italy are a noted scrummaging and mauling side. But in neither the scrum, until Al Baxter was replaced, or the rolling maul were the Italians able to do much damage to the Wallaby pack. The pack will benefit from its dedicated scrum coach, Patricio Noriega, who was brought up in Argentina in the days of the bajada, 8-man shove.
The Wallaby lineout was secure until the erratic Tatafu Polota-Nau replaced the splendid Stephen Moore. It would be interesting to see if someone else in the pack can throw the ball in. Polota-Nau played number 8 for some years and in time this might be his Test position.
The backs were impressive in the way they took the right options on most plays and then executed these options. The Deans notion of playing what is in front of you once the play unravels is beginning to be learnt by the backs.
I was impressed, too, along with Greg Martin, on the way the back three worked as a unit, always positioning themselves so that they could run back kicks that were not well-directed.
The Wallabies look to be a more formidable and intelligent side than last year’s model. Admittedly the Barbarians and Italy (which now has lost a record 9 consecutive Tests) were not confronting opposition.
In two weeks, when the Wallabies play France at Sydney we will probably get a better indication of just how good the 2009 Wallabies and their new star, James O’Connor, really are.
My guess is that a very good team is being created.
Greg Russell
Roar Guru
Knives: we are not in any fundamental disagreement. Notice that I quoted you favorably in the first instance, i.e., I was drawing the attention of readers to something you had said that most people were missing. I agree that Deans has not yet done anything of genius as Wallabies coach, however there is no doubt that he is an improvement on coaching for most of the last decade. He won in South Africa last year against a much more talented Bok team than those of previous years that Australia had failed to beat - a very notable achievement. The potential of Giteau-Barnes-O'Connor gives Deans a chance to do something of genius. If we both keep trying I'm sure one of us will think of someone who has changed from FR to BR!
ohtani's jacket,
Guest
I dunno about Henry. He got pretty amorous with Mils last week -- http://www.samoaobserver.ws/images/stories/Sport2/0000000_Graham-Henry.gif
Spencer
Guest
OJ - I would rather have JoC as a mascot than look at that entirely miserable sour face that is Graham Henry. There is an old proverb that goes" Until the age of 40 you have the face of your genes. After 40 you have the face of your character. What must Graham Henrys character be like? I think it is great that JoC is excited, and gets the fans excited. That is one of the great things about sport: it brings enjoyment. Cheer up OJ, your Mr Jockey will be back in his strap soon!
Knives Out
Guest
To be fair, Mr. Russell, I did actually state that I was impressed with the patience of the Wallabies and the persistent kicking to touch. It was intelligent rugby. But, and this is a big but, that Italian team was perhaps the worst and most disinterested test team I have ever seen. The holes in the defence were huge and they had no attacking clout whatsoever. O'Connor's performance has overshadowed an inability to build a big score. It's not realistic for Australian fans to consistently perpetuate the theme that Deans is a genius after games like this. Australia may well go on to do very well this season, but that first performance was very poor. However, if you're suggesting that Australia struggled with the Italian gameplan then one has to wonder how they'll cope with the Springbok rush system. Regarding shifts from the front to back row, I have strained my mind and can't think of any. Ross Ford, John Hayes, William Servat, Andrew Sheridan, TPN, Steve Thompson have all made the shift from 2nd/back row to test level front row. Incidentally, Steve Thompson did take a quick sabbatical as a flanker a few seasons ago, and Phil Greening occasionally played on the flank. In fact, there are two young England 'A' (I refuse to use the name 'English Saxons') hookers have played a lot of back row for their clubs: Neil Briggs at Sale Sharks, and Rob Webber at London Wasps. Beyond that I think it would be unworkable at test level.
ohtani's jacket,
Guest
What is O'Conner? The Wallabies' mascot? I suddenly have this burning desire to see the Wallabies get smashed.
Acer
Guest
O'Conner is already a star and seems to be taking everything in his stride. The new poster boy of Australian rugby. Have to agree with some don't start getting to excited we still haven't played the Springboks / French or New Zealand yet. The real test will come then when up against world class players. South Africa will be primed for battle after the Lions series and all going well New Zealand will be a totally different beast. Much much better than what they are now. As for the French lets just hope they don't rest on their Laurels and be content with a win over a makeshift NZ.
Brett McKay
Guest
Completely agree Greg, and it will be interesting to see how the Barnes-Cooper-O'Connor combo goes this weekend (Aussie Rob's made 11 positional and personnel changes, if you haven't see it yet). I made the comment in yesterday that I was really impressed with the way the backs retreatd into a zone-style defence on Sat night as they got ready for the Italians to return kicks. No doubt - as has been written everywhere - this is being done to get ready for the counter-attacking waves of New Zealand and Bryan Habana..
Greg Russell
Roar Guru
Brett, I enjoy any ideas like Mortlock to 15, TPN to 8, Waugh to 2, Giteau to wing (from Spiro) that make one stop and think. The point is to recognize these ideas as experimental, and not be dogmatically devoted to them. Notice that with Giteau-Barnes-O'Connor I am not talking about anything experimental. Just ask the Italians. As Knives Out has pointed out, take these three away and " then the majority of Australian fans might be wondering what on earth is going on with their team." Actually, this assessment by KO is a little harsh. On Saturday night Italy basically played the football equivalent of putting 11 men behind the ball. Australia has never been a team like NZ that can murder teams with such a defensive mindset. The BaaBaas were much more open, and I thought the Wallabies did a very reasonable job of putting points on them.
Greg Russell
Roar Guru
My general comment on Saturday night will indirectly be in support of reds fan on Barnes. In any sport one should play to one's strengths. What Australia's two matches so far have confirmed is that Australia's biggest positive point of difference with all other teams in world rugby will be the Giteau-Barnes-O'Connor axis, which has the potential to be in rugby what Thurston (approximately Giteau), Lockyer (Barnes) and Slater (O'Connor) are in rugby league. (If one really wanted to push this analogy to the limit, one could assign George Smith the role of his namesake Cameron in league.) Those who read my comments know that I don't try to hide my ignorance of NH rugby, so I will not attempt to pass judgement on the number of players of the quality and type of Giteau, Barnes and O'Connor in the NH (I very much doubt there are many). However I do watch a lot of SH rugby, and when one stops to think about it, there are very few players of the quality and type of these Australian "little men" (to borrow a rugby league term) at the top level in NZ and SAf. I mean, take out Dan Carter, and what else is there? Don't get me wrong, players like Ma'a Nonu, Morne Steyn, Stephen Donald, Luke McAlister, Wynand Oliver and so on all have their strengths (in some cases considerable, e.g. Nonu, in other cases exaggerated, in my opinion). But the point is that none of these players shine in the way that Giteau, Barnes and O'Connor do. It seems logical that Australia should produce rugby players who are like rugby league playmakers, just as it is logical that NZ and SAf do not (remembering here that NZ's strength in league has rarely been in positions 1,6 and 9). I am convinced that if the present Wallabies are to become a great team, then Giteau-Barnes-O'Connor will be the point of difference that makes them so. I think Deans knows this too, as reflected in his fast-tracking of O'Connor. None of this is to put down players like G Smith, S Moore, S Mortlock, R Elsom, Horwill, and so on. They are all excellent players. But the point is that one finds similarly excellent players in other countries (McCaw, Burger, Botha, etc.). If I look around, what I do not see is many other countries with any players of the particular type of excellence of Giteau, Barnes and O'Connor, let alone three such players in one place. One also notes how these three complement each other, just as do Thurston, Lockyer and Slater. (I will now sit back and watch for this point to be misinterpreted ... I am not saying that Australia's "little men" will definitely make them no. 1, I am not saying that South Africa and NZ do not have some areas of strength over Australia, and so on.)
Brett McKay
Guest
So Greg, where would TPN-to-8 rate on the scale of suggested positional changes, if Mortlock-to-15 is Brilliant (if I do say so myself) and Waugh-to-2 is Ridiculous?!?!
Greg Russell
Roar Guru
"Polota-Nau played number 8 for some years and in time this might be his Test position." I wondered whether this was just Spiro's wildcard comment to stimulate reaction, but all I can find is Worlds Biggest writing "I have mentioned previously on the Roar that TPN should be looked at as a backrower in particular No 8. He played Australian Schoolboys at Number 8. Imagine TPN, Smith and Elsom backrow." He would have to undergo a major and very difficult change in body shape to play BR. Further, my impression is that BR-FR traffic is all one-way, e.g. Richard Harry and Steve Thompson both went from BR to FR. Similarly, a good idea often aired at The Roar (but too late to act on) is that Phil Waugh should change to hooker. Does anyone know of any reverse traffic at the top level? Moore is the most accurate thrower in world rugby, so he's a tough standard to judge TPN on when the latter enters the fray. If anything play TPN as a lineout lifter and see if one of the props can throw the ball in.
Who Needs Melon
Guest
reds fan, You're not wrong. I hope Cooper goes well but, if he doesn't, I'd like to see he and O'Connor swap. Or AAC on at fullback and JOC to 12. C'mon The Roar! Post the article so we can comment on it! :)
reds fan
Guest
Gee he's mixing it up with the changes! Barnes at 10, Quade at 12, Cross 13, Hynes 11. Kimlin 6, Mumm 5, Pek 1, TPN running on. Pocock 7, Smith captain from 8.
reds fan
Guest
Stu. I agree with your comment on Barnes. My name gives away my bias, so I try to refrain from bringing him up too often to avoid appearing too parochial. But the bloke seriously gets about 2% of the air time and newspaper pundantry that the rest of the backline gets. And the great thing about him, is that he is happy with that. He was a bit wonky when he first came back from league but he is now really showing his class. He is the reason why I think O'connor should get his education from 15. Both 12 and 15 are acknowledged as good positions for future 10's to learn from. If you pushed O'connor up to 12, we'd be back searching for a decent 15 again. I think any time we can have O'connor, Barnes and Gits on the field is happy days! The one thing we do need to acknowledge though, is that these boys, whilst brave tacklers, are not massive. So when we select 11, 13 and 14 we need to make sure we are getting some boofheads. Mortlock is superb for this. Digby would also be great (thats if he doesn't flee for the filthy lucre.)
stu
Guest
I've cringed at Shgarpe for a long while, but in fairness old googly has been playing well for the last 12 or so months and deserves his spot. Even since he made it back into the team he has markedly been more involved and his error rate feel a lot lower than it used to be. I'd love to see him bust the first tackle but he usually doesn't. Just wanted to say that Barnes is one of the best players we have, he's intelligent, great hands & feet, he could probably tackle a steamroller, and is a fantatic foil for giteau.
OldManEmu
Guest
Love the chatter regarding Sharpey - Bulldog, Virgil, Reds Fan, Worlds Biggest - all get a gold star and meat pie for lunch. The rest of you must write out 100 lines "Nathan Sharpe is not the devil." I have decided once and for all to put this mindless debate regarding the abilities of Nathan Sharpe to rest by writing the authoritative tome which will be titled something like "Mary McKillop or Nathan Sharpe - who will be touched by the hand of God first." I can almost hear the keyboards of the Sharpie haters bashing away in anticipation. Watch this space.
Blinky Bill of Bellingen
Guest
Interesting reading the different views about Nathan Sharp. When Sharpey was dropped I just accepted that age had caught up with him, his day had finally arrived & their were better players coming through. Let's face it, he looked tired. There was absolutely no leg drive & his presence seagulling out on the backline I thought was more about catching his breath than busting the defensive line. He's a bit too slow for that & besides back then anyways he was constantly dropping the pill. When he was back in following Vicks departure I figured it was because of his lineout ability & leadership. That's it. Against the Baa Baas & Italy I've not noticed him seagulling or dropping the ball. So that's good. BUT........where I'm expecting (or should that be hoping) him to really get up a head of steam, deliver punishing runs and bust a few tackles, he seems content to just look for the turf. Perhaps he thinks he's really fast & is concerned at getting too far ahead of his support? Not sure what gives but you'd have to think that a bloke that size could make more meters. Wouldn't you? Annnnnd an occassional off load to keep the opposition on their toes would make a nice change. As it is all the opp has to do is show up and he starts to lower like a crane on a building site. Hey what do I know?
Peter K
Guest
How on earth can you say he is strong in the scrum? When we were crap and pushed backwards it was normally on his side. Vickermann was far more effective as is Horwill. The props and hooker have a lot more to do with the scrum. Also Sharpe does not work hard consistently. I have had stats where he did hardly anything but seagull. Remember he was dropped and saved when Vickerman left for O/S. Also he does not do the hard yards up the middle. Look at the game again the runs through the heavy traffic around the ruck were by the frontrow and in other games Horwill. Sharpe was out wider running into backs in channel 3, no not hard yards up the middle. Yes he is good in the lineout. We need to blood or find a better player for the world cup. At Sharpes age he is just getting poorer and slower year by year.
Virgil
Guest
I like the balance of horwill and sharpe at the moment too. And when you have such a strong exponent of the lineout why replace him? Fundamentally he works hard, does the hard yards up the middle, wins lineouts, is strong and big in the scrum, doesn't miss tackles and best of all for this fairly young team he is passionate and experienced. Case closed I reckon. I hope Pocock, Cooper and Valentine get a bit more game time this week.
Peter K
Guest
Spencer - How can you say Palu is too lazy? Do you know his stats? Do you know he is at the top in tackles and runs and metres gained out of the forwards in test matches? Brown has been totally ineffective against opposition weaker than S14, the pace is below S14. Yes I wanted Mumm because Sharpe is non effective, I would rather it get it wrong trying to improve the team than accept mediocrity. Sharpe goes straight down when he hits the line and places the ball back, yes, but so what. He hardly ever breaks tackles or hits them hard. How can these hit ups be outstanding? They are soft. He also hardly ever offloads the ball.His tackles also are just adequate, he does not hit them hard. However he did have a high work rate last game.