South Africa’s Victor Matfield, right, tackles Australia Will Genia, center, during their Tri Nations rugby match in Cape Town, South Africa, Saturday, Aug. 8, 2009. (AP Photo/Schalk van Zuydam)
The Wallabies had two enemies on the field – themselves and the referee. The actual opposition, the Springboks, came in a distant third.
As one of my co-viewers mentioned at the time, it is a blight on the game that the Springboks can be described as the best team in the world when they don’t actually play any rugby.
While the Wallabies once again crumbled under the pressure of their lack of self belief, the referee, the crowd, the occasion and the history, the Boks simply sat back, kicked the ball in the air, waited for mistakes and kicked the points.
A telling moment was the 78th minute close up shot of centre Jacques Fourie, because it was at that point where one realised that he had been on the field for the whole game, but not once had been sighted with that ball in hand.
Against any other team, the early exit of Stirling Mortlock would have had alarm bells ringing, but against the Boks, it meant nothing, because their centres were never going to take the Wallabies on.
Morne Steyn, Francois Steyn and Ruan Pienaar, simply kicked, kicked and kicked again. And you can’t blame them. The IRB have encouraged this style of rugby through their incessant tampering with the laws, and they are now reaping the horrible harvest.
Test rugby has regressed to a kickfest – a contest of which team has the best kicker – and a complete guessing game about how the referee might decide to interpret the various infringements. If this is rugby’s showpiece, then we are in dire straits.
In terms of playing attractive rugby, the Boks were dreadful, and so were the Wallabies. In terms of playing percentage rugby likely to win them matches and eventually the Tri-Nations, the Boks were excellent, and the Wallabies were, again, dreadful.
Sadly for the Wallaby tight five, they have worked hard to get to a point where their scrum is a dominant weapon, only to find that their backs are prepared to squander the ball that they have worked so hard to win.
Matt Giteau must be removed from five-eighth sooner rather than later. He has long been touted as the equal of Dan Carter in the world flyhalf ranks, but tonight this was proven to be a sham.
Luke Burgess didn’t help with his scatterbrained passing and some of Giteau’s poor composure must be put down to his halfback creating massive doubt in his mind as to where the ball would arrive, or if indeed it would arrive at all.
Berrick Barnes on the other hand, stepped up to the plate while Giteau was serving his ten in the bin, and kicked with aplomb. With quick ball delivered by Genia after Burgess had been hooked, Barnes settled the Australians to the point where they looked like they might pull it off, but then Giteau rejoined the fray and spoiled it all.
Coach Deans’ first order of business should be to swap these two, to utilize Barnes’ composure and accurate kicking game, and to free Giteau up to take on the line and loop in support of his outside backs.
Ultimately though, it will mean little if the Wallabies aren’t prepared to take on their opposition and seize some chances to attack.
The Wallabies took a step back in time to the old days where they were so locked into a game plan, that they couldn’t get out of it, even when the occasion demanded. So much so, that we saw Drew Mitchell, with 6 minutes to go, and a 10 point margin, kicking the ball back to the Boks from the brokenest of broken play. The idea of running it back supported by Turner, O’Connor et al didn’t appear to have occurred to him.
I haven’t yet mentioned the referee.
Mr Rolland was horrendous and the only redeeming feature was that the Wallabies were bad enough to lose it on their own, so there is no need to blame him.
He penalized the Wallabies in their first scrum for a crooked feed, only to let both sides continue to feed like that for the rest of the match.
He penalized both sides for killing the ball while they were hard on attack. He missed several forward passes, and penalized some that weren’t.
His ruck interpretation was inexplicable and he also allowed himself to be bullied by John Smit. You can’t blame Smit by the way – any good captain should try it on, and it’s the ref’s fault if he succeeds, but it was rubbish of the first degree from Rolland, and any momentum that either side may have developed was completely destroyed by his histrionics.
While all this was going on, the Boks did what they do best and piled up points. They didn’t play rugby, but they didn’t need to.
They played the game plan which basically removes the chance of them making errors and gives them every chance to accumulate points. In the Test arena, you have to admire the application of a team who can be so single minded about their approach, even if you don’t actually enjoy it.
Where to from here for the Wallabies?
It has to be results. There can be no more talk of “development”, of “learning”, of “going in the right direction”. They have now lost to an All Blacks side which is one of the worst since Taine Randell’s All Blacks, and then to a Springbok side which is simply a one-trick pony, albeit a thoroughbred.
That said, both of these teams have something the Wallabies don’t, and that is steadfastness and application. The ability to hang around, remaining there or thereabouts on the scoreboard, and give themselves a chance to win at the death.
With Berrick Barnes’ field goal, it seemed early that the Wallabies may have heeded this lesson. But it wasn’t to be. The Tri-Nations is won and lost on the road. The Wallabies have squandered their chances thus far, and now instead of having a chance to win, will be fighting simply to remain in the contest.
It would be nice to be optimistic, but there’s little reason for optimism. So Wallabies supporters – brace yourselves. This Tri-Nations could actually get worse.
oliver
Guest
In the Wallabies squad there are too many players who are out of their depth. Until selection processes at s14 level are improved we will be subject to more of the same poor performances.
Knives Out
Guest
The 1999 SA scrum with du Randt and Visagie was pretty strong. It's no coincidence that Jake White tried so hard to get Visagie involved with his squad.
countryboy
Guest
Ivan where are you from? It seemed to me like you were a South African, but I have never heard a South African refer to themselves as 'saffers'.
Ivan
Guest
Ya i know. It was known for SA to have the biggest guys, and the strongest scrum back in 1956 until one Kevin Skinner was drafted into the kiwi team. His job was to outmuscle the boks, and he did that quite well. Not since those days have the boks been known for scrum dominance, so I dont actually know where that comes from, i know until recently the boks frequently put out the largest packs in excess of 900kg, but that image has since changed and the boks are obviously trying to adapt to an increased speed in the game. The springboks forwards coach needs to catch a wakeup, the boks are being out thought at scrum time, are they perhaps putting too much emphasis on the lineout and the breakdown. I think bar the scrum, the bok forwards are the best around.
Darryl SA
Guest
Ivan, I'm afraid you're on a losing wicket here. Ever since I can remember, SA have boasted of their massive scrum, as if beef and brawn win scrums. Even if it were true that Aus were scrumming illegally (which I actually don't care if they are) then we should stop whinging about it, and fight fire with fire, or are the SA scrumming coaches too stupid to be technically astute? Time after time countries like Aus (who themselves have bemoaned their lack of good scrumming depth) have scrummed us into the ground. It's about time Gold or Muir or whoever is handling the scrumming sessions realized that size alone will not win scrums. And as many have already pointed out, lately SA is on the lighter side of the contests.
Ivan
Guest
Good point. It worries me though, because this would mean that the boks are picking up their scrum frailty at provincial level. Yes the wallas are technically superior, but i dont feel they allow for a fair contest at scrums which is against the laws is it not? its only sometimes tho and you will find scrums that were fair, are usually stagnant. But you are right, the tahs did have a good pack, although i think the saffers still have the best loosies around maybe its also fair to say that the aussies now have the better props.
Working Class Rugger
Guest
Ivan You have said that the Wallaby scrum is technically superior to its opponents. Namely the Boks. If so how do they cheat. The weight difference between both packs isn't that great.So technique and nous comes into play. From your assumptions of our technical superiority you could come to the conclusion that the Wallabies are the better scrummagers.That would be the reason why one side is left standing. When you consider that the Wallaby Props are both from arguably the strongest scrummaging side in the S14 this year. Case in point. When the Tahs meet the Sharks it was considered the clash of the packs. Who will emerge on top. And the winner was. NSW.
Ivan
Guest
ya ure right... SAs scrum is not good at the moment but i still feel that Aus are doing something illegal there. I also did say in previous posts that Aus are technically good and smart. So no i dont feel the biggest guy must win the scrum. But i do think something is up when the one side of the scrum is left standing still. Lets reserve all great talk for after the 3N. 3 home wins does not warrant that conversation
Knives Out
Guest
I don't think they did actually. It's probably a bit silly of you to label the Australian forwards as small when they were actually bigger than the SA forwards, and it's also probably silly to suggest that SA has physically superior athletes given that most test rugby players can bench press and squad the same. The fact of the matter is that South Africa does not have a powerful or technically good scrum, and that is why it has been pushed about by the Lions, NZ and Australia, and was pushed about during the Autumn tests by Wales, Scotland and England. Perhaps you should investigate Jake White's 2006 "men against boys" quote, Ivan. That might set you straight.
Mike
Guest
"Hence, its in the genes". Yes, genetically pre-determined. I've heard this sort of thing from certain South Africans before, and its quite distasteful. Anyway, you have not the faintest idea what you are talking about when it comes to scrummaging, that much is obvious. Believe it or not Ivan, most of scrummaging is skill and co-ordination so that 8 men work as a team. You think that the only thing you need to do to win scrums is put your heaviest men in them - please, be my guest! Keep following that tactic...
Mike
Guest
I am sure you are right WCR. I don't know why he's so sore though - I thought the boks won the game! I would hate to read his rantings when they lose!
Ivan
Guest
Oh please. Its not our right, its fact. Go watch the documentary by ESPN on greatest rugby rivalries.. namely the All Black againsts the Springboks. ALL BlaCK GREATS mention that the reason that the sport took so well in SA was that their men were physically larger than any other rugby playing country. Hence, its in the genes. Power... you talk as if i said Godly status. And you are obviously watching your footage with beer goggles on, else you need to please educate me as to how Smit and Bakkies can be left standing stationery at a scrum, while the Aussie loosehead and his lock and flank have all moved inside and past them. Or why Baxter would angle his leg outwards to scrum forwards? Its technique, illegal technique but smart. The only reason that Aus would have outmuscled all those teams at the scrum was due to their technical nous, illegal or not... but not hteir muscle. But then comes the rest of the forward game... Where are Aus then ? Are they flexing their biceps at ruck time? Are they driving every team in history backwards in the tackle? No, they are blatantly trying to cheat there too, by going to ground and crawling over the tackled man and ball trying to prevent the opposition from getting to the ball. A delay in 1 second is enough to win the penalty for holding. Its all very smart, and i must say that they are the smartest team around.. but physically... Sorry, the weakest of the 3N teams. And NZ are far stronger scrummagers than SA and Aus... If they were pushed back by Aus.. you would have to ask why?
Working Class Rugger
Guest
Looking beefer doesn't make you superior. Australia clearly won the battle of the scrum. I think Ivan's showing a considerable case of sour grapes on this matter. We went through a period of mediocrity but we have emerged from that. I'm surprised no one saw this coming. The Tahs and Brumbies packs were two of the most dominant in this years Super 14. I'd rank the Tahs as the most dominant.
Mike
Guest
Well of course, Ivan. South Africa is superior - it is your God-given right isn't it? Natural superiority, that no other nation may question! All utter rubbish. I had a look at the footage - you have the nerve to complain that the Australian were angling in on Smit. The only player in the scrums in that match who did any angling was Smit when he milked the penalty from Rolland. He bored in on our hooker but got the penalty by complaining to the ref before and after. And that is what South Africa's superiority is - nothing more than the ability to whinge the loudest when they don't get what they want. South Africa's scrummaging is pretty mediocre at the moment, not just compared to the Australians, but everyone else they play. And then, when they don't get their own way, they sob and cry like little girls. I'll find you a handkerchief...
Ivan
Guest
Thats because you watch the game with your one eye closed. Australia have a good technique, well in my opinion then, SA are bigger and stronger and faster than Aus. Aus are technically smarter.
Mike
Guest
No Ivan, Australia are superior scrummagers to South Africa. We have pushed back the French, the Italians and the Boks, and we would have done the same to the ABs if not for a referee (Joubert) who does not know one end of a scrum from the other. I have also seen little evidence that the South African pack is superior to other European sides.
Ivan
Guest
What numbers would those be ? 7 - The amount of the scrums that Australia illegally won without being penalized? In a fair push, SA would run Aus backwards. SA have physically superior athletes when compared to Australia... end of story.
Knives Out
Guest
'Aus do not have more powerful forwards than SA, they are small and weak compared to the bok forwards' Not much of a numbers fan, Ivan?!
Michael Lee
Guest
Well done, well written that's all that needs to be said
Rusty
Guest
Great post Pete, top erm "Marks"