My old chief of staff years ago and a great mentor at the Sydney Morning Herald, Keith Martin, would have tossed my copy into a waste paper basket if I’d presented him with this lead.
“Get your lead right, sonny,” he’d say in his terse way.
So into the basket goes the ARU’s lead.
The real lead is that Deans has set up a new leadership team for the Wallabies. The usual suspects, the former incumbent Stirling Mortlock and George Smith, the last Wallaby captain, have been discarded for two players, neither of whom are captains or have been captains of their respective Super Rugby teams.
Elsom is far and away the best Wallaby forward.
He is an 80 minute man in a pack that often has not much more than 40 strong minutes in it. He is hyped on victory. He is tough, brutal and passionate in the Simon Poidevin tradition. He might not make the best after-dinner speeches or mouth those platitudinous sound-bites that someone like George Gregan was adept at.
But he will be a fearless and uncompromising leader on the field, as solid as a rock as his name suggests, which is something the Wallabies have lacked for some years.
Making Barnes the vice-captain is a sign that Deans sees him as the brains of the backline, the playmaker who sets up plays for his outside backs and who takes the team around the field in a measured, calculating and smart way.
We had a story earlier in the week in the SMH from Greg Growden (who is well-informed on these inside matters) that Giteau is unhappy with the possibility of being taken out the play-making role of first five-eighths in favour of Barnes.
I hope the story is right, not the unhappiness part, but the likelihood that Giteau is being moved out, at least to inside centre or even further out to the wing (something I’ve advocated for a while).
Giteau is an instinctive highly-skilled player who is best suited as a strike weapon rather than as a playmaker, setting up plays for the other strike players. When I think of Giteau, the image of Carlos Spencer comes to mind.
Playing such gifted players at first five-eighths is the equivalent of playing them in straitjackets.
Barnes, as far as I’m concerned, is the ideal playmaker.
He has a good kick. He passes nicely. He can make a break while taking the ball to the line. But most importantly, he plays what is in front of him rather than what comes into his mind.
Both Elsom and Barnes are not part of the corroding faction within Australian rugby, a faction that is lead by some former senior Wallabies and disaffected former officials, and gets support from the RUPA (the players’ union) to bring down John O’Neill, the CEO of the ARU, who in his first incarnation as CEO tried to keep the greed of the newly professional players under some sort of control.
I can hear Keith Martin saying to me now: “How is this related to your headline, son?”
Well, one of the consistent themes of Deans’ selections since he took over two years ago has been the way he has tried to change the culture of the side from what may be described as a RUPA-like sense of entitlement without the achievements to back up the claims, to a side that puts playing well and successfully for the Wallabies above all other considerations.
He has tried to get rid of the corroding elements or put them in a position where their ability to influence (for the worse) the younger players is greatly restricted.
The headline “last throw of the dice” element in the selection relates to the gamble Deans has taken to discard the leadership of players who have been involved in the Wallabies for most of this century for two players of lesser experience.
Elsom has played 44 Tests. Barnes has played 21. Stirling Mortlock has played 80 Tests. And George Smith 105.
The other aspect about Elsom and Barnes is that they don’t push their agendas in public, and they don’t contrive to undermine the position of other players with comments that can be read as criticisms of what the coach might be wanting to try out with them and the other players.
For better or for worse, this is the leadership team that will take the Wallabies through to the 2011 RWC tournament in New Zealand.
Deans will want this new leadership to make a difference right now, for this is what the Wallabies need after a disgraceful Tri-Nations (aside from a glorious victory over the Springboks at Brisbane).
The Wallabies face a formidable Spring Tour.
They play the All Blacks at Tokyo, an opposition that has historically the best away-from-home record of any side in world rugby.
Then there are the Grand Slam Tests starting with England at Twickenham on 7 November.
England will have Jonny Wilkinson back, and he is back to his match-winning best. The referee is Bryce Lawrence (NZ) which should be a slight advantage for the Wallabies as they are familiar with his style from Super Rugby matches.
On 15 November, the Wallabies play Ireland, the form team in Europe.
The referee is the South African Jonathan Kaplan.
Kaplan has a reputation of being tough on the Wallabies. But he was the referee in Wellington who played a very, very long extra time and then gave a penalty to the Wallabies for John Eales to kick the winning goal.
On 21 November, the Wallabies play Scotland. The referee is R. Poite, who I guess is a Frenchman, but I haven’t seen him in a major Test.
This shapes up to be the easiest of the Grand Slam Tests, although Scotland has the biggest pack of the Home Unions.
The tour finishes on November 28 with the Test against Wales, who fancy their chances this year of defeating the All Blacks and the Wallabies.
The referee is Wayne Barnes, the Englishman who New Zealanders’ reckon torpedoed their 2007 RWC chances at Cardiff against France.
Barnes has been in New Zealand refereeing and it may be that exposure to Southern Hemisphere rugby might have enlightened him about the fairness of the methods and systems used in this part of the rugby world.
There is a mid-week match against Gloucester on 3 November which, even though the uncapped Wallabies will make up some of the team, should be a victory.
Given this, anything less than four wins out of the six matches would make the tour a failure.
The hope is, of course, that the Wallabies will emulate the famous 1984 side and achieve a second Grand Slam.
We need some context here, though.
The notes to the ARU’s handout suggest that this is the eighth potential Grand Slam tour. The Wallabies have won only one Grand Slam since the 1928/29 NSW Waratahs (the Queensland Rugby Union was not re-formed until 1929) first tried to pull off the sequence of four Tests wins against the Home Unions.
The Springboks and the All Blacks have both achieved four Grand Slams out of eight attempts.
2009, 25 years after the first Wallabies Grand Slam, is the appropriate time for Australian rugby to celebrate another Grand Slam triumph.
As the ARU notes point out, 17 members of the Spring Tour squad hadn’t been born when Alan Jones coached a marvellous team to a memorable sequence of victories against the Home Unions.
ThelmaWrites
Guest
Ahoy Pothale! Please see my reply at the end of this thread.
ThelmaWrites
Guest
Pothale, ahoy! For a while I thought I would be going back to Sydney without having seen an Irish club in a match. Luckily, I flicked on Eurosport yesterday and behold, there was the replay of Leinster v London Irish. The following are my impressions of the game. Sorry, it must look gushy, but bear in mind I subsisted on lousy Tri Nations fare this year. What an intense match-up for 80 minutes! I would have wanted the Wallabies to watch this game. 1. Leinster looked gutted by the defeat, especiakly the prop? who gave away the match-winning penalty. Not like the Wallabies who don't seem to be affected if they lose. 2. The scrums were great. Not many restarts. Great binding. You could throw a blanket over the scrum and you wouldn't detect a bump. I exaggerate, but you get the drift. 3. At one particular ruck, I was surprised at how a Leinster player stood and bound himself to a player on the ground while the halfback was still retrieving the ball for clearance. I remember one Brumbies v Crusaders game (2000?) where all the players would be on the ground, George Gregan would be looking left and right at the backline, and the ruck was still adjudged not over. 4. Leinster's speed at the break-down and effective contest for the ball. 5. A decoy move with two decoys, a loop, quick ball through the backline. Unfortunately for Leinster, Mapusua and co. were arriving early to the Leinster backline. I couldn't work out whether the former were offside or not. Don't remember any chip kicks. There was one long passage of kicking but that was all. Don't remember any dropped balls. 6. It was nice to see Peter Hewat and Chris Malone. The last time I've seen Malone was at the Grand Finals Randwick v Sydney Uni in 2000. Maybe now that Tuqiri is gone, Hewat might think of playing with the Wallabies? 7. The referee policed the ruck very well. Not many infringements, mostly not releasing the ball and one diving, I think. So the game was at a frenetic pace. 8. Obviously, I don't know much about Kearney, but I thought Brian Lam substituting for Malone won the game for London Irish. It could have gone either way. 9. If Spiro is right, and Dean's "play what's in front of you" is like Randwick when Jeff Sayle was coach, the Wallabies should watch this game. 10. The commentating was excellent. Unlike the English commentator for the French Top 14. Voluble at 120 miles per hour, would catch breath after 7 long sentences. Worse when his side-kick Simon was commentating instead of the Frenchman, there would be two of them at great speed cutting into each other's lines. Thoroughly enjoyable and very instructive.
Colin N
Guest
*Downey* even.
Colin N
Guest
Downet, that was it. He certainly looked a bit lost out there.
Knives Out
Guest
'I never got the signing of JDV anyway. Mafi plays/played his best rugby at 12 for Munster, with either Earls or Tipoki alongside him. De Villiers was absolutely smashed a couple of times (probably by Lawes). Also, their midfield defence was non-existant at times, and I think it was Mafi who moved up too early to create the hole for Northampton’s third try.' De Villier's hasn't had an easy induction to European rugby. O'Driscoll blitzed him and then he copped an almighty hit off Downey and some others and has generally looked off the pace. I have no doubt that he'll go onto be a big hit but I think it was a bit optimist of McGahan to promote him to the starting xv so early. I'm convinced that he is a totally unnecessary buy.
Colin N
Guest
I never got the signing of JDV anyway. Mafi plays/played his best rugby at 12 for Munster, with either Earls or Tipoki alongside him. De Villiers was absolutely smashed a couple of times (probably by Lawes). Also, their midfield defence was non-existant at times, and I think it was Mafi who moved up too early to create the hole for Northampton's third try.
Knives Out
Guest
The Irish scrum has often been hit and miss, but Hayes rarely gets bested which is at odds with the negative press he receives. I'm surprised that the Munster scrum was having such a tough time of it because Tonga (whatever he is called) is no technician, and is the same size as Buckley, and Lawes was scrummaging. I've always seen Horan as the problem. It seems to go unnoticed that he is actually a tiny prop by modern standards. Healy is the natural replacement and Court is a big old unit who can move about a bit. I agree about Buckley. He doesn't seem to be improving under Laurie Fisher, and as for Ross.. I don't know what to say? Michael Bradley was reticent to use him during the Summer games, if I recall correctly, which is interesting. The coming games this weekend will be informative. One other quick point worth mentioning, IMO, is the form of JDV. Obviously he was never going to slot right in and dominate games, but moving Mafi to 13 seems to have upset the midfield balance, and playing Earls on the wing won't do much good for his game. It seems like he's a luxury as opposed to a necessity. Munster need some invigoration in the back row, I think.
Derm
Roar Guru
I agree about Healy - he's starting to perform really well, and can carry too. Buckley seems to go backward with each game though. Ross was eating the same stuff as Heaslip ate the previous week. that's two end of match moments that have cost them points - dearly. Stupid stuff. Hope he got a bollocking. Am disappointed with Ross - thought his arrival would strengthen options in the front row, but not looking good. It's not my greatest area of knowledge but it looks like we could get really hammered in this area - even by Australia. (TIC). O'Leary was like a player on his first test in the first half, and then recovered well in the second half to take a nice solo opportunist try. Reddan needs to be snapping at his heels.
Knives Out
Guest
The Munster scrum has always been a weakness. Ulster are scrummaging well, and Healy is looking stronger so there are options (albeit callow options) for Ireland. I agree that Hines and Cullen aren't a good combo. Their relationship lacks aireal guile and O'Connell is slowly turning into the Irish Borthwick. Oy vey! Paddy Wallace had a very good game, and I always liked the look of Humphreys at Leicester. Fitzgerald looked interested and penetrative as well. I thought that Reddan was pretty mediocre, and O'Leary looked really shaky. Btw, what was Mike Ross thinking? Cheika can't be pleased with that or Heaslips' silliness against Edinburgh.
Knives Out
Guest
So they were, stuff happens. I forgot. Well done Wales.
Invictus
Guest
He left the Force as part of the fallout over the Firepower collapse. Both he and Mitchell didn't get a fair chunk of their 3rd party cash because of it.
Invictus
Guest
It might do him the world of good to play a couple of seasons in Europe. Just play him at 12, so you get your moneys worth.
pothale
Guest
It's taken me a while to surface from work, KO. Nothing more. Unfortunately I predicted correctly the likely form of the two front-runner Irish provinces before the season began. They need to get up to speed real quick. Northampton were good value for their win, and it would have been cruel if Munster had got over the line. Didn't quite understand the ref's last call that ended the match - clearly O'Connell didn't. Munster have the hard won experience of clawing their way back into matches -full credit to Northampton for keeping them out. Even if they are English. :) Leinster on the other hand threw away the match against Irish. They had better kicking ability, but Cheika brought on Kearney far too late. This guy needs regular game time if he's gonna perform for us in the AIs. He gets rusty very quickly. Too much cleverality going on in the back line, and not enough creating of real space by O'Driscoll and yer man Darcy at 12 who's beginning to annoy me with his waste of ball. Reddan has been a good arrival and links well with Sexton. Heaslip & Co were far too quiet, and the lineout performance was lamentable. Hines and Cullen won't always work as a combo, and Toner needs development quickly. Let's see how this weekend goes before I get out the executioner's axe. The nordies had the best of the weekend, and Kidney is having his head slowly turned by the performances of Humphreys, Boss and Trimble in particular. And stand-in captain, Paddy Wallace wasn't too shabby either. Ferris is growing in stature again following his injury. However it's the Munster front five which are the most worrying. And Kidney needs to be ruthless in his selection for November. Hopefully any club ties have now been dispensed with, and he picks on form and energy. Flannery, Horan, O'Connell aren't good enough at the moment.
stuff happens
Guest
All this bickering and instability that apparently exists around camp Wallaby is largely based on the fact that they are a team with a very poor record who are still playing poorly.What is it, one victory out of seven or eight in the TN? Deans does not look good in all this at all.In my view the team is playing worse not better. That's why this tour is so important for them. If ( and I agree if) they can string together three victories then everyone will feel life is back on track.If they can't the Giteau,Tuqiri, Mortlock & no doubt others issues will continue to fester.Blame will be apportioned, coaches will duck for cover not to mention the CEO - that sort of thing. And KO Australia were not unbeaten on last year's tour (I think that's what you meant). They lost to Wales. Good to read the views about the NH teams from those you who are there.
Terry Kidd
Guest
Ko you are most definitely correct when you say that its an interesting topic. You also throw up some good points for thought and debate .... were both Mortlock and Giteau not informed .... it might be that if they were not informed then it was done deliberately to send a message loud and clear that no player is above the team. Harping back to the Brumbies (Nucifora)/Gregan/RUPA theories is there anything to read in that it was Mortlock and Giteau involved again? Personally, I believe that in the case of Mortlock he has been informed that his place in the team is no longer a given in that it is likely that he won't be around in 2011 and ACC is playing pretty well in the 13 jumper. Why else would Mortlock go exploring Japan? I also think that Giteau is struggling with the fact that in 2009 he was 'the man' whereas in 2010 others have come on somewhat and Giteau is less 'the man'. One thing I have no doubt on though .... we will all be trawling thru every single utterance looking for meanings, hidden meanings and nuances ..... lol, what more could us Roarers want that a good conspiracy and debate?
Knives Out
Guest
Not denying it El Tel, it's just hard for me to qualify from so far away - if you see what I mean? I completely agree that Australia looks better with Barnes at 10, and Giteau was formerly one of the worlds best 12s, if not the best. Giteau's determination to play at 10 reminds of Hernandez who is a far superior 15 than he is 10. In those instances it is up to the coach to lay down the law. McKenzie tried to massage Hernandez's ego and lavished extravagant public praise on him but then Hernandez was appalling at 10. When that happens there is little room for manoeuvre. It's a tough call, but I don't think not informing Giteau that he isn't going to be considered as a public leader is a good move. However, did Giteau struggle at 10 because of Burgess or simply the Wallaby tactics? He definitely tried a bit too hard in the 3N this year. Does that mean he wants to win that much, or he thinks his way is the only way that Australia can win? It's an interesting topic and seems to be developing into a real issue, especially as it seems that Deans neglected to inform Mortlock of his demotion too.
Terry Kidd
Guest
G'day Knives, I agree with Thelma. I have to admit that prior to this season I didn't see the Giteau attitude thingy on the horizon but during this season I was a little surprised at some of his statements in the press where he stated that he wanted to be the chief playmaker, and later when a challenge from Barnes was rising how he wanted to be the 10 .... it just smacked a little of 'me, me, me' rather than 'team, team, team'. I don't know any facts, or 3rd party tales, as some here seem to be in on, but if half is true then there very well may be an attitude problem .... certainly his erratic play this season in the internationals would seem to point to something being not quite right with his head. Is he trying to do too much because he is trying to show how he is indispensible? I don't know, but what I do know from the evidence of my own eyes is that the team plays better with Barnes at 10.
Knives Out
Guest
Thelma, living in England all I see is his match face and his post-game attitude. Nothing deeper, but the anti-Giteau tinge seems to have slowly crept in recently, as opposed to being a long-held view. Is that not right? -- First game blues, Pothale. It's taken you a while to surface.. much like the form of the boyos from Ireland... (ho ho) but never fear. Each end everyone of us is a brother/sister on the Roar. I'm here for you. Losing to an English side is no terrible thing given how we have the greatest players, clubs and history in the world. I'm sure Viscount could do the whole post-colonial sarcasm perspective better than me, but you get the gist... On a more serious and non-patronising note London Irish are a seriously well-coached side, and Munster could have definitely snatched the game at the end. The most significant thing for me was the way that the Leicester 3rd string back line (with Craig Newby spending 40 minutes at 12) carved up a team of British Lions. Gatland must be starting to worry now as the Blues were no great shakes either.
pothale
Guest
I'm not sure that Ireland have anything to be shouting about either. They're not the form team in Europe at the moment. they were last season. Things and players have moved on. The opening displays by Leinster and Munster in both league and cup leave a lot to be desired. It's quite possible that by the time Australia arrive that both team will find themselves struggling to qualify for the knock-out stages before the Christmas break. Admittedly the delayed return of the Lions to their teams has not helped, but Kidney will have a tough task getting them to gel together along with I suspect more than one or two Ulster players into the coherent test team of last year. Ireland's first match is against Australia - that's a big advantage to the Wallabies. England are in the same position. Wales will have 2 or 3 matches under their belt before they play them. Scotland may be a surprise package. Maybe. Their two Magners teams started in the league wel, and then foundered badly at the weekend in the H Cup.
ThelmaWrites
Guest
KO If I may say so, my younger rugby daughter has a clear, unadulterated view of things rugby, not given to the convoluted debates we carry on. She has been telling me for the past four years that Matt Giteau has a big ego. It has also been insinuated from time to time in posts here, such as when the Western Force players and John Mitchell were having problems. I agree with Stuff Happens that as a pragmatic matter, Giteau should be encouraged to stay with the Wallabies. I have been watching UK and French rugby here, and note how Salvi and Norton-Knight seem to be doing well over there. For them and for Giteau, if he opts to follow them, the experience of playing in a different culture will serve them in good stead. Hopefully, like Elsom, they can think of playing rugby again in Australia. (I cannot say the same thing for Gasnier.)