Kevin Rudd apologises for Wallaby performance

I am loving tennis because it made me aware of this website. I loved the article about Kevin Rudd apologising for the performance of the Wallabies. What I'm not loving about the tennis is having to go to work after being up late watching tennis. I'm looking forward to what The Roar has to say in the Rugby season. I'm enjoying the mixed doubles in the Hopman Cup for some more light hearted entertainment.

I agree - "enterprise" is a good descriptive word for it. I cannot think of a current Wallaby with enterprise. In the last few weeks I've seen some French and Italian players display enterprise - even though they don't have perfectly formed biceps and pecs! Francois Steyn has enterprise and Sivivatu as well, when he's not snoozing out there. These ones have the Campese-like "dare to chance it" attitude and do not feel the need for deep psychological counselling on the occassions it fails. I watched Campo and Ella try some marvellous stuff together, and make some outrageous blues, playing club for those mongrels Randwick against the Mighty Woods. Their reaction at the dropped pass more often than not was to look at each other and laugh. I see it from time to time in the modern codefied business practices, where the young manager's main objective is to not generate a "non conformance report" (NCR) rather than the objective of being excellent at what they do (thereby minimising the likelihood of a NCR). They are afraid to make a mistake, end up paper bound and do not recognise (and cannot craft) smart solutions.

Jock, Forget that today's defences are stronger & more sophisticated (which is true, BTW). Look at league & guys like Inglis & Slater, they would succeed in any era, because they refusae to be shackled. They have the belief to attack, & the skills to match. The point is this, it doesn't matter what era you put guys like Ella, Campese, O'Connor, etc into, they would have found a way around the tighest defences. They would have accepted the challenge, refused to be shackled. They were explorers, pioneers, whatever, it was their spirit & enterprise that made them great. I've said this before, individuality has been drummed out of today's players. Homogeneity is the rage. Protecting the coaches' position, & their pay packets (plus their own) is the end game. Sorry for the cynicism, but I hope I'm wrong on this last point! As for players, there were players 25 years ago, & players today who kick the cover off the ball, because they lack the courage & imagination to run the ball. Which unfortunately, tends to be the majority of players. They are taught to do this, from a young age, safety first, by equally timid & unimaginative coaches, which again, is unfortunately the majority of coaches.

Good comment Bruce. One might object "Ah, but it's only with hindsight that we say that so many of the 1984 players were great." However this is not true - it was clear at the time that many of the 1984 players were right out of the box. However the same cannot be said at this stage about many of the 2009 players at all. Therefore your comment is completely correct. Personally I think a draw in this match is a result beyond expectations. I never expected Australia to win this match (for obvious reasons - Ireland are reigning 6N champs and grand slam winners, were at home, etc.), just as I have never expected Australia to win in Cardiff in a fortnight. A draw is not a loss and therefore is still a positive result when seen in context. The only real sense in which this loss is a disappointment is that arguably Australia should have won this match, having played the better rugby and been in front all the way. When a talented but young and inexperienced side comes up against a mature side, one always has to reckon with the old heads being able to emerge with a result even if not the better side - that's one of the universals of sport.

I actually agree with you, it is a problem, but so is your final solution. Profit minus human values and you have ……..

Bored with comparisons of 1984 vs 2009 Wallabies. A completely different time, amateur vs professional/ different player diet/ phsyiques/ fitness levels, different opposition in 1984, different coaching/training techniques, game tactics etc. And Sheek the only reason you have good memories is because you had great talents (Ella, Gould, Moon etc) but who had room to move around the paddock. Props/ 2nd rowers couldn't run down wingers back then particularly late in the match with no substitutions and fatigue setting in. Lets not forget the overly structured-coaching/ game tactics limiting natural flair. Bring back the pie eating props I say, might open up the game again

i was pretty happy with that free $900.

I bloody knew it all along - sheek, you are a filthy sex crazed pervert!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! To borrow from Sam Kekovich - you know it makes sense.

Get rid of half the population easy! World's population has tripled over the last 50 years.

Now this is really clever. Well done Mick haven't a clue how you do this stuff.

Awesome!!! How about the new Waratahs signing, young Hendrik. I wonder if he's a good Roodt?!

Ben, plenty did, just the smarter ones don't admit it. When 'Rudd's Wreckers' have finished, the Liberal Reconstruction Company will once again be called upon to return the budget to surplus. However, I fear this may not even be seen by our children's children, by which time the new generation wouldn't have been through the hurt and the merry-go-round will start once again. Sound familiar? At least there will still be rugby!

Onya swifty, good stuff! Don’t want to be a Burke – can you do me a Fava and show me the way to the Lynagh for me Campo? The Prime Minister’s apology has removed the shades of Grey and there may a pot of Gould at the end of the Hall – just a few Marks or Moore would help a Little. McGill, McKid and I could be happy then and I won’t have to Lisle awake at night feeling L’Estrange, listening to the Summons of the Lyons of the poor. Cleary it’s been a Black period with a Batch of bad luck and I’ve been feeling Flatley. Shute! - this would Sharpe me up, we could Sayle along and there’d be no further need for a Loane. Whilst I’m not a Hardman I am a Hardy fellow, but our condition was becoming Crittle and we were headed for the Tombs. I wasn't Welborn and you could shoot a Cannon down the Lane where I lived. We'd get locked Outterside and the local Constable would accuse me of being a Hawker and make feel like a Tuynman. Now I can go to Taafe (I won’t Moon about) but on Thaiday we’ll have some Kava and Stumbles about like a drunken Sailor, singing a happy Tune – that Ken only be Wright! Howard you feel? I ask you - what’s a Papworth? Now I feel a real Bond with this Prime Minister. (The last sentence is a flat out lie)

nothing can take away tho the magnificent celebration by mitchell of his try ---pure gem;no looking at the replay for this star;who said deans has taken the fun out of this group.next wallaby coach might be SRI LANKAN if rudd has a say .

Agreed, it was lame.

This is why rugby journalism is so banal - always digging up the past, that 'tackle', that 'try', that grand slam. While I love a bit of satire this one left me cold.

"One day the members of this Wallabies team may be as good as their 1984 counterparts, but at present they are far from it." Yes and no - one day they may be as good, but they will now never be credited as such. Since '84 we have had great players, some winning two world cups and considered legends, but they are individuals. It remains the Grand Slam team that is forever held up as the point of comparison, never mind that they lost four and drew one tour matches. This tour was this team's chance to lay down the same marker, and they couldn't. They could win in 2011, but they'll never be held in the same regard.

The only reason the current squad is compared with the 1984 one is because THAT TEAM WAS THE ONLY ONE THAT HAS DONE THE GRAND SLAM -- a feat the current team are trying/tried to emulate. I too believe the circa 2000 team was better -- though not necessarily more attractive -- and would have cakewalked a grand slam if such a tour had been organised. Sadly they never had the chance to do it. That's all. No one said that the 1984 team was the best of all time. Having said all that, Ido think that if the current team had managed to do teh Grand Slam it would rank as a superior achievment to the 1984 one -- because the British teams now are in better shape than they were in 1984, and because the current Wallabies are more green and have had a bit of a pasting psychologically of late.

There are no votes in it for him - no rugby supporters vote ALP or more specifically for the Chameleon-in-Chief - except Peter Fitz and Mike Carlton, the ultimate Bollinger Socialists.

Howi, I was going to give you a reasoned & thoughtful response, but stuff it.......... I am biased towards the players of 1980-86 & I make no apology for this. I loved the way they played the game (mostly). They thrilled me, & provided me with a window to how good the game of rugby union could be when played by men of courage, enterprise & daring. They gave me many of my best memories of rugby, & I am in debt to them. You didn't have the opportunity to see these guys play first-hand (I'm presuming), & I'm very sorry for you younger generations that you missed out on the Ellas, Campeses, O'Connors, Goulds, Moons, etc, in their pomp. Many years from now Howi, when you're an old man, it will be the good memories that sustain you, & make your life worthwhile. Are we wrong to expect that from our sportsmen? Giving us good memories today for our old age???