Australia’s Rocky Elsom, right, tries to charge down the kick from Wales’ Martin Roberts, left, during their international rugby union match at the Millennium Stadium in Cardiff, Wales, Saturday, Nov. 28, 2009. (AP Photo/Tom Hevezi)
‘Australia were superb.’ That was the old curmudgeon himself, the UK Sunday Times rugby writer Stephen Jones’ response to the emphatic and occasionally brilliant 33 – 12, four tries to none, victory over Wales.
Although the praise from Jones the rugby writer for the Wallabies is as extravagant as it is rare, it was well-deserved.
It is rare for Wales to be out-classed so comprehensively at home. A fervent Welsh crowd could only muster some sporadic singing as the pride of the valleys (admittedly without the Little Magician, Shane Williams, for most of the Test) were made to look as second-rate and as clueless on attack as England.
Just before the half-time whistle we had the first and really last glimpse of the 2009 ‘Woellabies’ when Adam Ashley-Cooper fielded a kick inside his 22. Instead of doing the obvious thing and kicking the ball out and ensuring his team went into half time with a 23 – 9 lead, he booted the ball down field.
The inevitable happened. Wales put in a high ball. The Wallabies offended at the ruck and Stephen Jones kicked the penalty. The scoreline tightened just ever so significantly to 23 – 12.
Why did Ashley-Cooper make such a stupid play?
We’ve been asking the same question of him and all the other Wallabies throughout the season. I got an email before the Test from a famous former All Black, who is a noted thinker about the game. ‘Why are the Wallabies playing such dumb rugby?’ he asked. ‘Is it because they just aren’t as smart as Wallabies in the past?’
There is I reckon something in this.
This generation of players have only known professional rugby. They haven’t had to get on with their life outside the game during their careers as older generations of Wallabies had to do.
Perhaps, too, they have been over-coached throughout their careers. The modern player tends to look to the coach to work out what the tactics should be. When things turn to custard on the field, they often don’t seem to be able to work out how to solve their problems.
This seemed to happen in the second half of the Wales Test when, inexplicably, the Wallabies gave away their running game that had given them three tries in the first half and reverted to the kicking game that has been so unsuccessful throughout this season.
Perhaps it is a mark of how the young Wallabies are finally understanding the Robbie Deans philosophy of ‘playing what is in front of you’ that they got their running game back into action and began to threaten the Welsh defence, especially out wide with sweeping passing movements.
The official Man of the Match award went to Matt Giteau who, according to the curmudgeon was ‘magnificent.’ He was that, especially when he ran from the inside centre position. Wales had no defensive answer to the backline attacks set up (legally) behind the flat front line of forwards. Giteau was able to isolate tacklers and ran around or inside them to set up scoring moves.
But my Man of the Match and the best Wallaby all year, in my opinion, was tubby Benn Robinson.
The Wallaby scrum monstered the Welsh pack, with Robinson leading the way. He was good with the ball in hand, catching, forcing a hole, drawing and passing to set up a try with the aplomb of an outside centre. And then on defence it was not unusual for him to make several strong tackles in one sequence of plays.
The Wallabies end the year as they started, with a strong, convincing win.
The first three Tests were won and then only two Tests were won in the next 10. The nadir was reached against Scotland when the Wallabies contrived to lose a Test in which they were (statistically) at their most dominant. Against Wales, they finally turned the dominance into tries.
So despite all the failures and abject play, the Wallabies were able to record convincing victories of the Springboks, England and Wales, and achieve a 20 – 20 draw against Ireland in that team’s only Test this season that was not won.
Deans has cleaned out most of the dead wood left over from the 2007 Rugby World Cup campaign.
He has developed a scrum (with the help of Patricio Noreiga). He has finally got a loose forward trio who complement each other’s play.
Will Genia has solved a perennial halfback problem going back to 2004. Giteau is being forced out of the play-making role that does not suit his instinctive and intuitive skills. Digby Ione has given some bite to the attack.
Taken as a whole, 2009 has been a poor year in terms of results for the Wallabies. For the first time since 2005, the team has had a losing season.
But in terms of getting through the transition period in developing a strong team for the 2011 Rugby World Cup there has been some significant progress. Apparently only 9 of the Wallabies were in the beaten side at Cardiff last year against Wales were in the same that won so splendidly at the Millennium Stadium at the weekend.
If all this sounds too upbeat in a year when most of the rugby, especially that played by Australian sides, was simply unwatchable, I give the last words to the old curmudgeon: ‘Welcome back the Wallabies. And welcome back the concept of rugby as something you would like to go and see.’
conrad Rines
Guest
2011 world cup wallabies a little different but will go very well i think! 1. alexander 2. polota nau 3 robinson 4 hand 5 vickerman 6 elsom 7 smith 8 palu 9 holmes 10 barnes 11 turner 12 mortlock/horne 13 ioane 14 morahan 15 shepard * would consider cooper or oconner for a utility bench spot along with either horne or mortlock * hand is a late bloomer with a wealth of experience and and is considered by micheal foley as a top lineout general. thoughts?
Dean Pantio
Guest
And no other team will be? On what basis do you make the claim this rag tag bunch will be the best team? Certainly can't be the way in which they've improved from last year.
CliffyTahTah
Guest
Wallabies will be peaking at the right time to take the WC.
Dean Pantio
Guest
Definitely - this is one area where Sharpe is an asset to the Wallabies; his work in the lineout.
Dean Pantio
Guest
Hang on - where does this nonsense in your last sentence come from?
Joh4Canberra
Guest
Parisien: I think we're agreed that while players should be able to understand basic instructions in English once you go beyond this the use of English will favour sides from English speaking countries over the others. Regional accents themselves shouldn't be a problem if the referee makes a point of clearly articulating his words and not speaking too quickly. What often gets me though is the referee's choice of vocabulary. I'm both a native English speaker and a referee and sometimes even I'm not sure what some of the English-speaking referees in international matches mean. Sure, I hear the string of words and understand each single word but am sometimes left in two minds as to what he is trying to say by that particular combination of words. And even if his meaning is quite clear to me as a native English speaker there are still occasions where I am left thinking that a reasonably competent non-native speaker would have trouble understanding what the referee meant. If referees are going to use English with non-English speaking teams then in addition to speaking clearly they do really need to choose their words carefully, avoiding many colloquialisms (even rugby colloquialisms).
stillmissit
Roar Guru
Ohtanis Jacket - 'Anyway, rugby needs more attacking play and a better balance between attack and defence and that starts with the coaching not the laws." this is very true and I thought the whole of this reply was right on the money. This ideas in your reply is worth a thread - why don't you write it??????
Mungehead
Guest
Excellent post rugbyguy. And I completely agree that Rokocoko should have been dropped ages ago.
sittingbison
Guest
the 2006 wales game?
sittingbison
Guest
very droll
sittingbison
Guest
almost as funny as witnessing the ever-(over)optimistic all black supporters having their team as world cup favourites every four seasons hehe
johnny-boy
Guest
Re low lifes - where do start. I'd just be repeating myself. Another day maybe. However, I will say Henry & Co will be carrying so much bad karma in to the next World Cup - it would be un-natural for them to win it. But stranger things have happened.
Shahsan
Guest
Except he's really not that good. Good man to have in the pack but technically not that good a lock forward. If only he were bit younger and more mobile -- could have been a good no 6.
ohtani's jacket
Guest
What is it about the low lifes that you don't like specifically?
ohtani's jacket
Guest
Earlier in the season, the All Blacks were getting picked off in front of the defensive line and driven backwards, leading to penalty situations. In Marseilles, the forwards kept driving in the tackle and we were able to get quicker ball. Instead of passing across the face of the defence, we were able to hit the gap and offload. I think they showed that you can avoid being isolated and reduce the ruck contest if you inject a bit of pace into your attack. They kicked less, kept the ball in hand and ran at the opposition line. A lot of teams played defensively this year, either by spoiling opposition ball or forcing mistakes, and sides infringed a lot due to a lack of possession. You don't need to get locked into this pattern so long as you play well. The All Blacks have been more confident of late because of their lineout and the return of Carter. The refs need to start making more no-calls and let play develop. There's no reason why they can't issue warnings and bear in mind what they saw the defence doing. Most teams would rather keep the play alive than have it killed, and I firmly believe that if the ball is coming out on the right side then play should continue. I don't think refs should call an infringement unless the ball's been killed. And every ref should make use of the scrum option like Rolland did. That was brilliant refereeing. No guessing, just a perfectly sensible restart. You don't need ELVs if you use that option correctly. Anyway, rugby needs more attacking play and a better balance between attack and defence and that starts with the coaching not the laws. So, if the Wallabies want to stop the All Blacks from controlling the rucks and mauls and slowing the game down, they need to work on their attack and not bemoan the refereeing.
rugbyguy
Roar Pro
brian mills you are a dumbass, the world cup is in 2011, the wallabies recent results are irrelevent. The reason we are saying the wallabies look good for the world cup is that their team is young and raw, at the moment they are average but with two years of internatioal rugby under their belts they will be very good, wales and ireland are mediocre and their best current player will need walking frames by 2011, same goes for south africa to a lesser extent as they have some young talent on the rise.brian mills you are a dumbass
Campbell Watts
Guest
You want a lock with grunt and a huge ticker?? You cant go past Brad Thorn - at half time against the French he had just ticked up 1000 minutes of test rugby for the year!!!! I think he'll still have it in him come the world cup!
True Tah
Guest
you've probably been saying the same argument in 1997, 2001 and 2005.
True Tah
Guest
Maybe teach Mark Lawrence to understand Japanese
Campbell Watts
Guest
Agree Dean, As good as the Wallabies back row are they don't ever seem to be the 1st man there to support line breaks - which as shown in the Scotland game can come home to bite you! Expect that will improve with Pocock next S14 season - I can't see Mitch missing the importance of your No7 linking with the backline! I'd say it's the only week point to his game at present.