Wallabies ‘character’ – what exactly is it?

By ozxile / Roar Pro

Character: ‘The aggregate of features and traits that form the individual nature of some person or thing.’

We are accustomed to making and hearing casual judgments about the character of individuals, e.g. ‘he is a pathological jerk’, ‘she is a sweet tempered person’, and, ‘he is Mother Theresa with a moustache’. What about the character of teams? A lot is said about teams in this forum, much of it implicitly related to character.

A current article on Rugby Heaven is titled ‘John O’Neill expecting ruthless Wallabies.’ My immediate reaction to this was unprintable – essentially a reflection that it was not likely because that would be ‘out of character’ for the current lot. However, it did prompt me to ask myself just exactly what is the character of the Wallabies and how does it compare to their peers heading into 2011?

Here is a quick stab at some team ‘character’ assessments for the current top 10:

Argentina – Machiavellian when armed (just ask the French!)

Australia – GPS Old Boys on walkabout (may cooperate if really hungry)

England – Effete public school whiners (but it’s our game!)

Fiji – Very talented, equally slothful (can we stop after 40 minutes?)

France – Manic-depressive genius (art can be ugly)

Ireland – Overly self-conscious battlers (instinct and intellect collide)

New Zealand – Self-intoxicatingly talented (our 4th XV could beat your 1sts, but…)

Scotland – Passive aggressive opportunists (may we have the ball for a minute?)

South Africa – Stampeding cattle (best not to let them loose)

Wales – Dazed and confused (we’ve played this game – did the laws change?)

If character counts, right now 2011 may be a good year for Argentina and South Africa.

The Crowd Says:

2010-07-05T12:44:47+00:00

Ben J

Guest


Brilliant

2010-07-05T05:58:31+00:00

Who Needs Melon

Guest


Ahh... love the characterisations. Everyone loves to generalise, don't they?

2010-07-05T04:25:14+00:00

Rusty

Roar Guru


That's very very good

2010-07-04T09:35:04+00:00

Viscount Crouchback

Guest


This reminds me of an email I was once sent... If The World's Rugby Teams Were Armies: Australia ---> Yugoslav Partisans (achieve a helluva lot with not very much) Argentina ---> The Russians at Stalingrad (mean and scary and happier in the undergrowth) England ----> The British Army at The Somme (plucky but brainless, just keep ploughing on through the mud) France ----> The Americans in Vietnam (release lots of Napalm then get bored and go home) Ireland ---> The Poles in 1940 (brave and skilled but ultimately out-matched) New Zealand ---> The French at Waterloo (brilliant and fearsome but tend to choke on the big occasion) Scotland ---> The Taliban (outgunned savages who snipe from the hedges) South Africa ---> The German 5th Panzer Division (brutal, relentless, will only be defeated by Total War) Wales ---> The Dervishes at Omdurman (lots of ritual flailing and wailing before inevitably getting chopped down)

2010-07-04T09:34:11+00:00

mother teresa

Guest


its all in the spelling mike. culture is good for existing cattle;get someone who understands it;like a good coach

2010-07-04T09:14:49+00:00

Johnno

Guest


I had this feeling of de javu when reading this, especially the comments. It reminds me of the late '90's / early '00's. The same debate was raging in SA, because we were continually losing, and then the Bulls won the Super 14 and all of that's history now. The problem then for SA was essentially the same as it is for Aus now, and it has less to do with the players and more to do with the administration. SA has developed and moveds its structures to the professional era, it seems as if Aus may have moved it's strucures into the professional era but my perceptiion is that they still trail far behind NZ and SA when it comes to the developement of talent. If you want good hard forwards with some mongrell, you're going to find them amongst the working classes, it's just a matter of developing that source. Aus Cricket could find a guy like Siddle who came from that type of background and there have been other examples before him, why can't rugby find these players? Are they looking, are they even trying to find new sources or are they content with what they got?

2010-07-04T09:12:44+00:00

Mr Saunders

Roar Guru


I've never understand the demand for performance based contracts. NZ lost the 2007 WC QF basically due to a forward pass and injuries to Carter and Evans, yet the entire squad would suffer financially due to freak occurrences.

2010-07-04T08:24:22+00:00

MikeM

Guest


Well, I'm still stuck at "Mother Thersa with a moustache".

2010-07-04T04:39:24+00:00

El Gamba

Guest


Or working on banana plantations up in coolangatta. Gold.

2010-07-04T04:01:47+00:00

Nathan

Roar Pro


The ARU need to move with the times. If you want the latest information or insights on what's happening with the Wallabies you can get it from Quade Cooper's 'Tweets' on Twitter. He arguably provides better news coverage than the press and it's free. Also, it's virtually live with plenty of pics too. At times, the newspapers are now quoting 'Tweets' to provide their news. Again, there is room for both but people are content hungry and want it 24/7. I read in todays paper that the West Tigers are about to launch a phone app that fans can subscribe too for all the latest information on their team. I am no expert in this area, but surely, the ARU would want to harness this technology to give the fans what they want and from the 1 source rather than having to read it from various player's Tweets?

2010-07-04T02:52:52+00:00

Peter K

Guest


I was reffing a junior U15'As game the other day. One team was from the Northern Beaches, Newport. The other was Easts. Easts was full of boys who went to a GPS school and played rugby there. What struck me was the Easts team spent most of the game being referees rather than playing. They knew the lawbook back to front and you could tell some were intending to be lawyers. I told them before the game to concentrate on playing and I would concentrate on reffing. Now I started penalising them for dissent and they really didnt like it. I told the captain anymore and they could go off the field. The thing was they were the better team and had real skills etc but were a real whiney bunch. They didnt like it when Newport played aggressive in your face rugby since that was their only weapon. Their supporters / parents were yelling to stick it to them, smash them they dont like it they are soft etc. East finally concentrated on rugby and not refereeing and they won. Their manager complained to me about the 'boguns'on the sideline. I had enough by that stage and said well you have not played at Liverpool or Cambletown often, I think the team needs to harden up a bit. The Wallabies are like that. If the other team is winning by doubtful means their response is to whinge to the ref or use it as an excuse instead of doing something about it on the field.

2010-07-04T02:37:59+00:00

Peter K

Guest


I would change the match payments. Zero for a loss. $5000 for a draw with a higher ranked team. $10000 for a 15+ point win over a lower ranked team. $30000 for a win against a higher ranked team. Would cost the ARU hardly anything since we rarely thrash teams or beat SA or NZ.

2010-07-04T02:35:39+00:00

Peter K

Guest


The real tough forwards were hard physical workers in trying conditions. IN NZ as pointed out they were farmers. In Wales in the 50's and 60's they were the coal miners. In SA a lot still come from cattle farms (do they call them ranches?)

2010-07-04T01:36:43+00:00

Go_the_Wannabe's

Guest


Welcome to the world of the Wannabe rugy player.......and they seem to like it that way as well. One day their cosy little lifestyles will be pulled out from under them when the fans stop showing up. One day they'll suddenly realise it's the fans that pay their way......hope it's not too late!!! One solution is to bring in performance based contracts rather than just a straight salary. That would go a long way to fixing the problem. The better they play, the better they're paid. Socialist RUPA would have a pink fit of course, but the game should be bigger than them.

2010-07-04T00:13:54+00:00

Rob

Guest


Sheek , off on a tangent from what you have said, some of the strongest men I've met didn't know what a bench press was.They were brickies labourers and the like and gee they were tough footballers. I have a theory and remember it is just a theory that NZ dominance years ago was due in part to the occupational background of the players-- farmers vs accountants.A bit simplified I know. I've thought for a long time now that the S14 players who are not in the Wallaby squad should work as soon as the S14 season is over. Make them work as the brickies labourer on site at 7 on a cold winters morning knocking off at 4 in the afternoon, going to club training at night and if they are doing part time courses , do it wen they have spare time. I think it would be character building and would really toughen up some of these guys.

2010-07-03T23:10:01+00:00

Bay35Pablo

Roar Guru


"What a whiney, whingy piece." I cannot argue with my learned friend's submission.

2010-07-03T22:51:23+00:00

Even Looser

Guest


I wonder 'is it only Rugby'? Speaking to an old Army guy he commented that the standard of your average recruit had dropped. So the Army also lowered it's expectations. I suspect it's a generational thing.

2010-07-03T22:22:43+00:00

sheek

Guest


It's almost impossible to turn back the clock, but some aspects of amateurism perhaps weren't so bad after all..... Like having a job in the real world, & mixing with real people who had every day issues to deal with. It gave the amateur player a persepctive totally missing in his professional brother.

2010-07-03T21:57:14+00:00

Rabbitz

Roar Guru


I think that the Wallabies attitude is summed up by Adam Friers article in the SMH today: http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-union/union-news/cut-them-some-slack-youthful-australian-team-is-a-work-in-progress-20100703-zuwf.html What a whiney, whingy piece. The nub of it is, the Wallabies do not appear to really care - they get paid, have the lifestyle and don't seem to take losses personally. As Mark Ella said "they go missing in action" at the first hurdle. So my character definition is: "A bunch of over-privileged, pampered prima-donna wannbes who like the lifestyle but hate doing the work to maintain the lifestyle. (No heart, No desire to be the best)".

2010-07-03T17:06:15+00:00

Nick

Guest


Mark Ella captured it best I think. "Elite players in this country have no substance and at the first sign of a true contest they go missing in action. Consistency is missing, continuity is a fantasy. Doing the hard yards applies to all Australian sports except rugby."

More Comments on The Roar

Read more at The Roar