Australia’s Wallabies captain Rocky Elsom, cenre, along with his teammates. AP Photo/Shuji Kajiyama
Last week’s column on the role space is set to play in this year’s Tri-Nations went over really well, and it was abundantly clear from the responses that rugby fans on this bottom side of the equator want to see more of it through the rest of the tournament.
Most agreed that it was indeed in the Wallabies’ best interests to follow the lead of the All Blacks and run the big Springbok defenders around the paddock, and to then cash in on the opportunities and space as it appears.
Roar regular and Melbourne-based All Black fan, Sam Taulelei, left the comment that really hit the mark, for mine, when amongst other very valid observations, he said, “Rugby has always been about 14 players working to put the 15th into space.”
This line – and it’s such a simple and obvious line – has stayed with me all this last week.
So given that on-field combinations has been a bit of a running theme of mine this year, I thought it would be worthwhile viewing the second New Zealand-South Africa Test while keeping a close eye on how the All Black and Springbok combinations work, and which 14 players work best to put the 15th away.
Unfortunately, for South African fans, the answer became evident reasonably early, and there’s little doubt the All Blacks played the best 15-man rugby.
That said, New Zealand did score two tries early on while the ‘Boks again lost a forward to the sin bin. It’s arguable what Danie Roussouw was trying to do when he appeared to give Richie McCaw’s eyebrows a bit of a slap, but referee Alain Roland saw McCaw reacting and quickly assumed the South African No.4 was responsible. Perhaps he forgot Bakkies Botha wasn’t wearing it.
Putting the 15th man into space becomes significantly easier when the defensive line only runs to 14. Either way, the All Blacks played the better combinations game for the second week running.
On the kick reception and return, Mils Muliaina was always in the company of wingers Cory Jane and Rene Ranger. Muliaina and Jane, particularly, were in each other’s pocket constantly, and it didn’t seem to matter where one of them popped up in the attack, the other one was generally nearby.
At the breakdown, No.8 Kieran Read and Blindside flanker Jerome Kaino seemed to be working in tandem quite effectively, and that makes sense, because it’s hard to imagine a day when Richie McCaw ever needs a hand in the ruck contest.
And as it did last week too, the Dan Carter-Ma’a Nonu combination again proved rather lethal.
For South Africa though, it was rare to see such combinations in action.
Their backrow of Francois Louw, Schalk Burger, and Pierre Spies was rarely seen in combination, and Spies had a quiet game as he did in Auckland the week before. Louw and Burger looked to be doing the same job in alternate rucks, but were often without support.
The same applied to the back three too. Fullback Zane Kirchner must be wondering if he has an odour problem, for the way his wingers seemed to be actively avoiding him in attack. Late in the game Kirchner made a clear line break, but when it came to passing to his support, the only green jersey in view belonged to reserve no.8 Ryan Kankowski, and it was being held onto by a covering All Black. Bryan Habana was surprisingly off the pace in the background.
Flyhalf Morne Steyn stuck with his preferred game plan of kick in the first instance, and again, didn’t look to use his centres in attack. On the rare occasions when Wynand Oliver and Jaque Fourie did see attacking ball, it would only be as a ‘crash runner’. I can’t really recall the two of them combining for anything other than defence.
So again, and at the risk of repeating myself, what does this mean for the Wallabies?
Well let me start with an ‘I told you so’. This time last week, I mentioned that the Wallabies were in danger of facing a wounded South African side and a worryingly red-hot New Zealand in consecutive weeks, starting this weekend in Brisbane. This coming week is going to require a Wallaby preparation of the highest order.
While it’s vital that the Wallabies are able to match and better the Springboks across the park from fullback to front row, the three areas that really need to be in harmony on Saturday are the backrow, the midfield, and the back three. And that’s not to ignore the importance of the scrum in its entirety, either.
It’s going to mean the Wallabies need a strong breakdown performance from the backrow a la the first Test against England. South Africa’s loose trio aren’t mugs, but they are vulnerable currently, and the Wallabies need to take advantage of this.
Likewise, the midfield could do worse than watch the same England Test, and for good measure, catch a replay of the equivalent Tri-Nations game in Brisbane from last year. Adam Ashley-Cooper’s corker try from a scrum set-play is not too far removed from the sort of thing the All Blacks have been terrifying the Springboks with over the last two weeks.
The back three need only look at how Muliaina, Jane and Ranger (and Joe Rokocoko the week before) returned the constant Steyn aerial raids with numbers, and compare that with how they’ve been going previously playing as two wingers and James O’Connor. Support in numbers, run the ball back at pace, and don’t forget to use the space.
These combinations have less than a week to be fortified, refined, and perfected. The importance of winning this first game cannot be stressed enough, both in terms of starting the Tri-Nations on the front foot, and of taking advantage of a wounded opponent.
If the Wallabies can out-combine the Springboks from number 1 to number 15, they should maintain the unhappy Brisbane record for South Africa.
Go_the_Wannabe's
Guest
I'm not arguing that wasn't their fault they were carded. I'm arguing that it ruined the spectacle when I was looking forward to no. 1 and no. 2 teams playing off against each other with 15 men each for the whole game. Until that happens, I wouldn't get carried with the kiwis performance. That's it. End of story.
Auabob
Guest
It was his / their own fault they had less than the full compliment. Stop ignoring that fact, Roussow put himself in a situation to get carded and he was Remember refs have to make split second decisions they do not have the advantage of replays.
Ben S
Roar Guru
Sam, Aplon doesn't have to challenge in the air, but having a genuine winger who knows how to chase, and understands the positional necessities of wing play should, in theory, mean that his chasing game will be superior to that of De Villiers, even if he is just in the right place at the right time and thereby pressuring the opposition simply by closing down their space. Automatically there should be an improvement to the lacklustre performance we saw last week and the week before if SA persist with the same strategy. Conversely, as Brett has noted twice now, the Australian backline does not play as a unit. Do you think the Wallaby back three would be able to support each other and counter attack intelligently and effectively as NZ did? One also has to consider the defensive weaknesses out wide that England exploited. In terms of attack the first Test versus England seems to be a point of reference for Wallaby supporters, despite the fact that England missed 30+ tackles and simply had a bad day at the office. The best attacking game I have seen from Australia under Deans was versus Wales last season, and that was only for 40 minutes. I think SA do need to change, or at least have a Plan B if they are to progress as a team, what I MEANT to say (should have been clearer initially - apologies) was that SA don't, IMO, need to change their tactics for this coming international, and I maintain that view having seen the side selected. The SA front row looks better technically with the selection of BJ Botha, and Rossouw and Matfield has a good balance as a lock pairing. Will the Australian pack be able to stand up to that tight five? I don't know? They got bullied by a particularly inexperienced England tight five, so who knows at this stage? I remain massively underwhelmed by Faingaa, Ma'afu and Mumm. I'm less sure about the back row. Kankowski might add a bit of spice to the game, but at what cost? Spies will actually have to do so number 8 work for once, and I don't know if he's capable of that. That said, I felt that Louw and Burger were too similar, and at least Kankowski offers another carrying option. Were I PdV, I'd ask Steyn to kick, and for the side to go through some mauling, and then some phases. I reckon Australia will have to do a lot more than SA will to win this one.
Rabbitz
Roar Guru
Hear Hear! Someone give this man a job as a "Rugby Correspondent".
SamSport
Roar Pro
I'm tired of this argument as well. SA had no one but themselves to blame for being down to 14 men, not the referee or the All Blacks. They could count themselves lucky because if Botha's head-but, and de Villiers spear tackle had been seen at the time then they would have been playing a lot longer with 14 men. The rules are the rules and if referees become soft and don't deal with illegal play the way they are instructed (and the way the laws dictate), then we'll just be getting a return to the bad old days of frequent stomping, eye-gouging and head-high tackles.
Go_the_Wannabe's
Guest
Nope, I disagree wholeheartedly. it still ruined both the games as a spectacle. Saffer's had to extend themselves to try and cover the absence of a man on the field for 10 minutes each time. It changed the whole complexion of both games and anyone who can't see that has their heads in the sand. It doesn't really matter if you're tired of the argument or not because the point is still valid.
Brett McKay
Guest
Great post Melon, very hard to argue with... (especially the bit about forwards being at fault ;-) )
ohtani's jacket
Guest
It shouldn't be that hard for the Wallabies to beat the Springboks in Brisbane. If it were being played in SA, I wouldn't give the Wallabies much of a chance, but the only way it's going to be hard at home is if Deans and the players make it hard for themselves.
Who Needs Melon
Guest
In rugby, as in a lot of things, it never rains but it pours. When things are going well, the whole team looks great, the coaches seem great, the crowds, etc. but when things are going badly, nothings seems right. Put another way, when the forwards are going gangbusters, the backs look good and (as all forwards will know) when the backs aren't firing, it's all the forwards fault. :) I thought the All Blacks looked fantastic the last couple of weeks. But the Wallabies have looked fantastic at times during the past couple of years. It's a bit simplistic to point to the All Blacks and say "we need to play like that" because no joke sherlock you need to play rugby well, show commitment, chase well, play smart and concentrate, etc. to win a rugby game against good opposition. At this stage, I'm over it - I don't want to hear any more about game plan to be honest. Nor selections. Nor combinations. I want the blokes who take the field to think they're probably going to lose and probably going to be dropped if they lose and to play as if their own and their kids futures depend on them winning. I want to see what they're made of. I want to see them relish the contact and run until they are completely stuffed and cramping and/or injured and HAVE to be taken off. I'm positive if we play like that we will win. And that's what rugby has always been about, hasn't it?
johnny-boy
Guest
You're having a laugh arent you OJ ? Talk about kicking us when we are down - and practically out. With these idiot selections I agree with rabbitz - it's not worth bothering to attend let alone watching at home.
Short-Blind.
Guest
To OJ et al, Sam (a most respected roarer) has just reiterated the point of difference I have mentioned in other posts that the Wallabies will offer through Cooper - "I expect the Wallabies to gain parity at the setpieces and if their forwards man up at the breakdown and maintain good ball security they have a sharper attacking edge to score tries more so than the Boks". The key words here are man up, break down and ball security. If that happens a Wallaby win is inevitable.
Short-Blind.
Guest
Gary - Wallabies 22 just announced and yours (and my) worst nightmare is still recurring. Mitchell in, no Hbottom or Faingaa or Shepherd. Mumm still in and Brown at No 8. Deans is losing me quickly as a selector of cattle as we have no time left for 'last chances'. At least Hodgson is in the 22 god I hope he gets a run with at least 20 to go. Looking at the team SA has picked (better than last week IMHO) this is going to be a much harder game than many are predicting. Piennar at 9, Aplon on the wing and Kankowski to 6. Wallabies will be motivated but rusty with a few returning from injury, Boks will be tired but motivated to avoid an away clean sweep. Really the team with the best attitude and intensity for 80 will win it. Im tipping the Wallys in a tight one because of the genia/cooper combination. Piggies have to stand up though for this to occur.
formeropenside
Guest
FFS, that pack will likely get chewed up and spat out - although at least there is some change on the bench with Simmons and Hodgson - assuming they are used. But where is Higginbotham? Shouldn't he be at 6 or 8, or carry an extra forward on the bench with Gits the backup 9? I'd have started Moore ahead of Faingaa for the simply reason that he can come back on. Pull him after 20, give Faingaa a run, then Faingaa can come off for a rest. Moore offers physicality at scrum time and in running that Faingaa does not, although Faingaa is a excellent defender. What happens if an outside back goes down - say for instance, Rob Horne's hammy? I assume AAC to 13, and one of JOC or Beale to 15. I know Hynes and Ioane are out at present, but maybe Shepherd was worth a run: this is a hard test, but the easiest the Wallabies will play until November, so better to bring him back now - even off the bench - than later.
reds fan
Guest
This is virtually the same team that lost to england and were dreadful in beating ireland. my prediction of Bokke by 7 stands.
Brett McKay
Guest
thanks Reds. Now the debate can really kick off!! Have to say I've veeeeery surprised not to see Scott Higginbotham named somewhere..
reds fan
Guest
Wallabies team named to play South Africa in the Tri-Nations rugby Test at Suncorp Stadium on Saturday:-Adam Ashley Cooper, James O’Connor, Rob Horne, Matt Giteau, Drew Mitchell, Quade Cooper, Will Genia, Richard Brown, David Pocock, Rocky Elsom (capt), Nathan Sharpe, Dean Mumm, Salesi Ma’afu, Saia Fainga, Benn Robinson. Res: Stephen Moore, James Slipper, Rob Simmons, Matt Hodgson, Luke Burgess, Berrick Barnes, Kurtley Beale.
Auabob
Guest
Which Springbok team will grace the field on Saturday? 1. A Boks team with a severely depleted ego looking for pride to be restored so will come out all guns blazing. 2. A tired an battered Boks side with one foot on the plane will turn up for the drinks and nibbles post match. Now lets flip a coin and have a wager on which Boks side will show up
Brett McKay
Guest
quite right Colin, that's exactly what I mean in my last line there..
Rabbitz
Roar Guru
Somewhat surprisingly, I think Greg Growden summed it all up perfectly. He said that the Wallabies will need to play 80 minutes of mistake free, flat out rugby. Looking at recent form: 80 minutes? Nope Mistake free? Not a hope in hell Flat Out? Like a lizard drinking maybe but not on the field. Unfortunately SA by 15+. And I am struggling to convince myself to watch the game. No ticker, No pride = No watch
Brett McKay
Guest
I have to self-edit here Auabob, Botha's yellow wasn't for foul play - his headbutt to Cowan was now famously missed by all officialdon at them time, but replayed not minutes later....