The Wallabies have failed again at altitude in South Africa, throwing away a blistering start to the Tri-Nations Test in Pretoria to go down to the Springboks 44-31.
Australia had scored three tries within the opening 10 minutes to lead 21-7 and led 28-24 at the break after seven five-pointers were scored in a madcap opening 40 minutes few had expected.
But the Wallabies continually cruelled their second half opportunities with poor handling and lineout work, allowing the desperate Springboks to notch their first win of the series in Victor Matfield’s 100th Test in front of 43,152 at his home ground of Loftus Versfeld.
The result means Australia are yet to win in Pretoria after five Tests and they haven’t won on the South African highveld since 1963.
The Nelson Mandela Challenge Plate and second place behind New Zealand in the Tri-Nations will now depend on the result of next weekend’s Test in Bloemfontein.
“We didn’t hold onto the ball so we didn’t spend long enough in possession, we turned over more ball than South Africa did, that was a big part of it,” Wallabies coach Robbie Deans said.
“And obviously critically at the end, when we had built some pressure and had opportunities, our set piece came up short, and our finishing wasn’t as effective.”
South Africa scored five tries to four, with Australia’s all coming in the first half.
The Loftus crowd were silenced when Will Genia dummied and scored in just the third minute and James O’Connor bagged the first of a double after after a scintillating 60m run by Kurtley Beale in the fifth.
Springboks flanker Juan Smith powered through some threadbare defence in the ninth minute but O’Connor was there to pounce when Bryan Habana dropped the kick-off and Australia led 21-7.
The Boks narrowed the lead to seven when prop Gurthro Steenkamp burrowed over in the 14th minute and an altitude-powered 59m penalty goal from Morne Steyn made it 21-17 after 20 minutes.
The Wallabies’ determination to spread the ball paid off again, though, six minutes later with a Dean Mumm five-pointer and it was 28-17 before Springboks No.8 Pierre Spies completed the first half madness with a 32nd minute try.
But the Wallabies began imploding after the break with a succession of errors.
Steyn and Matt Giteau exchanged penalty goals in the 47th and 49th minutes before the Springboks took the lead – 34-31- for the first time in the match through a Francois Steyn try a minute after Mumm had spilled a kick-off.
Boks fullback Francois Steyn increased the lead to 37-31 with a 68th minute penalty goal and a JP Pietersen try a minute from time rubbed salt into Australia’s wounds.
Even looser
Guest
Well summed-up. It's not rocket science.
ThelmaWrites
Guest
Gary and Katipo I posted this at the end of Andrew Logan's thread: Last November, my son, who has an MS in Sports and Exercise Science, passed on to me “Applied Physiology and Game Analysis of Rugby Union” (Duthrie, J, Pyne D, and S Hooper, Sports Medicine 2003). Like a dutiful mother, I waded through the article and kept it in my basket for rugby and for crossword puzzles. “Australian and New Zealand Super 12 players are regularly required to travel to South Africa and perform at moderate altitude. At this altitude, cognitive performance is maintained (citation), yet physical performance is impaired for 48 hours, as measured by the multi-stage shuttle run (citation). This test has been shown to accurately evaluate the influence of hypoxia on performance (citation of South African researchers). In such cases, the teams living and training at altitude have been shown to have an advantage over their lowland opponents (two citations).” That may explain why the Wallabies didn’t travel to Pretoria earlier?
Colin N
Guest
Is he Steve Borthwick in disguise?
Mick Gold Coast QLD
Roar Guru
Deans lost me, Mother Theresa, when he ran down to the sideline at that last lineout, shoved the specialist hooker aside and threw the ball way past, to the centre. I had, until then, forgiven him missing the tackle on Juan Smith when he ran through the middle of exactly where the No 12 and No 15 stand in defence. I forgave him that one 'cos at least he had a go when he saw there were no Wallaby players - well - there to tackle Smith at the time.
ThelmaWrites
Guest
MT Calm down.
Mick Gold Coast QLD
Roar Guru
With ease, jeremy, without question.
Katipo
Guest
The glass is half empty!!!! Has anyone noticed that the Wallabies are averaging 30 points a game against the AB's and 'Boks this year, with a number of key players out injured. It's a long time since the Wallabies have had an attacking team this good. No Australian team has beaten the 'Boks at altitude for 47 years (way before Robbie took over). Should any credit be given to the South Africans for the result?
Mark M
Guest
The success of wallaby teams of the past was built on defence. It may not be pretty but hey I rather watch us win ugly than watch a non competive team on the field. The non selction of Phil Waugh is a blight on Australian rugby at the moment. Best Captain and player we have and he doesn't get a look in. Its time to question those in the ARU executive who continue to support this direction because we can only acheive more losses and become even more uncompetitive. The fans are walking away and if any one up there has any balls its time to stand up and say enough is enough. We need a new direction and some new leaders.
Mark M
Guest
From the 12th minute onwards the Sprinboks scored 37-10. I think implode is the appropriate word in a sporting sense.
MOTHER TERESA
Guest
SHEEK,get prof help;try harder mate we will support all the deluded ocds
stillmissit
Roar Guru
OJ - Deans must have had plenty of roasted Wallaby around this morning.
ohtani's jacket
Guest
I had cereal for breakfast, but what did Deans have? I wonder...!
Shahsan
Guest
I wasn't firing a cheap shot and it doesnt make me feel anything. Do not assume I am Australian. It was just that the 199 semi was the best example of the past 20 years of a superior team losing to a weaker team, despite having a sizeable lead with less than half of the game to go. In Saturdays' game, it was one team gifted early leads through mistakes and loose defence but who were then overhauled by the superior team once they cut out their mistakes. It was still anybody's game with 5 minutes to go. That does not sound like an implosion to me. That 1999 game, when the far better team suddenly look became stunned, shell-shocked and rudderless, still provides the best definition of a team imploding.
Gary
Guest
I toured with the Wallabies last time in South Africa and witnessed the debacle at Ellis Park and the shattered players afterwards first hand. Since then I have given the altitude problem a lot of thought. I think we need to get the team there as soon as possible after their last game in Australia or NZ. Straight to altitude and give them time to acclimatise. Use the full bench. Note that the ball travels further at altitude so include a long range kicker (eg Shepherd) in the 15. So what is Robbie doing? Leave late, base in Cape Town and not using the full bench.
rich1612
Guest
I cannot see the Wallabies winning consistently while Mafu, Brown and Mumm are in the run on side. In addition, this season I think Genia has been given too much time over Burgess, Genia has been disappointing, needs to boss the forward around more. Also unfortunately, I think Elsom play better as a rebel, I think he is a very good player but hasn't become a better player as Captain (arguably he has become a little worse). Backs are ok but I think inside centre is still a problem. Giteau is a talented individual but is not really a link man or a crash ball man. He's a bit of a one trick pony, "step, step pace off the mark". He is good at it but he is not good at making the backline cohesive. This week I would start with Genia, Cooper, Barnes, AAC, JOC, Mitchell and Beale. But I would also give Burgess more game time.
taylorbridge
Guest
Stillmissit, 100% agree. I love Genia's work but Burgess would have provided fresh legs. Did you see the total coldness that Moore and Fainga exchanged they passed each other after Fainga had to be blood binned in the 1st half . Compare it to how Matfield acknowledged his opposition after the game.
taylorbridge
Guest
Van Humphries would have done better than Dean Mumm re lineouts. is it not better to have a player like VH who can win the lineouts but maybe( ??) not not a s quick around the field but is 100% effective at the task he is selected for? When the lineouts went awry why wasnt Steve Moore put on. Fainga was falling away in the 2 nd half.
sheek
Guest
Stillmissit, Can't find your response in the main thread. But why indeed do I keep posting??? Maybe I'm a blog junkie, & maybe I just lead a very dull life??? Then again, it's in my nature. If something said or written doesn't seem right, I just have to speak up. Well, as long as I live in a democracy, I'll continue to feel inclined to speak up. I am trying hard to wean myself off though.....
stillmissit
Roar Guru
OJ - was the Miso soup off at breakfast this morning?
stillmissit
Roar Guru
Sheek - sometimes you do talk a load of bull locks. If you don't care about the Wallabies why would you post here for the last 3 years? This has been during their darkest days since the 70's. Mate! you are one of the MOST committed Wallaby supporters on this site - if only O'Neil would adopt your ideas for the second tier of rugby all would be well. What is going to happen in Bloemfontein? that is the key question, can Deans bring out the running best and combine it with committed forwards for one of the great wins.