What a difference a week can make in sport. The Wallabies played a fast and expansive sytle of rugby on Saturday night that the Springboks had absolutely no answers for and the scoreline flattered them with a try on full time.
Some observations from the game:
1. The Second Row:
Horwill and Simmmons combined very well and their tight, industrious play was evident at Scrum time and also at the break down where the Wallabies had accuracy (an area I noted last week that they could and would easily fix).
Their body height was excellent and they protected the ball very well. The Wallabies will take four locks to the Rugby World Cup.
Howrwill and Sharpe are certainties and Simmons has moved ahead of Mumm. That leaves the final locking position to either Vickerman or Timani.
Timani has a bright future in the Green and Gold but it will be hard for him to go past Vickerman’s experience and quality in a rugby World Cup year.
I also commented that I thought the All Blacks/England and South Africa will play tight and narrow in the tougher games. Horwill and Simmons play a very direct game and I think their style of play allows Elsom to range in the slightly wider channels where he really causes some damage.
2. Elsom
Elsom was a better player for the 80 minutes last week and is not far off his best. Hopefully, any questions about his leadership and captaincy are put to rest, so that he can simply focus on the job at hand – Growden and co. – take note of this statement!
Your negative press only adds to the problem.
Elsom is at his most dominant, when he is not having to pile into every BD because his tight five are not cutting the mustard. The Wallaby tight five all had very solid games on Saturday night and this allows players like Elsom to play their natural game.
Elsom looked like the player that dominated in Europe a few years back, when he carried the ball in the third and fourth channel and his speed and size is often difficult for outside backs to deal with.
3. Counter attack/Mindset:
Genia, Cooper, O’Connor and Beale – the four amigos as I like to call them – will be causing every coach that has to face them this year, some real concerns.
The Wallaby counter attack finally looks like the Crusaders – it has taken Deans several years, but he has developed the players and mindset.
The Wallabies are lethal from anywhere on the park these days and their superior fitness (more on this below) is allowing them to play a full 80 minutes like this where both forwards and backs are bale to keep an up-tempo going.
The big Springboks forwards could simply not keep pace.
The attacking mindset means that teams will have to be exceptionally accurate with every kick they put in and will also have to ensure that their chase and defensive line is well structured otherwise there will be problems.
These young players thrive on confidence, so big wins like that go a long way in supporting Deans’ style and the way to play the game.
4. Fitness
The Wallaby team looks very fit. Several players are still coming back to their best after some time on the sideline.
A few years, back we looked a yard or two off the pace of the All Blacks and when the game was tight, their superior fitness would play a big hand in being able to pull out the last minute play to secure the win.
I think that gap is now closed and Australia are an 80-minute team.
My final comment was that Quade summed it up perfectly in that seldom is a game perfect.
The Wallabies’ accuracy on a few occasions, let them down on the weekend and they probably left three tries out on the field (which if converted would have made the scoreline 60-20!).
Doing the basics well and not pushing unnecessary passes will go a long way in addressing this issue. Doing the basics well also seemed to address much of the errors around the BD and collision area last week.
Bones506
Guest
Timani and Samo both play way too loose. Samo was elevated to Wallabies colours many years ago and his form did not translate at all. Timani is a player for the future but he will have to wait until after RWC.
Steve's bit
Guest
The main reason the Wallabies dropped off in the last quater was because of the huge turnover of players with RD giving the whole bench a go. This imo disrupted the flow of the wallabies game. anywho.
Johnno
Guest
Radike Samo and Timani should be looked at i hope Robbie Deans does not forget these 2 forwads. No forwad in World rugby will enjoy haveing to face these 2 at full fitness, aggresive, intimadting, and naturally strong like Dannie Rossow is another example (of a player who has it the natural raw strength that you have to be born with can't get in the Gym), and powerful at the collision. No opposition forwad in world rugby will enjoy facing these 2 at the rucks or mauls, and men like Burger and and mcgaw moody, will not enjoy haveing to tackle a mentally fired up , big strong elbows flying everywhere Samo or Timani 5 metres out from the tryline in a RWC semi or final. Also Dan vickerman should be monitored as he is a complete lock when fully fit.
balmybeach
Guest
On the second row, I would have Sam Wykes ahead of both Mumm and Vickerman. He should be in the 40 ahead of Mumm and Vickerman. IMO Mumm is just a good club player whereas, Wykes had an outstanding season alongside Sharpe for the Force. As for Dan Vickerman, where is he? He was named to play for Sydney Uni a couple of weeks ago but has not been sighted. Surely he should be at least holding down a first grade spot with SU if he is to be seriously considered for the WC. Hardly a fair go for other second rowers who all played a full season of Super rugby.
Bones506
Guest
Finishing stronger and being fitter are two different things. Rugby is a game that ebbs and flows. The Boks simply had the running of the play in the last few minutes. The Wallabies outworked and outran the Boks all day. We continually saw tight five forwards on counter attack break-out plays involved in ball inter-change and in a few instances finishing it off. This is after consistent aggressive work at the BD. The Wallabies turned the boks on their heals very quickly in counter attack and where unable to re-group defensively - a lot of this is fitness. The pace the Wallabies played at was far too much for the boks and the scoreline reflected that.
RuckinGoodStats
Roar Rookie
There were only 6 scrum resets by my count. At an average of 35 seconds, that is only 3 and a half or so minutes lost. Biggest consumer of time in refs time is kicks at goal. By the time the tee arrives, the kicker has a minute to get his kick in, then 30 seconds to get back for the kick off. Also you have to factor in that the game can go over 40 minutes a half as play continues until the hooter is gone and there is a stoppage, unlike Basketball where it is when the hooter has sounded. Didn't mean to start a debate so hopefully that will provide more complete information
p.Tah
Guest
Did that happen on the weekend?
Sammy
Guest
I always feel short changed whem I am watching endless scrum resets during a game of rugby.
Ben S
Roar Guru
Last season the Wallabies defended the Springbok rolling maul particularly well, if my memory serves me well, but not this time... I don't know if Australia are especially fit, or if those fatties Greyling, Smit and Van der Merwe just looked like out of breath fatties.
shop
Guest
Sorry, Elsom is at his best when he doesn't have to worry about being captain. One good performance doesn't "put any questions about his leadership or captaincy to rest" whatsoever. He may lead from the front with the ball in hand whilst breaking tackles but there is much more to captaincy - e.g. Good communication with referee, good tactical desicion making and inspiring the team with the right feedback (especially when behind the goalposts)! He has never looked comfortable when attending to these tasks. Note: Elsom didn't play 80 minutes, it was more like 65.....
p.Tah
Guest
Why is it curse? Did anyone watching the game feel they were short changed? I don't think the players could play the high intensity rugby we enjoy for a full 80 minutes. The big blokes would slowly be lost to the game. The advertisers may like it but I wouldn't enjoy rugby nearly as much if the game went for 3 hours.
Ian Whitchurch
Guest
"The ball was in play/contestable for 34:56 minutes in the whole game. That’s about average" What a curse on the game of rugby that is. There were only 35 minutes of actual *play* in a game of rugby union ... what would happen to the game if we demanded not only the ball is in play at all times, but also that the clock was only going while the ball was in play ?
RuckinGoodStats
Roar Rookie
Not sure about the fitness aspect either. The game wasn't played at a fast pace. The ball was in play/contestable for 34:56 minutes in the whole game. That's about average. The Bok played a quick recycle plan with their 102 rucks/mauls for 57% possession and the Wallabies only 60 ruck/mauls suggesting the Wallabies played it at their pace that was not a fast one. The ball was in play/contestable 6 seconds less in the second half. If the oppostion was the All Blacks, the 2nd half would the ball would have been in play/contestable for around 20 minutes. So maybe they were fit enough for the game plan?
Stellenbosched
Guest
Hii Bones 506, I have to question why you state that the Wallabies are fitter than what was a second string Bok side. In my opinion the Boks finished stronger than the Wallabies.