Australia’s David Pocock front, is tackled by South Africa’s Bjorn Basson during their Tri-Nations rugby match. (AP Photo/Rob Griffith).
From the start this Durban Test, the Wallabies’ change of heart was obvious.
Will Genia took the kickoff and five breakdowns ensued, the first policed by David Pocock, Nathan Sharpe and Ben Alexander, the second where the ball was taken forward by Rocky Elsom who was covered by Stephen Moore and Scott Higginbotham, and the third was James Horwill backed up by Sharpe and Sekope Kepu.
On the fourth, Higginbotham trucked it up into a withering de Villiers hit where he was backed up by Moore.
Finally the fifth was a Sharpe hitup with Pocock, Alexander, Horwill and Kepu in his pocket, before Will Genia opted to float over a box kick and put the Springboks under pressure.
Thus began a Test which highlighted the most frustrating aspect of Wallaby culture – that only at the final desperate moment after a horrible loss and scathing criticism, are the Australians able to get up for the occasion.
Rarely do Wallaby teams win tough matches against leading sides without the pressure of the final stages of a tournament or some stinging critique to prod them into action.
The Wallabies only win the tough games when put under huge pressure by the public and the coaching staff – generally speaking, the honour of wearing the green and gold is not enough to have the Wallabies putting their bodies on the line.
But for now, that pressure existed and the Wallabies responded.
The early exchanges were torrid and the Wallabies gave out as much as they received, to the point where some of the tackles bordered on dangerous.
First Elsom on Botha where a scuffle ensued, then Elsom again on Russow and then McCabe on Fourie – all tackles where the man was lifted.
It wouldn’t surprise if the Wallabies had been coached to lift the leg in the tackle to stop the Springboks rumbling forward on their feet. It was effective and had the desired effect of giving the Springbok forwards cause for thought.
All this effort was led from the front by captain Rocky Elsom who answered his critics with the biggest first eight minutes ever by a Wallaby forward.
In an astonishing opening to the match, Elsom made several big tackles, one clean linebreak followed by a 40 metre run, and won a couple of lineouts, as well as his work at the breakdown.
If the Wallabies were looking for a man to follow, they couldn’t have done better than Elsom. The only unfortunate part being that, like the Wallabies, Elsom had to get to the point of having the public calling for his head before he put in a big game.
By contrast, Richie McCaw does it every single match, regardless of circumstance.
Another defining feature of this game was the absence of Quade Cooper, who didn’t touch the ball until the 4th minute – a veritable eternity considering how much they have relied on him in recent times, and a definite contrast to the All Blacks Test where the Wallabies play immediately revolved around Cooper and Beale from the very start.
It appeared to be a deliberate ploy to keep Cooper out of the game and to take the Springboks on in the way they least expected, with direct forward running through the inside channels.
Indeed, the first time Cooper took the ball to the line himself from phase play was after halftime in the 45th minute.
If we had hoped that the Wallabies would heed the calls to win the forward battle before going wide, we were well rewarded in this match.
The centres Pat McCabe and Adam Ashley Cooper were rarely sighted during the first 40, but when the Wallabies opened up in the second half, both reaped the rewards.
Ashley-Cooper gave glimpses of his incredible athleticism and McCabe providing steadfast support to a James O’Connor shimmy, which led to McCabe’s first Test try, and the only try in the 14-9 win to Australia.
Although the Wallabies clearly made a conscious decision to play direct early, the lack of centre involvement also reflected some very poor handling by the men in gold.
Several times early passes went astray from first and second phase, leading to turnovers before the centres could be unleashed on the broken defensive line.
The Wallabies application was admirable, but their handling was awful, and the All Blacks will never allow such slackness to go unpunished.
The Wallabies also bombed two tries, first with O’Connor throwing a pass which was intercepted by Jacques Fourie on the Springbok line, and then with Kurtley Beale being wrapped up by some desperation defence.
But the encouraging part was that when the Wallabies were judicious with their options, they opened up the Springboks with the ease of a housewife opening a can of beans.
Had some passes stuck and the support players been a metre or two closer, the score could well have been 30.
Part of the Wallaby dominance in the second stanza accrued through a rampant Wallaby scrum, greatly assisted by the shift of Bok skipper John Smit to tighthead. Former Springbok prop Os du Randt was recently scathing of Smit’s continued selection, and on this performance it’s hard to argue.
Smit was totally off the pace in the loose (a stark contrast with his replacement Bismarck du Plessis) and his scrummaging was dire.
The Smit/du Plessis/Steenkamp front row was overwhelmed by a resurgent and heavy Wallaby pack – a fact which must provoke South African concern and Wallaby optimism in equal measure.
Ben Alexander and Sekope Kepu were both fully functioning adult front rowers in this match, and the hooker Stephen Moore played all over his opposite number Smit – by the time du Plessis joined the fray, the battle was won.
After their listless performance last week, the Wallaby forwards to a man stood up to be counted, and few more so than Nathan Sharpe.
Sharpe’s omission from the NZ tour was more about shuffling players for game time than form-related, but in this match he showed his real value to this Wallaby side, and he must be an automatic World Cup selection.
Apart from the strong scrum, Sharpe was tireless in the loose and made several fighting ball carries to get the Wallabies on the front foot.
Late in the match, he and James Horwill forced a turnover from a Springbok maul through sheer brute strength and force of will, and it was this sort of uncompromising play that Wallaby supporters will be looking for in the pointy end of the RWC.
Anthony Faingaa was another who put a strong reminder of his talents to the selectors. World Cups are won with defence and Faingaa is without question the toughest defensive centre in Australia.
His timing isn’t bad either – his rushing shutdown of JP Pietersen was a wonderful example of anticipation and correct decision making, as was his late game takedown of Jacques Fourie, a notoriously difficult man to put down.
Overall, this was a Wallaby performance to be proud of, but only when the Wallabies can strong two or three of these together, can Australian rugby fans start to get excited.
The Wallabies have a nasty history of disappointing those who care for them the most.
This team has shown that they can bring out the big guns when their backs are to the wall, but they struggle for motivation when the stakes aren’t as high or when the public is on their side.
It’s only when they arrive at the last chance saloon, that they seem able to pull their boots on and stand up to the gunslingers of world rugby.
This makes them prime targets for a boilover in the pool stages of the Rugby World Cup and unless they can complete this Tri-Nations with a strong, aggressive performance against the All Blacks in Brisbane, they remain doubtful prospects for Eden Park in October.
stuff happens
Guest
No it wouldn't be rude.These are trial games prior to the RWC & difficult to assess.But the Wallabies came up well after a lashing in Auckland & then flying to Durban - you have to give them credit for that. The 'Boks as we know will get better despite their incompetent coaching group & obsession with Smit.One bit of good news for them is that Juan Smith plays his first game since Feb on Sat for the Cheetahs.A great player in my view.
Manuwatu
Guest
Would it be rude of me to maybe suggest that they beat a very ordinary Sprinkbok team that would have probably lost to Ireland, Wales, France or England?
Johnno
Guest
Yes a big 6'7 of prime size meat.
s.t.rine
Guest
The game I saw in Wales had Martin Johnson worried. Did I miss something? Estee
Johnno
Guest
Is Big 6'7 Matt Banagahan , and Tuilagi non ex sistent s.t.rine. What are you on.
s.t.rine
Guest
A worrysome weakness is kicking & leaving 3 & 2 points off board. Has to be more consistent because comes RWC & 'strange' ref decisions teams like England, whose backline is non-existent, could easily win with all 3-pointers while we miss ours. Estee
Timnaik
Guest
Where are you from Ivan? my guess Durban. May be this maybe that maybe maybe but the bottom line is after 80 min of footy the Wallabies were up 14-9.
Tui
Guest
Personally I thought it was quite a good win for the wallabies. They really fronted up and refused to let the Boks over power them. Usually when tight games like this occur against the Boks, the Wallabies get bullied not this time which bodes well for them.
Davo
Guest
Ivan - how can they not be fit ? The Boks have just finished a Super 15 season and then been in secret training camps despite pretending they were injured. The 4-5week break from actual match play shouldve freshened them up not rendered them " unfit ". You say the Aussie backs didn't come in to match until after the 40min mark yet I seem to recall them testing the Boks repeatedly on the fringes and making a 95m charge just before halftime that was snuffed out by abysmal refereeing. Your praise of Bismarck I agree with. It makes Smit's selection all the more implausible...
Ivan
Guest
You started off well, but then just became another Wallaby fan writing towards the end. Wallabies were dominated for 40 against unfit boks - put that in your pen and write it. When the boks meet the wallabies in the semis of the WC - expect Bismarck to start, with Alberts at 7. Anyone notice how Bismarck consistently threw tacklers to the ground while making some hard yards? Anyone notice how the Wallabies were lucky to not receive two yellows, one after the touch judge even recommended it ? Anyone notice how the Boks being unfit, stuffed two tries near the line - and were unfortunate not to receive another when cooper dropped the ball ? Anyone notice how the Wallabies being able to get the ball - coincided with the replacement of Brussow ? Anyone notice that Cooper, o'Connor, Digby and Adam ashley were not in the game for the first 40 ? A fit and correctly picked Bok pack will steamroll the Wallabies. Optimistic much?
flying hori
Guest
No chance Anaru, ABs will always be one step ahead, it was a game the wallabies had to win and thanks to a Bok side that played their 1st game to gether and ran out of gas, the wallabies did. NOT VERY IMPRESSIVE I MUST ADD, heaps of room for improvement and must before the Brisbane game.
Kuruki
Guest
If the Wallabies are to win the test in Brisbane they need a complete performance from the forwards and the backs, just getting one area right will mean another loss.
kaha
Guest
Now that is one of the most balanced and realistic articles I have read on any of the australian sites. It was a win, a good win doubtful. But encouraging from and australian point of view. But to read most of the other sites or articles you would think the australians just need to show up in brisbane to win, I just have one piece of advice don't get ahead of yourselves. Wait to see how you go in brisbane.
bennalong
Guest
This is a good article and your generalisation about the team 'needing to respond to enormous pressure' in order to perform, would no doubt have struck a chord with many a Wallaby fan, even if it made Handles very cross. I believe however that our lack of depth and the youth of the side has meant our injury toll has had a huge affect on our consistency. Despite the amount of dropped ball and other errors by the team in general, the forewards play was excellent both in the set piece and in the loose, and importantly the intensity was maintained for the full 80. The Australian fans are impatient, but Deans is definitely affecting our style of play and the fitness levels have allowed us to respond quickly and in numbers, to sudden changes in attack and defence a la Crusaders The Wallabies are building toward a great team, and It may well be that this foreward performance will be a watershed as it will be followed by a Suncorp showdown with the All Blacks which I predict will involve similar intensity. Who knows, we may win it! GO the WALLABIEEEEEES!
Handles O'Love
Guest
This is a reasonable article, completely ruined by the sort of sweeping generalisation that gets under my skin. "Rarely do Wallaby teams win tough matches against leading sides without the pressure of the final stages of a tournament or some stinging critique to prod them into action." Really. If this is the case, then there must have been a lot of stinging criticism that I missed. Even over the last 10 years, a period where we were never the best team in the world, we have a record of 74 wins and 53 losses. This record is reasonable in its own right, but when you factor in the number of games we play against the All Blacks, the ridiculous nature of your statement comes into focus. The Wallabies have won 67% of their non-All Black tests in the last 10 years, and have a winning record against every nation except England, who are 8-7 up in that period. 28 out of the 127 games were against the best team in the world, i.e. more than 20%. I am not proposing mediocrity, we want to play the best, and we want to be measured against them, but to attribute losing a game to some fundamental character flaw in Australian rugby is worse than silly, it is just plain arrogant. Mate, the criticism of the masses is exactly what the name of this site tells us, it is nothing but the Roar of the Crowd.
OldManEmu
Guest
"Biggest first eight minutes ever by a wallaby forward." Wow. That is a topic in itself.
kingplaymaker
Roar Guru
Hmmm...I agree that they do play well when under the greatest pressure: on the plus side this maybe why they sometimes win world cups, as fear of being knocked out forces one or two great one-off perfomances :-) There are still big problems which would have been exposed against the ABs. There was a lot of mobility, energy and aggression in the forwards, but little physicality. Someone like Palu, TPN, Samo or Timani has to come in to add this or Jerome Kaino, Thorn, Mealamu will bash them back all day. I'm afraid I think this is the worst attacking centre partnership in Wallabies history. AAC is the ghost of what he was. Aside from Barnes the only alternatives are just a very little better. I said they should have got Folau and Inglis when they were available last year. Genia, Cooper, Ioane, Folau, Inglis, O'Connor, Beale would have been an RWC winning backline. But JON doesn't buy league players anymore, not having learnt that the relative failures of Sailor and Rogers to Tuqiri were because they were 27 and he was 23. Folau and Inglis would have been 23 and 20...The young convert better, that's the lesson. They can't seriously take Vickerman after no rugby in three years. It's sentimental fantasy. Timani has played a full Super season. Probably any player who has would be better than one that hadn't played rugby for three years. The Wallabies handling was awful. Large numbers of knock-ons always mean one of two things: 1) Rain. 2) Nerves/weak confidence. This weak confidence although it pulls out the committed performance described in the article, is worrying.
Andrew Logan
Guest
True James - the skills were lacking for many players here I felt, including Rocky on the blind. If they can maintain this level of first 20 mins intensity, they'll have a chance vs NZ.
Capital
Roar Guru
Good work Andrew Agree in spades. It was good to see the Wallabies build momentum and apply pressure. It was good to see phase ball - not Cooper cutting the centres from minute one. It was good to see determined defence and the tight five work as a unit. And it was good to see Elsom lead the team by example for the first time this year. The Wallabies sometimes remind me of my days in the Army. We had guys who would get bad comments in their preliminary Annual Report (3 months out), work for 3 months - get a better report, then slacken off. Until these guys can compete in the first round of the Bledisloe, or when it is not a dead rubber - we might have a team that learns to dominate on a consistent basis. This was a good result, but I hope that they do not become complacent once selected and start to believe their own hype. This side has a lot of potential - mostly unrealised at this time.
jameswm
Guest
I'll still go against the grain and say Sharpe still hits like a wet mop and missed tackles, and Rocky was caught out down the blind twice. Isn't that the blind side flanker's first responsibility at the scrum? He actually passed it on one occasion though, which was a first.