Perhaps the most pleasing aspect of the Wallabies’ 20-14 win over the flying purple people-eaters at Twickenham was that there were signs that the Wallabies might just be getting at least some of the messages coming from disgruntled supporters at home and abroad.
After the Wallabies were correctly pilloried by all and sundry for their lacklustre display against France, it’s great to be reading credit where it’s properly due.
However, I’ll first get a quick word on England’s kit out of the way.
I’d only just given them a rap for letting their new supplier, Canterbury, go back to the traditional England white jersey and shorts and navy socks kit.
After France’s new retro-styled adidas strip as well, it seemed the rugby world was going back to their roots (if you’ll ignore the All Blacks finally relenting on a sponsor).
But “Regal Purple” is just a horrendous step back to the dark old days of made-for-marketing, like anthracite, and black in New Zealand.
This was supposed to be a clash at the home of rugby between centuries-old colonial rivals, and we, as supporters and lovers of the game, deserved better than something more suited to a tired Wiggle. All jibes that I’ve read so far have been well made and are well deserved.
But I digress…
All last week, commentators, journos, bloggers, pundits, and rarely-pleased ex-pat former players were lining up to have their two cents on what went wrong in France, and very little of it was wide of the mark.
Andrew Logan spoke of the need in rugby “to win the contest at the collision point,” and overall, I’d say that if the Wallabies didn’t ‘win’ the collision, they certainly contested it a whole lot better than they did in Paris just a week before.
There were numerous examples of gold jerseys breaking the first tackle, and with that came a better second phase game in which the Wallabies’ eight offloads found support more often than has been the case in recent outings.
In fact, the Wallabies’ support game was much improved, and there were noticeably more bodies in motion.
As Nick Cummins went over for his try, you could see Kurtley Beale and Sitaleki Timani hovering in the background supporting the break-maker Nick Phipps, which in turn meant some of the covering defenders had to keep half and eye on them, too.
On the rare occasion that the Wallabies made a break in Paris, or for most of The Rugby Championship, the man in the clear often fought a lone battle.
The plaudits for Ben Tapuai in his first outing at inside centre have rightly flowed, and he certainly played a major part in creating the “line-bend, a point from which the team can attack on the front foot” that ‘Loges’ required of a no. 12 last week.
Again, the supporting bodies in motion and improved second phase play meant that Australia were much better equipped to take advantage of Tapuai’s good work.
One of David Lord’s ‘musts’ on Saturday was that “Wingers [Digby] Ioane and Nick Cummins must be given ball in hand with time and space, and not have to go searching for it,” and again, I reckon the Wallabies got this right.
It’s true that Ioane didn’t have the same impact that Cummins did, but the fact that both were regularly utilised as option runners meant that there was another dimension to the Australian attack.
Cummins was superb, for the record, and with every run I couldn’t help but think he’s going to be so much more dangerous in Super Rugby next season.
Nick Phipps was much better than his previous outing, and there hasn’t been and won’t be anywhere near as much gnashing of teeth that Brett Sheehan was again relegated to the role formerly mastered by Chris Whittaker. Phipps’ passing game still had its moments, but his decision-making looked better and he showed great vision to make the space in the lead-up to Cummins’ maiden Test try.
David Campese’s now-famous comment, that “Robbie Deans is destroying Australian rugby” is never going to be forgotten by just one win.
The major difference between the Wallabies’ display against England and most showings this year, is that while the game plan (and I use the word loosely) looked largely the same, the much-improved execution and basic skills of the players provided the platform for the win.
We may never know if this was a coaching or player-led advance, but the acknowledgement should be made regardless.
After being pantsed in Paris, I thought the Wallaby tight-five were excellent, and more than held their own against the English scrum that had (or was given) an expectation of 2005-vintage dominance.
It was nice to see former England International, Paul Ackford, writing in The Telegraph that their ability to “rebuild their scrummage and breakdown work, to play with real passion and imagination was praiseworthy indeed.”
Ackford’s ratings of the Ben(n)s Alexander and Robinson were only topped by the perfect ten he afforded Man of the Match, Michael Hooper, for whom he effused, “..had an extraordinary match in attack and defence. His work at the breakdown was exemplary and … [his] decision-making was spot on. He knew precisely when and how to apply the pressure without conceding penalties in dangerous positions.”
Beale and Berrick Barnes both had solid games, too, and appeared to feed off each other pretty well throughout. Barnes might not be quite as good a goal-kicker as Mike Harris, but I think he makes a better makeshift fullback.
The Wallaby defence in that last half hour was just something else, and highlighted the very character of the men that Deans has never doubted, if sometimes to a fault.
Once again, though, I find myself saying as I have done often in my time on The Roar, that the Wallabies cannot be judged on their last game now, but on their next.
The Wallabies have often found the Azzuri to be a tough opponent at home, perhaps most famously when Quade Cooper announced himself on the international stage in 2008.
With Italy coming off a 42-10 loss at the hands of New Zealand in Rome, they will be primed for another shot at the hot-and-cold Wallabies, and certainly the Australians cannot afford to lift the foot. A win in Florence will provide immense confidence as they head to Cardiff and chase eight straight wins against Wales.
More importantly, the Wallabies now have a chance to show they’re not always hot and cold, and are capable of stringing wins together. The thing about consistency, as another favourite saying goes, is that you have to do it all the time.
Jiggles
Roar Guru
Corbisiero is obviously a loss, but I thought Maler was supposed to be a handy young prop. Alexander who is very weak in my opinion (evident by that first (?) scrum when Vunipola was on) was easily getting it over him. Cole wasn't great against Robinson despite his reputation. Parling is on the small side for an international lock so maybe they lacked a bit of grunt coming through. I don't know I will have another look this weekend when the face the weaker Springbok scrum. I kind of enjoy the way this Endland team have been playing and I think Lancaster has them on the right track which you allude to. I think England is finally getting out of the post 2003 mindset of the "English Way" of rugby and realising its much more productive to bend a game-plan to the cattle rather than the other way round. they've still go issues (Just like Australia really) which is based around commitment at the breakdown and penetration by the backline. Again despite Tuilagi's try I dont think he offered much, but hey if he is contributing 5 points per game thats ok. Not sure about Robshaw at captain, not taking those points was baffling.
Colin N
Guest
Indeed, it wasn't when Marler was on, but the 20 minutes that Corbisiero played (before he suffered the injury which has kept him out until now), England were dominant. Corbisiero is returning for this weekend and Vunipola impressed on Saturday so hopefully England can dominant this weekend.
Bakkies
Guest
You absolutely should take the points but when teams aren't infringing you need to be able to create. To me the attack was too flat and predictable. Beale doesn't seem to draw in defenders maybe he needs to give Larkham a call. We don't want to end up like Ireland and Munster relying on constant pick and gos.
Neuen
Roar Rookie
Actually they are no use to NZ because they have represented Fiji at 15 or 7 man level which make ineligible to play for NZ. Kids with a Pacific Island background value culture more than country. So if they see a superstar Fijian play for NZ the kids also want to become a All Black. Big names = kids flocking to NZ schools to do what their role model did. That is why Samoa have some talented players playing for them cause and not go over to NZ thanks to guys like Brain Lima being a role model for some. People do not look at the cultural background when they talk about these issues. You can be born in NZ but they will be brought up in a Samoa, Tonga or Fiji culture and not NZ one. Many of them go to NZ for a education and started playing rugby due to guys like Michael Jones which was responsible for most of the players with the Samoan background playing for NZ.
Bakkies
Guest
Well mister know it all why do certain Fiji players get left behind due to red tape issues. There have been issues in the past due to Fiji having a military controlled government which didn't go down well with Aus and NZ.
Bakkies
Guest
What professional opportunities are there in Fiji for these players? Well ?
Neuen
Roar Rookie
Their scrum wasn't much against South Africa in the June Internationals IMO.
Colin N
Guest
Re: set-piece, that's because Corbisiero and Hartley weren't there, which is pretty obvious. As for defence, that was pretty shocking in the Six Nations early on, especially when you consider England were facing teams like Scotland and Italy who lack the quality of Australia in the backline. I actually think the defence is improving and improved as the game went on, but in fairness to Australia, they mixed up the game extremely well in the first 60 minutes. Despite the lack of accuracy, I thought there was a development in phase play and ambition, even if it was lateral at times. The question is: how long do you give the team before you expect them to start beating the southern hemisphere teams regularly? (Obviously not long if you're the British press!) Considering it's an inexperienced team anyway, to then have three of your proven international performers missing from the pack (and one from the backline), it's a huge loss.
Colin N
Guest
I was impressed with Italy last week. The scoreline was extremely harsh on them and they should have been ahead at half-time as they made several breaks - they just didn't quite have the support at the crucial moments. On another note, just responding to Riccardo I thought the scrum was pretty solid with Castro on the field against New Zealand. If anything, I thought Italy had the edge and won a couple of penalties. Even if my memory is deceiving me, I think people confuse 'dominance' with 'having the edge.' For example, there's no doubt Australia had the upper hand versus England, but it was hardly akin to the way France demolished Australia up front the previous week. Finally, I thought it was a good performance by Australia against a naive and inexperienced England side (I wouldn't call it arrogant as Bakkies did above), but it didn't really tell us anything we didn't know. Hooper was immense, though, a much better link player than Pocock. The Wallabies perhaps showed a bit more intelligence with ball in hand than they have done in previous weeks, but it was a much more threatening backline with Tapuai and Ashley-Cooper in the centre (much more balanced too).
Neuen
Roar Rookie
AB made 14 changes for the game. Off course it will take 40 or so minutes to get it together.
bennalong
Guest
If you take out losses to the All Blacks we don't look bad If you add the UNPRECEDENTED injury record you can understand why cohesion has been poor. . If you look at the UNPRECEDENTED injury list of captains starting with Rocky then Horwill, Genia and Pocock, you suspect the effect of beheading might have quite a negative effect. (Sorry to sound flippant) Getting back to the first point I almost choked as I wrote it because we all hoped (I think) that Robbie might give us a Crusaders like running game to beat the All Blacks with, and that's been the main aim of Oz rugby "forever' and I was there when we regularly flogged them So Robbie gets it for his origins I believe we're putting it together now and that the contest for places after so many bloodings will ensure we deal with the inconsistency I'd point out we have dealt with our fast start then fizzle, as we now play 80. And we've fought back after being behind on the scoreboard Finally the young tyros in the team have seen what happens when you believe your own press and I suspect we'll see more sober performances off the field from JOC and KB I'm actually sad to see Quade go, he's an exciting player, but his greatest contribution will be to set an example. It'd be nice to think that he might accept his new contract and be upgraded after the start of 2013 but it looks like he's too important to cop a downgrading so he'll follow Nasser, Sonny Bill and Anthony Mundine. If that's his choice good luck mate,,,,,and good riddance!!
HardData
Guest
I have a funny feeling it actually made history. Not that you would be concerned about that would you??? You have to suck up to the 20% of staunch White Australians remaining in Australia that support/trash the Wallabies. Otherwise you would not be calling things as you are, would you????
ohtani's jacket
Guest
The All Black forward pack have been coasting for a while, but they're the undefeated World Champions. Don't you worry about them.
HardData
Guest
McKay, You Dont think the win over England was possibly executed by some journeymen punching above their weight prior to the incumbents coming back? Taking into account the currently young English team being a monstrous hurdle when they have home ground advantage in 2015 plus almost 3 years additional experience. Had a small chuckle when there was two KIWI born props opposing each other in an AU/ENG match. Not worthy a mention??????? Be respected if you replied to at least 1 of my 10 posts?????
Neuen
Roar Rookie
I believe in you were only as good as the other team allow you to play. England alllow Australia to do number of things France did not allow. It is also hard for any side to prepare against the French as you know what they might do or capable of doing and they come at you a totally different way. France also targeted the Australian set pieces. You get rumbled upfront you are going to have a long day. England are predictable. you know exactly what they are going to do and they do it. They basically fax you their game plan and say try and stop us. Its strange to see a teams get a couple of big straight runners and then go and try it for 70 minutes only to see them cut down time after time. Australia use to do well because they had this basic concept of quick phase ball and that you need to score within the first 3 phases otherwise the opportunity is lost. Currently you see them hold the ball for 15 20 phases. Reds did that a lot.Todays game is so much set out for counter attack rugby. Most tries get scored of counter attacks and is one of the reason NZ is doing so well. Australia got the ball winners to do it but you need to pick when. Against NZ they got suckered in by their defence.
bennalong
Guest
So OJ What did you think of the foreward play by the Ab's...........playing like Australia?
HardData
Guest
All due respect Bakkies, You have NO idea in regards VISA issues. Do not comment otherwise.
HardData
Guest
Fiji has lost most of this generation's talent to France, thanks to their almost newly installed Academy. But lets not let the facts get in the way of perception?????
bennalong
Guest
I agree Terry, I've made the point that the AB forewards played like we did against the French using pick and go up the centre with no passing rushes to speak of ! As you say this was a second string team but the backs were still peppered with firsts I agree with you that we should beat them with a few tries but Brett's point is well made in that it will require an effort that takes the Wallabies beyond the English game not a return to R & R because Italy's not top tier (which on past performances could happen!)
bennalong
Guest
I think your point about 'time 5 out' has some validity Bakkies and has been repeated a number of times in a number of tests. On the other hand it indicates the lead up work that got us there and the correct decision to take the points. There is no shame in that either, especially if the defending team lays it all on the line (so to speak) to stop them! We're a bit tough on our own and the free to air English commentary was superior to Fox where Greg Martin adds every error to the list of repeated Wallaby failings