It’s been a depressing week for Australian rugby. A once in 12 year opportunity to showcase our sport has been dealt a huge blow with the selection of a squad that appears set to play a brand of rugby that won’t attract new fans to the game.
In fact, it will probably cost us the series in the process.
Equally, if not more depressing, is the divide this has created within the rugby community.
The spite between fans on either side of the Deans and/or Cooper fence is unprecedented.
Posts filled with vitriol are at an all-time high on the Roar – if nothing else, Deans has certainly managed to bring out the worst in many rugby fans on this site.
After moping around for days, it finally occurred to me that there is a bright side – Gatland.
Many Roarers, myself included, have moaned endlessly about the omission of Quade Cooper in Deans’ squad.
To me it doesn’t make sense to leave out a guy who has 38 caps, a better international winning record than the coach himself, now playing significantly better than he did in those 38 games, and has a 100% record at international level, even against the All Blacks at the first Test venue.
Replacing him with a guy who’s played fly half in only one game at international level two years ago is bordering on insane.
Same could be argued about the omission of Johnny Wilkinson in Gatland’s squad.
I can’t say I’ve seen much European rugby this year, but given Wilkinson was just named Europe’s best rugby player, I think it’s safe to conclude he’s in some great form right now, and must have been consistent throughout the season to earn this accolade.
Despite the bleeding obvious, Gatland failed to pick him in the Lions squad, let alone the match-day 22.
I dare say that Wilkinson would do more damage to Australia than Cooper would do to the Lions, so on the whole, we’re one up on them already!
The 2015 Wales development squad (aka the Lions) is bound to be filled with bias selections that are no different, and possibly worse, than the selection errors made by Dingo.
Similarly, given Gatland has a worse record against Australia than Deans has against New Zealand, it can be deduced that he is at least equally incompetent on the tactical/game plan front.
So on the whole, things aren’t so bad. We should all put our bickering aside and get behind the Wallabies – bring on the spy versus spy contest between the two coaches and let’s see who out-dumbs the other!
Ash
Guest
Dan, that is not the point. The point, is that the All Blacks would never have an Aussie coach.
BetterRedThanDead
Guest
The thought of a Kiwi coach makes you physically ill? Ha ha! Love it RK! No one could question your passion. Nationality aside, I am confident that if Dingo was an Aussie we would still be here calling for his head.
BetterRedThanDead
Guest
Damn, I didnt think that one through...ha ha
Red Kev
Guest
Your original post that has since been deleted said "Because other than against the All Blacks and oddly Scotland Deans has better records than all his professional era predecessors". Wrong. This statement of yours "it is only fair to compare the pro era against sides we don’t play as often as nz/sa." doesn't even make sense. I'm sure you think you've proved something with your post but you haven't. Try again.
Ben.S
Roar Guru
That one collision with Ranger is still just one collision. It means nothing. Larkham was no shrinking violet.
Ben.S
Roar Guru
Potentially not a bad list, but definitely an unproven list at Test level. Any fan can pick 3rd stringers. The reality is that there's just a number of players who can fill multiple jerseys as opposed to genuine specialist competition for places like you have with the 7 jersey, for example.
Dan
Guest
Pot - kettle, I'm afraid.
Ben.S
Roar Guru
Zing!
Red Kev
Guest
So you're not replying to a specific comment you're just cherry picking posts and being a tool - no problem - you carry on, get back to me when you post something useful or informative.
Kippa
Guest
Aru gave away scarfs. Bundy rum sponsored the event, I'm sure you would remember the ads where all the Poms where moving here. What I want to know is why are we less then three weeks out and still no promo gear from Lion Nathan who through Hahn Super Dry are the beer sponsor? Hahn had shirts with every carton for the socceroos, tooheys a few years ago when kooga started sponsoring the Wobblies had a similar promo. Yet 2013 sfa.
mh
Guest
lets talk about being wrong... Deans has a win ratio against england of 66.66%. in the professional era ie 1996 to 2008 the wallabies had just over a 50% win ratio over england. you can't compare with connoly who played them 3 times. it is only fair to compare the pro era against sides we don't play as often as nz/sa. against nz/sa yes its fair to compare individual coaching eras. its bad against nz and good against sa.
Dan
Guest
There's a reason that the past successes of different people in different circumstances generally aren't used to forecast the future; it's because they're ... Wait for it ... Different! Yes, believe it or not our first World Cup win was by a fast running and enterprising Dwyre coached side in the amateur era, when most players had day jobs and the springboks weren't even invited to participate. In '99 our boys were a very different set again, moving from free flowing back line experts of the amateur era, to the most professional and well drilled side in the world. The team could score tries, but that wasn't their hallmark - defence was. The team was as controlled and clinical as they come, conceding a solitary try to the United States throughout the entire World Cup. Either way you look at it, these were sides with very distinctive characteristics that represent numerous differing competitive environments both internally and abroad. One key factor in both eras was Australia having a significant number of players that most objective observers would name in a world XV, something that is clearly not the case today. If you were to name a World XV tomorrow, how many Australians would you honestly pick? This is why historians are often pretty ordinary at anticipating major changes in the world; they're good at forming narratives about the past, but often fail to understand that these cant be applied to the present day quite so easily.
johnson
Guest
Don't waste your time explaining reality to Red Kev. The only thing he contributes is anti-deans posts. If you took that away from him he would have nothing to say. Deans is the first thing he thinks about in the morning and the last thing he thinks about at night. He is like a jilted lover. It is seriously all he contributes.
Well Ruck me.
Guest
1 Robinson 2 Moore 3 Alexander (Palmer if fit) 4 Simmons 5 Horwill 6 Higginbitham 7 Hooper 8 Palu 9 Genia 10 ????? 11 Tomane 12 Lealiifano 13 AAC 14 Cummins 15 Barnes 16 Faingaa 17 Slipper 18 Kepu (Alexander if Palmer fit) 19 Timani 20 Mowen 21 Burgess 22 ????? 23 Folau Will be the team for the first test with JOC and either Cooper or Beale filling in at 10 & 22.
ScrumJunkie
Guest
Well said Dave. This is where Deans has lost the support of Aussie fans. He is perceived as taking us away from our strengths as a rugby nation. Which has always been bamboozling teams with our superior backs. Not crash ball centres, and players out of position.
Neuen
Roar Rookie
That is not true. Larkham can sling a ball miles
Ajax
Guest
+1
Dave
Guest
While you continually UNDERESTIMATE a nation that's won 2 World Cups (and a drop goal shy of a 3rd), is almost always ranked in the top 3 nations in the world, made from players who compete with and hold their own against the 2 best traditional rugby nations (NZ and SA) week in week out at Super rugby level, in addition to the tri-nations. I doubt many Wallaby fans would tell you that we EXPECT our forwards to dominate other top tier nations - because yes that's a rare luxury. What we all expect is that with the ball we do receive, we completely baffle our opponents with creativity and our continually outstanding production line of backs.
Dave
Guest
It should also be remembered that Larkham never missed a chance to get in the oppositions face - no matter how big the opponent! Even something as simple as collecting the ball after going into touch would have Larkham niggling. People loved him for that. Puts the whole Quade and McCaw nonsense into comparison, considering an entire nation still complains about it...
Red Kev
Guest
No, there are simply two sides to the argument. Firstly there is the objective review the hard data that lists the long long litany of mistakes and poor decisions Deans has made and are illustrated by his mediocre returns as coach. On that metric he fails. Then there is the emotive argument that acknowledges the fact that representing a nation in a sport is about pride. And Deans fails on that metric too. Many people ignore it and claim it doesn't matter, those are the people who don't tear up on ANZAC day or when the national anthem is played, who won't paint their face to support the team. Passion is what carries you over the line in the game of inches when you're slugging it out against an equally talented and equally well trained team. I feel pity for people who can't acknowledge that both are important and valid.