Well, that was anticlimactic. Unfortunately Bledisloe game one between Australia and New Zealand ended in a 12-all draw in a match played in atrocious conditions. I am not going to criticise the quality of the match, it was always going to be a grind in that weather.
Anybody who saw the torrential downpour an hour before kickoff, or saw water splashing up whenever the Wallabies ran during their warm-up, would understand how tough the conditions were for the players.
I’m also not going to criticise captain Michael Hooper and his decision making and blame him for the loss, the match is a completely different ball game if the Wallabies come away with points at the end of the first half and the All Blacks would have responded accordingly.
This article is also not going to discuss factors that were outside of the players’ hands, the performance of Jaco Peyper. Peyper made some very questionable decisions, but he did not cost the Wallabies the match, and he was inconsistent against both teams, not just the Wallabies.
The breakdown is always a lottery when Peyper is reffing.
What I will discuss is one factor that coach Ewen McKenzie had direct control over, the use of his subs. Put simply, McKenzie’s use of his reserves was mind boggling, it was almost like he forgot he had them until the 65th minute.
New Zealand made their first sub in the 47th minute when they decided to leave Ben Franks on the field after he replaced the sin binned Wyatt Crockett. Australia, on the other hand, made their first substitute in the 66th minute when Scott Higginbotham replaced Scott Fardy and Nick Phipps replaced Nic White. New Zealand had made four changes before McKenzie had even made one.
Substitutes have become a vital part of any rugby union match. They are an opportunity to inject fresh legs into a match and provide a spark, to take advantage of tired players. New Zealand got their substitutes right on the most part, the Barrett for Cruden switch was interesting, but Steve Hansen gave his replacements enough time to make an impact on the match. McKenzie didn’t.
Let’s start with the halfbacks. Nic White was having a poor game, his passing was average, which is understandable given the conditions, but his decision making and speed to the ball were poor and are inexcusable.
There were a number of times where he was far too slow getting from one breakdown to the next, you beat the All Blacks by playing on the back of quick ball, it’s not possible to do this when the halfback isn’t getting to the ball before it’s ready. Secondly, his decision making was subpar, it was like he wasn’t even thinking about where to pass, he knew that he was slow to the ball so he had to just get it out and pass it to the first player he saw in a gold jersey.
It’s understandable to leave him on the field when you don’t have a solid replacement on the bench but that wasn’t the case. Nick Phipps is in probably the best form of his career.
The Waratahs don’t win the Super Rugby title if Phipps isn’t playing as well as he has been. As soon as he entered the game the difference was clear, he was getting to the breakdown quickly and then pausing to make a decision, admittedly there were a few too many passes to the short side, but at least he was looking and thinking. Phipps should have been given at least 20 minutes to help turn the match, instead he got just 14.
The second curious change to take place came four minutes after the halfback swap. In the 70th minute Bernard Foley replaced his Waratahs teammate, Kurtley Beale, and slotted into the five-eighth position. Both Beale, whom I spoke about last week (http://www.theroar.com.au/2014/08/13/kurtley-beale-gamble-or-masterstroke/) and inside centre Matt Toomua were struggling in the conditions, Toomua more so than Beale, and it became clear fairly early on in the second half that Foley needed to come on and lead the attack.
The weather conditions were not suited to Beale’s game and a very brave coach would have made a late switch on Saturday afternoon prior to kickoff, but nevertheless, Beale played pretty well. Foley should have entered the match with 20-25 minutes to go, replacing Matt Toomua and pushing Beale to inside centre.
Instead he came on with 10 minutes to go and like Phipps, his impact was immediately clear, whereas Beale and Toomua did a lot of running across field, Foley was very straight and very direct. In the ten minutes he played, he was exactly what the Wallabies needed, but the Wallabies needed him for more time on the field.
Throughout the Super Rugby season Waratahs coach Michael Cheika used Will Skelton as an impact player. He either told him to go hard for 50 minutes before being replaced normally by Jacques Potgieter or he started on the bench and came on with 25-30 minutes to go with the potential to have a big impact on the match.
The 30 minutes he was getting was perfect for him because it gave him a few minutes to work into the game before he exploded into action. He attempted to do this on Saturday night, but McKenzie only gave him ten minutes of game time.
And he only came on because Wycliff Palu went off with an injury, which suggests McKenzie was going to give him even less game time. Skelton is one of the largest rugby players in the world and given enough time, he will change a game. He tried his best on Saturday to have an impact on the game, but he just needed more time.
McKenzie made some poor substitute decisions on Saturday night but he will have another chance to get things right next Saturday night as the two teams go around for round two in Auckland. Unfortunately, after what we saw in Sydney, I can’t see the Australians departing Eden Park victorious, but stranger things have happened.
Twitter: @fromthesheds
DB
Guest
I somewhat agree, I think he simply left the changes too late. Higgers showed some real spark when he came on and I think deserves more time next week, especially on a dry track. Skelton needs the 20-30 minutes to really hit his straps and I thought Phipps did confuse the AB's closer to the ruck and on the short side, but he confused his own team mates in doing so, so he gets a pass mark. Firstly, I would cut Nic White's leg off, the bloke needs to let Toomua or Beale kick!! Secondly, I think the one issue that is overlooked on almost all sites/articles is the poor game by Folau. He ran a kick into touch (Under no pressure), squandered an absolute gimme try when he threw a wild pass to Beale on a counter attack with only tight forwards in front of them and then under pressure passed to Toomua which resulted in possession to the AB's. His stats should be good - they kicked to him all night - but no amount of offloading, which is only good when the receiver is able to take the offload, run meters etc are going to cover up a relatively poor game when viewed as such, not just an assessment of stats. The positive is that he has considerable improvement left in him based on that performance so a dry track in Auckland is the perfect place to show what he can do.
44bottles
Roar Guru
Just seen so many calls for a Foley-Beale 10-12 axis, made me think that.
Graeme
Guest
I guess Link thought that Whites kicking game was more important due to the wet conditions, but he probably should have subbed him at oranges since we weren't playing a field position game anyway. Given he was not at 100% due to a cork, he could have easily been subbed without any egos getting bruised or media explanations needed,
Graeme
Guest
I don't think he is at all. There are obviously provincial biases, but in general I think most of us are quite happy with Toomua at 12 and it is not one of the controversial positions. He is a good foil for a more riskée 10 with his cool head, strong boot and strong defense.
expathack
Guest
The refusal to substitute White was the thing that had me shouting at the TV. When a guy's having such a mare of a game and then get's a cork so bad he could only hobble around you have to hook him. Particularly when the sub is the for half in the country. Lost a bit of respect for Link because of that. I'm sure in his head White was integral for his kicking game, but that's not the way it was playing out. Good coaches need to be able to adapt.
WallaTah
Guest
Agree with you 44bottles, good summation.
44bottles
Roar Guru
Disliked is probably an overstatement, but I feel like what he brings isn't appreciated enough. He may not be the most outstanding attacker but he is one you can almost always rely on. Especially if you bring someone like Beale or Cooper in at 10.
Clifto
Roar Pro
Thanks for writing the article I wanted to write (but was too lazy to). The biggest one for me was White. He played probably the worst game in his professional career. Just steaming-turn awful. If that didn't require him being hooked at half time, I don't know what would. Is Phipps shagging McKenzie's missus???!
Peter
Guest
Spot on
ethan
Guest
I agree the subs were a bit late coming on. In such heavy conditions fresh legs would have been a real bonus. Here are my speculations. Hansen - No game time, perhaps concern over his improved but still unreliable line out throwing? Alexander - Kepu was having a quality game. Skelton - Carter was playing too well to take off. Simmons is needed for the line out. Kuridrani - Sometimes has suspect hands, which is not ideal in the wet, while all the other backs were accustomed to the conditions. Foley - Toomua's level head and defense suits the conditions, while Beale has the X-Factor to break open a late win. I don't necessarily agree with the decisions, but I'm just trying to see it from McK's point of view. I thought all the subs could have come on earlier, even Higgers and Phipps. When all the players are in form and depth looks better than it has in a long time - why not? One other big thing - Momentum. Australia had all the momentum in the 2nd half, and that is something you don't want to mess with.
world in union
Guest
If you're dopey enough to want to sub Izzy then you may as well support another team. He's an out & out match winner, no matter if he makes mistakes occasionally
DrewSampson
Guest
To be fair we looked the better team for the last 50 minutes, so it would have been a huge risk to sub some players and potentially mess with our momentum. I love how when izzy has a 'bad game' he's still the best attacking back on the field. Dont get me wrong...not his best but look at his stats. Most run metres, most defenders beaten etc. just shows the level we expect from him every game i guess
Wallaby supporter
Guest
I love McKenzie and would have named any children born in 2011 Ewen, but I have to agree that the lateness of the forward and inside backs substitutions was baffling, considering the difficult conditions. Each of the four matches against the ABs under McK have shown improvement though, so bring on Auckland.
Realist
Guest
Toomua struggling more than Beale? Give me a break. Beale was poor and his apologists are out in force. There is no way in hell Linkwould have taken Toomua out of the game given he was the only controlling things and smashing the All Blacks midfield. He made very few errors compared to Beale. What about Folau being subbed? He had a seriously off night as well.
WallaTah
Guest
Hi 44bottles, From my perspective I think he is liked in Australia in general. He is a talented player who will be a staple in the Wallabies team going forward. IMO on saturday he showed great defence, but not much in attack. He had some poor passes (but it was an atrocious night & he was not alone). He took some of the weight from Beale, but his tactical kicking can be an area he can improve on.
44bottles
Roar Guru
Why is Toomua disliked so much. I thought he was the form 10 in the Aussie conference, esepcially considering he was behind a weaker pack and with a weaker team than Foley.
Yeah, sorry, I cannot agree with you. You are taking the complexity of game day, negating the issues based on little else than your opinion whilst each of those issues had a direct bearing on the result, and then choose the "what if they came on earlier" as the basis of your criticism towards McKenzie
Graeme
Guest
Great article and I agree with it point by point. As a positive, I'd say when was the last time we played the AB's and were stronger in the last 20 whereas they weakened significantly. For most of the past 10 years, the only way you could even hope to best the kiwi's was to be ten points ahead come the last twenty minutes. They just simply relied on the fact that they could shred any team in the world in the last 20. The Crusaders of old as well. But both seem to have passed. On the Kiwi sites they are bemoaning their reserves who were brought on, whereas we are worried that ours didn't come on soon enough,