The biggest joy of the weekend of rugby was watching Argentina play so freely, and so simply against South Africa in Salta.
It was about as stark a contrast as it gets to what the Wallabies put Australian supporters through the night before in Auckland.
It was impossible to watch the Pumas – even at that time of Sunday morning – without a smile on your face.
This was a team playing with and for their teammates, themselves, and their country with passion, and with the confidence to chance their arm.
That’s not to say that the Wallabies don’t have all that; I’m sure they do. I know they do. They’re all professionals, and they have pride in their job.
But there were times in Auckland where the Wallabies really looked like they weren’t enjoying that particular day at the office. It looked like the rugby equivalent of having to clean all the four-month-old leftovers out the office fridge.
In Salta, Los Pumas played with simplicity. Beautiful simplicity. If they didn’t have the ball, they smashed into every tackle and every ruck until they did. And when they had it, they kept it alive as if it was the last play of the match.
It was wonderful, and I genuinely felt more disappointment for the Pumas when they lost to the Springboks than I did for the Wallabies in Auckland.
Whereas this moment of potential glory for Argentina was very real and played out for 70 minutes, the Wallabies heading to Eden Park has had an air of forced confidence covering gritted teeth for a lot longer than I’ve been writing about rugby.
So what now for the Wallabies? And why do I feel like I’ve asked this question every six months for the last six years?
I maintain the conclusion I reached late Saturday night, when I first started punching annoyed words through the keyboard; there’s no point talking about who to bring into the Wallabies side. The 51-20 loss is one of those major setbacks after which the only way forward is to start afresh.
Don’t regroup. Don’t tinker or tweak. No rebuilding.
Just clean the slate.
Ewen McKenzie’s biggest job now is to work out if the players he has available to him are the right players for the job. In order to really start afresh, he can’t just bring a few new guys into the side and fit them in; he needs to work out who should stay in the side and build up from there.
For starters, is he getting the right balance of set piece technicians and general play workhorses from the tight five?
The hooker curse is obviously a major issue, and let’s hope Nathan Charles’ injury is not as bad as first thought. If it is, then you’d presume it’s James Hanson to come in with Saia Fainga’a on the bench, but then who? I suggested Heath Tessmann yesterday, and I genuinely can’t think of who would be after him.
Is the Rob Simmons and Sam Carter second row combination still right? Is the team getting the right balance of scrum solidity, lineout presence, and general play work rate? Is a slightly out-of-form but desperate to return James Horwill a chance of being recalled? Do you start Will Skelton and just take the 25 or 30 minutes that you might get out of him?
Or do you really re-think it, and look at Luke Jones, or maybe even Cadeyrn Neville?
In the backrow, is the Scott Fardy, Michael Hooper and Wycliff Palu combination still providing the right platform? I have my doubts. Both Palu and Fardy were disappointing, and Scott Higginbotham certainly had an impact when he came on. However, how do you fit Higginbotham in?
I wonder about Hooper, too. Yes, he was everywhere at Eden Park, but was he effective or just everywhere?
The worry about playing Higginbotham and Hooper in the same backrow is that they both play too loosely. So to fit Higginbotham in – not undeserved on Saturday night’s showing – you might need to bring in a down-and-dirty player like Matt Hodgson too. Would a Hodgson-Hooper-Higginbotham combination bring the right mix of breakdown presence and ball carrying? Could Palu have a similar impact off the bench as did Higginbotham?
Surely Nick Phipps can’t do any more to state his case. He’s been very good in both Bledisloe games thus far, and deserves to start.
And we need to forget about an x-factor based attack and just go back to doing things simply. Doing things simply worked pretty well against France in June, don’t forget. I’d go back to the Bernard Foley-Matt Toomua midfield.
Wider than that, I’m not sure there’s a whole lot of point in major changes, simply because injuries have ruled so many guys out. It’s pretty obvious that Henry Speight will come in once eligible, but until then there will be a bit of a makeshift feel about it. Unless Tevita Kuridrani coming back forces Adam Ashley-Cooper wider. Or maybe someone like a Tom English has a storming couple of weeks in the NRC.
And maybe that’s the point to finish on: how many of the Auckland squad will play for their NRC clubs? I’ll bet it’s not as many as should be sent back to find some form.
richard
Guest
And how were France hard done by?Or are you going to conjure up a video snow job like the Irish did after the 2011 WC. And I'm well aware we have Barnes v SA.As an aside,there are rumours that the IRB is arranging for Barnes to be the referee if the AB's meet France in the WC next year (we would play them in a QF if all goes according to seedings).Now,why would that be? Barnes is a cheat,end of,and if Bryce Lawrence can be hounded out of the game for supposed bias / incompetence,why is Barnes still reffing at the highest level?
onside
Guest
"The biggest joy of the weekend of rugby was watching Argentina play so freely, and so simply against South Africa in Salta." But they lost !
RobC
Roar Guru
Thanks for the article. I can understand the call for a clean slate. But Im unsure its necessary I believe the WBs have developed something good over the past 9 months: - The power was in forwards combinations, scrums, double rucking, double tackling etc. - But they haven't yet been able to move the point of attack (and defence) as rapidly in test level, in the same way Tahs did in SR level - ABs exposed this and took advantage. ABs took advantage by keeping possession, and controlling the initiative: - This is v different to traditional game of tackling and kicking for turnovers. - This is a salute to WBs new found dangerous ability to take the ball and exploit opportunities. Something I hope WBs continue. - I believe they just need to strengthen their kick/chase in attack and defence, continue to play tight. Yes, thats Folau, the halves, and true defence captain. Looking forward to the scrum battle in Perth.
Daz
Guest
The only gamble I see there is Folau at 12. Horne plays wing already, Kuridrani already plays 13. Beale is misplayed at 12 and would be brilliant on the wing in broken play. AAC can't or won't pass but can catch and has played FB before. Folau, the apprentice, may have started at FB but his natural position is in the centres. He would attract so much attention there and he's good enough and unselfish enough to pass. Kuridrani would have a field day running off him.
ajh
Guest
Hi KP, You are probably right but to me Beale looks a million dollars coming off the bench as an impact player. I do not see him or JOC as ever being anything else than outstanding bench players with great impact against tired defenses. Until Quade is back from injury and can show good form via the NRC, I would rather rely on the combinations that served us well against France. What happened in the 2nd Bledisoe was what I was expecting in the 1st and I really did think Ewen got it wrong by not backing the combinations that he had developed against France. I think it's good to have high expectations of the WBs but we must learn to never let our foot off the accelerator and maintain the intensity. What was really disappointing was we just appeared to cave in alebit against oppoistion that will crush any team in that mood.
Suzy Poison
Guest
I concur Highlander. Folau is a genuine line breaker, makes the most metres etc, but has been out of position a lot in the last two games. Especially in Sydney, the All Blacks kicked behind him all night. Also I was shocked to watch him jog back slowly, not even trying to keep up with the defence, when the AB's were pummeling the line.
Highlander
Guest
I note victor aNd your namesake are still getting selected so age clearly not always an issue. The call for Hodgson is a simple one I think, do nothing and SA will get front foot quick ball all day, and the green back three will tear aus a new one. From those available Hodgson has that ability to be disruptive and just outright annoying, and slow down opposition ball, did it all year for the force. This would only be a near term solution, but hey - if you have a fire, put it out I reckon
AndyS
Guest
I've always been a bit sceptical about his size for Test level, but his one point of consistency is that he invariably throws everything he has into the breakdown and then some. He might not be a long term solution, but a reminder of what backrow play is supposed to be about could well be useful just at the moment.
Bakkies
Guest
Isn't Hodgson 33? There is no upside there. Might as well pick Gill.
Bakkies
Guest
Being an athlete is pointless if you aren't good at Rugby basics. Some NRL second rows and locks are converted centres!
Westie
Guest
And I thought it was just me thinking it.
eagleJack
Guest
sheek, Skelton moved to Australia at 10 years of age. The kid would have had to be pretty special to be on the NZRU radar.
eagleJack
Guest
Is this a response to me? Did I ever say the ref had a perfect game in Sydney? I just found it amusing that after the Crusaders loss, all we heard about was how tough the call on McCaw was. And then last week the ref was lambasted from pillar to post by Kiwis. He certainly made errors. I certainly didn't say otherwise. Then, Ben.S mentions an error by the referee. And he was spot on. Again it was one of many errors. But still an error. And no, as I have pointed out, it didn't change the course of the match. But I'll remember for next time that I must lay out every single error made in a match, before I agree with an error highlighted by a fellow poster. Just to keep nuffies like Rebel and Stillmatic1 happy
Harry Jones
Expert
I know I was stunned by this quote Explains a lot NZ locks are light years ahead of OZ's 9-10 too Only a few WBs might make an AB squad of 30
Mike
Guest
Bernie, when we finally learn that "All we have to do is get the selections right." is usually the wrong answer, we might actually start to get somewhere.
sheek
Roar Guru
I would agree with those not so hot on Skelton. I believe he's more hype than substance. The Kiwis don't seem to miss him at all.....
sheek
Roar Guru
But from memory, the ABs had blindside flankers of the ilk of Alan Whetton & Mike Brewer, so losing Willie O was probably Okay.
Garth
Guest
That's an insult to mouthwash and (possibly) Colorado mule wee wee. The original Czech brew is pretty good though.
Arto
Guest
@ Brett McKay: I understand the sentiment, but asking McKenzie to start a fresh is misguided, IMO - he obviously has a plan and on Saturday it either wasn't followed or poorly excuted. You argue that he can't simply add a few new guys and try to fit them in, but actually that's how change usually occurs - it's only in the very rare cases that you can massively overhaul the playing resources at one's disposal (eg: with a change of coach) and this is also dependent upon the depth of resources being great enough to allow for such a big change. And this is something you actually question whether it can be done - a couple of times you either directly or indirectly allude to there not being so many options in terms of replacements. Yes, you do offer up some alternatives, but with the caveat that they are framed as questions (thus sowing doubt as to their credibility to being improvements on those who were chosen!). For my mind, McKenzie has to make some changes, but throwing the baby out with the bathwater is not the way to go about it. Plus, it could be that the Wallabies match up better against the Springboks next than they did against the All Black on the weekend - it is after all only 10 days since we had a 12-all draw in Sydney (admittedly with conditions having a major say in that result)...
Perthstayer
Roar Rookie
BM, great article but Wallabies need to consider where to get that 16th player - mongrel. Hooper is a great 1st/2nd receiver and adds to attacks but this comes at a price; there is a guy out there who lives in the dungeon on the park, makes the oppo commit more players to a ruck/maul; slows their ball down allowing his team to realign, and tackles like few others. Link won't drop his Captain, and I am not suggesting he should, but is it really madness to have Hodgson and Hooper on the park? You can be damn sure there'll be two guys who give everything they have - and he brings some mongrel.