SPIRO: Wallabies come right, but what to do with Kurtley Beale?

By Spiro Zavos / Expert

When Rob Horne cut inside the Springboks covering defence and headed for the line to score the Wallabies’ last try I almost jumped out of my chair.

Then I started to rage that he had dived early rather than run round to create an easy conversion that would give the Test to the Wallabies 24-23.

Bernard Foley was left with one of those awkward kicks at goal, about halfway from the sideline and the posts.

Beauden Barrett had missed several similar shots during the All Blacks’ very impressive four-try victory over a strong Pumas side. And Foley himself had missed a similar conversion at the beginning of the Test after Israel Folau had scored a sensational opening try for the Wallabies.

That missed conversion was within the first minutes of the Test. Now Foley had the extra pressure of having to actually kick a successful conversion to ensure a Wallabies victory.

As it happened, Foley kicked an absolute beauty. Some of his other successful kicks had moved around a bit in flight. This one was arrow-straight. Yes!

Talking to other people about this, they told me they had the same sort of emotional response as I had.

What all this showed is that the Foley is the real deal. It takes nerves of steel and high skills to do what he did against the Springboks, both in running the game plan and then kicking four penalties and the one conversion.

I would say that the matter of the Wallabies starting number 10 leading into the 2015 Rugby World Cup is settled, unless he gets injured.

There was an immediate improvement in the alignment and the attack of the Wallabies from Foley’s direct method and his flat alignment. He is also a tough little player. He is prepared to take the tackle where necessary. And he makes his tackles in his channel, rather like Dan Carter.

Foley’s real value from his flat alignment is truly realised when Kurtley Beale is playing outside him at inside centre. The Wallabies backs started to carve up the Springboks defence when Beale came on well towards the end of the game. Beale’s inside passing confused the ponderous Springboks defensive line. In turn, Tevita Kuridrani’s power and speed came into play leading to Horne’s try.

The inference from these remarks is that even if Quade Cooper makes a successful return to rugby and if (and apparently there is some confusion about this) he commits to Australian rugby for the long term, Foley is the present and long-term number 10, at least until the Rugby World Cup 2015 tournament.

Cooper will have to be the back-up number 10 or develop the sort of all-purpose back play expertise that Beale has, playing in the centres and fullback (and remaining a possibility on the wing, according to Bob Dwyer).

And where does Beale fit in? There are calls, especially after his brilliant cameo, for him to start against the Pumas next week. I would support this. But I would also make the point that Matt Toomua (who I have been critical of during the past two Tests against the All Blacks) played splendidly against the Springboks. His best game as a Wallaby, I would think.

Probably Ewen McKenzie would like to see more of the Nick Phipps, Foley, Toomua, Kuridrani quartet before making a final decision to changing it.

But if this is the case, Beale needs to come on earlier in Tests from the reserve bench.

The point here is that he doesn’t have to come on as an inside centre. He is a terrific running fullback. Israel Folau could be moved on to the wing, if necessary, and Beale moved to fullback if the Foley-Toomua five-eighths combination is working especially well.

Some of Folau’s play at fullback, especially his kicking from around his own 22, was woeful. On the wing he wouldn’t have to make those decisions. He could play like Julian Savea, who runs when he gets the ball.

One way or the other, the Wallabies are a more dangerous side on attack with Beale on the field.

Matt Toomua’s impressive start to the Test fell away a bit when the Wallabies forwards started to get overwhelmed by the big Springboks pack. However, his defensive work remains a strong part of his game.

And there is now a strong case for making changes in the forwards as a result of what happened. Two starting forwards, in particular, were obviously out of their depth: Scott Fardy and Rob Simmons.

Fardy was exposed as having no running game, a big fault for a number six. Even more importantly, he had no idea of his role at scrum time. Most scrums he hardly shoved and when he did it he pushed straight ahead, instead of angling in support of his prop.

He needs to look at the way Richie McCaw scrums. This is one of those many little duties that McCaw does better than anyone else which makes him one of the greatest players to play the game. Often he pushes so hard that he becomes the fourth prop. He did this on that crucial last scrum before halftime in the Test against the Pumas.

His effort, along with the rest of the pack, resulted in the All Blacks forcing a tight head. Beauden Barrett made a break and Liam Messam scored a tremendous try that broke any chance of the Pumas defeating the All Blacks.

The Australian flanker who scrummed like this was Owen Finegan. Fardy and the Wallabies coaching staff need to ask Finegan the scrumming secrets of his trade.

As for Rob Simmons, where does one start? He almost single-handedly kept the Springboks in the Test. He allowed Victor Matfield to dominate the lineouts and to force penalties against the Springboks.

Simmons had no idea of how to cope with Matfield. He took him out in the air. He failed to win his own lineout ball at times and generally played like an enthusiastic schoolboy trying to contest against grown men.

Scott Higginbotham in for Fardy, James Horwill in for Simmons and Wycliff Palu to play 60 minutes, at the most, are the changes I’d make to the pack to confront the Pumas.

The Wallabies brains trust needs to understand that the Pumas are a greatly improved side, in the forwards and backs and, most importantly, in their attitude to balancing their kicking game with a lot of clever running.

Even though the All Blacks forced a crucial tight head, they still had to scrum brilliantly to hold the Pumas pack. A new front row was needed about 20 minutes out when the Pumas finally cracked the starting line-up.

The All Blacks had trained especially for a torrid scrumming contest with a lot of eight-on-eight scrum repetitions. The Wallabies have to do the same thing. Their scrum is nowhere near as good as the All Blacks’. But they can’t hope to get away with scrumming tricks.

What Joe Louis used to say about the square boxing ring applies to the new scrum rules that have taken away the irregularities and opportunities for cheating of the hit, ‘you can run but you can’t hide’.

Under the new regulations, you have to scrum. And the Pumas are likely to do what they tried to do against the All Blacks, which is to hold the ball in the scrum for as long as possible to force their opponents to scrum and give away a penalty, perhaps.

The best part of the Wallabies’ win against the Springboks is that for the first time in Ewen McKenzie’s coaching reign, the Wallabies have defeated a side ranked higher than they are.

Mind you, the Springboks are their own worst enemies. How their supporters tolerate the obsession with kicking away possession is beyond me. It is boring. And it allows a team like the Wallabies, beaten comprehensively in the set pieces, to defeat them. If the Springboks has used even half of the ball they kicked away there is no way the Wallabies could have come out as winners.

It is not as if the Springboks can’t run the ball. Their try was a beauty. And in Brian Habana they have the best finisher to have played for the Springboks. But Habana had to try and make something out of nothing. You have to be God to do this.

But nine out of 10 times the Springboks kick the ball away to their opponents. Admittedly, the Springboks kicked six penalties by being at the right end of the field, but the incessant kicking allowed the Wallabies to score two tries, and this with Bernard Foley’s four penalties trumped the Springboks on the scoreboard.

Nothing can convince me that giving the ball to your opponents the ball is a smart way of playing rugby. The tactic allows an opponent to dictate the outcome of the match. If they make mistakes under the high ball, as the Wallabies did early on, the Springboks get in front. But if mistakes are not made, then the Springboks lose.

You can win penalties without the ball. But you need to have the ball under your control to score tries. And all the evidence of Test rugby is that the side that scores more tries than their opponents will usually win the match.

My point is that kicking away possession is an extremely fraught way of trying to win Tests. The Springboks were incredibly lucky to defeat the Pumas with their kicking game. The All Blacks, with their all-court game, varying their kicking and keeping the ball in hand for long periods and putting on back line moves, defeated the Pumas comfortably in the end.

However, that is the problem for the Springboks and their supporters. I’d sack the present coaching staff, even though they have been successful in the last two years, and bring in some coaches who understand the modern game of rugby.

I wrote here a couple of weeks ago that I admired the way the All Blacks always came on to the field, no matter how cold and wet is was, in their jerseys. I said that this was a sign that they were ready to play. I suggested other sides should do this.

And what do you know? The Wallabies came out at Perth in their jerseys. And they started brilliantly to score inside the first two minutes of play.

At halftime, too, instead of staying out on the field, grand-standing by Ewen McKenzie I reckoned, they went into the dressing rooms and you could see all the coaching staff giving advice to different groups of players.

All in all, after the debacle at Eden Park against the All Blacks, the Wallabies can take some heart, on and off the field, with their spirited and smart victory against the Springboks, who had been sitting on a run of eight straight victories and expecting a ninth, without having the courage to play real rugby to get it.

I reckon, though, it will be just as hard against the Pumas next week.

The Crowd Says:

2014-09-10T08:43:25+00:00

Ruckin Oaf

Guest


He also kicked one re-start short of the 10 another knock on and a couple of turnovers I thought....

2014-09-10T03:34:23+00:00

Loosey

Guest


I think you would have to change up the entire SARU to modernise the Springbok style of play, not just sack the coaching staff.

2014-09-09T09:07:41+00:00

Mike

Guest


"And Izzy needs Beale on the field. Nobody else can move fast enough to give him space." That just ignores what has been happening at the Tahs. Izzy is not dependent on Beale to give space. I don't have a problem with Beale, he is a great player. But I don't think he should be at 10 for the Wallabies. And despite the ABs good performance in Bled 2, I don't think that precludes making judgments - Beale and Foley both played in Bled 1, Bled 2 and the Springboks match, and I think Foley is clearly your better proposition at 10.

2014-09-09T08:45:32+00:00

44bottles

Roar Guru


Personally, I think that QC is still McKenzie's first choice and Foley is the filler. Whether this is the right decision is up for debate by countless Roarers, but that is what I think he is doing. Cooper does have a good combination with Toomua as well as Genia, so that could also be a drawcard. I do accept that Foley is pushing Cooper and it is good to have some depth and competition like that. Similar to how Lealifano and Toomua were at the end of last year. (not this year due to Lealifano leaving his kicking boots back in Wales)

2014-09-09T06:35:50+00:00

AlsBoyce

Roar Guru


I know McKenzie has has been a strong QC supporter to-date. I meant that he now appears to accept that Foley is currently the man for 10, and not Beale or somebody else. The weight of performance will decide the issue, and Foley has the advantage of being there and doing it. QC may make a claim when back playing, and then those comparisons can really begin. IMO Foley will become more difficult to shift as the RC and EOYT unfold, given good Wallaby performances. There's the bottom line, then. Changing winning combinations is less likely, notwithstanding the Beale bungle. The reverse is also true.

2014-09-09T05:58:37+00:00

louis2533

Roar Rookie


Nice article. I completely agree with you about Beale, chuck him in at fullback and move Izzy to one wing. Beale is a triple threat with defenders in that case when he's fullback, and can take the ball to the line in a way that doesn't hinder the Australian attack. Always thought Beale was a better fullback than an inside back

2014-09-09T05:56:41+00:00

44bottles

Roar Guru


I understand your support for Foley but why do you say McKenzie seems to be a convert? He hasn't had to choose between Cooper and Foley since last year where he was picking Cooper. Quade's still injured and IIRC won't be back to EOYT.

2014-09-09T03:58:55+00:00

AlsBoyce

Roar Guru


Spiro, you refer to the All Blacks winning the scrum that lead to the Barrett break and AB try just on half time as being against the feed, which, while technically true, resulted from an Argie forward kicking the ball forward after the scrum had been decisively won by them and they were holding it in to apply the screws to the ABs, no doubt trying to get a penalty. The match callers noted at the time that the Argie loosies were still on the scrum pushing, because they thought they'd won it. Foley is the closest thing we have to Dan Carter bar the long clearing kicking game. He'll only get better and better with the confidence from incumbency. Many calls for the return of QC for RWC 2015 in the comments to this article indicate that there are plenty still to be converted. McKenzie seems to be a convert, but he's difficult to trust after the Bledisloe marches.

2014-09-09T03:56:11+00:00

DJINNI

Guest


Another Aussie dwelling Kiwi or one eyed reds supporter who cant see a quality 5/8 on the rise ! Foley just needs a bit more time with the team in a starting role to establish his game as the Tactical general for the wallabies. Quade has had far to many chances already and he has proven the when put under the pressure of a top 4 team he capitulates that pressure and makes the situation worse. For some reason you must have been looking the other way when Quade was Kicking out on the full when in attack or throwing ridiculous intersepts and hospital flick passes so he didnt have to take contact, missing tackles and any number of other failures to show composure. Next you'll be saying Horwill is a more pysical player than Skelkton. If Given the 40 odd test starts Quade has had Foley would surley have the wallabies backline humming. Please take off your tinted glasses :-)

2014-09-09T03:47:05+00:00

AlsBoyce

Roar Guru


Toomua did well, but the pass was a bit low, and Hendricks charged out of the line to pretty well hand it to him. The important thing was that the chance was there and it was not butchered. AAC would have caught it as well, but he and Izzy both have great hands.

2014-09-09T03:38:46+00:00

AlsBoyce

Roar Guru


Yogi, the pressure McKenzie put him under by dropping him and then bringing him back to save the day was obvious all over his face. But he stood up, in the main to deliver some sublime touches and ice-cold goal-kicking. He put a restart out, dropped a high ball, and was stripped in contact were 3 errors I remember. Not bad at all given the pressure. I think he did very well. MikeN's comments re Foley and the 2 Wallaby tries were spot on. 2 touches in the match-winning try says it all.

2014-09-09T03:18:02+00:00

Zinzan NT

Guest


Horrible statistic - maybe because they know he is very solid in defence they choose not to run at him.

2014-09-09T03:17:37+00:00

44bottles

Roar Guru


Why do you keep pushing this anti-Toomua point. Seriously. Toomua could get a hatrick against the All Blacks and set up 7 more tries and you would still criticise him.

2014-09-09T03:03:35+00:00

44bottles

Roar Guru


I'm sorry but why is that relevant?

2014-09-09T02:49:40+00:00

44bottles

Roar Guru


Not surprising his 2013 TRC performance was not impressive. He was on the bench until Argentina so had always been coming on after the game was lost and expected to do well. For clarification, he has played against 3 top tier teams. SA 2x, NZ, ENG. If you notice, all the times he has played, the rest of the team hasn't played well either.

2014-09-09T02:32:05+00:00

Mark

Guest


Did they really? Or were they handed the game by the worst officiating since the last time Wayne Barnes took the field? The Wannabies were extremely lucky... The Jappies - they were screwed...big time

2014-09-09T01:40:48+00:00

44bottles

Roar Guru


If he can't catch a pop pass at his waist I would be suprised. It wasn't like he threw a long pass at his ankles, or a bullet pass from a couple of metres. People will look for any reason to bash Toomua. Was it also Toomua's fault that AAC dropped the grubber over the line? Perhaps the grubber was too low.

2014-09-09T01:38:12+00:00

44bottles

Roar Guru


Wait, what games has he won that Cooper hasn't?

2014-09-09T01:13:29+00:00

44bottles

Roar Guru


Love these double standards with Beale as opposed to Cooper RobG. Keep it up.

2014-09-09T01:09:33+00:00

44bottles

Roar Guru


And like the chiefs, who had a two time champion team yet only got 3 players into the team. (Messam, Retallick, Cruden)

More Comments on The Roar

Read more at The Roar