“Say what you want about the Wallabies, but they are definitely becoming more and more consistent each game. They are consistently making basic skills errors and poor tactical decisions.”
That’s how a friend and former teammate of mine summed up Sunday’s game in Cape Town.
As much as I hate giving a fullback credit for anything, besides expert handling of a hairbrush while those up front are doing the hard work, this time he hit the nail on the head.
There has been an increasingly indignant voice in the Australian rugby community and blogosphere of late, vilifying those who have been critical of the 2014 Wallaby campaign to date.
But all the statistics (one loss from eleven games was thrown around a great deal) and the number three ranking mean little in context. It is not the Wallabies’ results, but the way they are arriving at them which matters, bearing in mind the one loss from eleven could have easily been four.
Sunday was a perfect demonstration of why fans and media alike find the current era so painful to watch.
The Wallabies again proved that they have the talent to beat any team in the world, against the Springboks who are looking more dangerous than they have in years. But not only did the Wallabies stumble at the final hurdle, but holding the lead at the 70 minute mark, having done so for an hour, they let their opponent score more points in the final 10 minutes than had been scored by both teams in the entire match to that point (20).
It was the kind of loss that leaves fans with a sick feeling in their stomach, the kind the men in gold almost allowed against Argentina two weeks prior and should have learnt from. Yet nothing changed. Basic skills errors and poor tactical decisions, that pretty much sums it up.
The Wallabies’ attacking kicking game was ill-conceived from the start, particularly on a dry pitch. But what is unforgivable is that having created no opportunities with this tactic in the first stanza, coach Ewen McKenzie persisted into the second half.
Having worn the team down by having them kick away the ball, requiring they defend constantly, McKenzie was entirely outmanoeuvred by his counterpart in the use of the bench. Granted Heyneke Meyer was spoilt for choice, still the impact of the Boks bench was obvious.
In fact, I tip my hat to Mr Meyer across the board, he out-coached McKenzie in every aspect.
The seriousness of Australia’s tactical errors aside, neither the poor kicking strategy nor the misuse use of the bench are nearly as concerning in the bigger picture as the way key players, particularly in the backline, appear to be progressing as the season goes on.
Nick Phipps and Bernard Foley registered their poorest performance since being promoted to the starting side, both rife with errors. Matt Toomua too was notably sub-par and Kurtley Beale was nothing if not ineffective for his 20ish minutes on the field. It appears that with his demotion to the bench Beale’s Super Rugby form has gone out the window, perhaps along with our chances of keeping him in the code.
The only shining light in jerseys 9-15 was Tevita Kuridrani, who is starting to look like a world beater. His effort was absolutely immense and had the result gone the other way I would peg him a certainty for man of the match.
Perhaps the most disappointing thing is that this time around, the forward pack more or less did the job. They performed well in the set-piece and despite allowing a try from a rolling mall, generally they held their own around the park. Scott Fardy and Saia Fainga’a were the standouts, the latter making a strong case to hold his spot until one the first-choice hookers is available.
Nonetheless, the Bledisloe Cup, the Mandela Challenge Plate, and the Rugby Championship Trophy have fallen by the wayside for another year. Like many fans, I’m deeply concerned about the World Cup next year.
If McKenzie is to have any chance of winning back the Australian crowds before then, he will need wins over Argentina and the All Blacks in the coming weeks and a clean-sweep of the Northern Hemisphere.
What’s more he will need to achieve these results in a way that convinces us that he can produce consistency, along with the kind of clinical, ruthless victories that top sides can deliver.
RobC
Roar Guru
cheers RT 100% http://www.theroar.com.au/2014/05/04/aru-needs-focus-grassroots-rugby/
Rugby Tragic
Guest
My final word on this at the moment mate ... Your perspective is great and I have enjoyed reading about them .. if others thought like you, imo the base support level of those who really love the game for what it is, would be secure. As you now know, I am an old fart. I grew up in another time, when the likes of the late Fred Allen, Wilson Whinerary, ruled the roost in rugby in NZ, its a long time since I strapped on a pair of boots or pulled on a jersey but my love for the game if anything has strengthen. Rule were different in those days and training methods infinitely inferior... however that was the way it was. A point I'd like to make is the game in fact should not be about the Wallabies ... it should be about the sport, the mateships and lasting relationships due to learning the ability to participate as a team. I believe the Wallabies are the pinnacle but the journey is more important, you cannot drive a car where there are no roads, the infrastructure needs to be in place first, prepare the foundations as the road (excuse the pun) to success. Too much emphasis is on the Wallabies when rugby is mentioned or discussed There I believe needs to be perspective, an understanding of the roots, the things that made the game enjoyable before the days of professionalism when representatives had to work to support their dependants but they played the game for the game, as playing did not provide that. Today we have issues with young athletes with big money in their pockets and too much time on their hands and perhaps that is what is wrong... I do not profess to have the answers but I am passionate about the game, always have been and always will be.... just my opinions RobC... thanks for reading and responding.
RobC
Roar Guru
Thanks for sharing this RT. Great story and perspective. I agree to the need to go back to basics. To an extent I believe this is happening at the top tier: - WBs refocused on scrums since EOYT last year. - More importantly, all SR (except Tahs) teams have aligned and chimed in this year. - WBs along with SR teams are now concentrating on the BD battle. The WBs decision making in the middle is pretty good. - I lament many missing forwards skills such as lateral mobility, offloads, leg drive and interplay. But I believe its part of the journey – and depth But thats not really addressing the issue. As you mentioned, the game should be about 'the playing' first before 'the winning' at grassroots. Secondly ‘the playing’ starts with the forwards, not the backs. And ‘the playing’ is where I believe Rugby is better than league - coming back to my point about competing. I agree it would be foolish to compete with other codes $ for $. I am a firm believer that you only invest larger amounts when you have the right business or economic model. The competition should in the three areas, I mentioned earlier. Articulation, education/engagement and vision. Once the model is right (back to the future) then the $ will come. The lack of appropriate articulation to casual followers is the killing the sport in Australia: - Its the same problem cricket lovers have when explaining the sport to Asians, Americans and others. - Its beauty and entertainment is not obvious, and needs tools and technology to support. - Likewise, the complexities of the sport need to be packaged so the simple message needs to be reinforced. - This is needed less in NZ and middle class SA because its the #1 winter sport. But this is crucial in Oz and non-middle class SA re education/engagement, Rugby needs to be experienced, not just explained: - And it needs to be experienced as early as possible. - I believe Rugby needs to be spread similar to how facebook and American Football was – via universities as cornerstones. But not as sole source of development. - Secondly, just like NFL all the plays, plays/moves needs to be shared widely. It also needs to be put into documentaries, movies and computer games. This should be in cooperation with SANZAR / IRB. - Finally there should be concentration on creating a greater supply of coaches starting w/grassroots esp from ex players. Vision: Strangely this is easy - as soon as it is decided that ‘Winning Wallabies’ is not the end goal.
Rugby Tragic
Guest
Sorry mate should have proof read first... What I meant was that ARU should NOT compete .. (in other words refrain) with other codes on a dollar basis. At this point we will only lose. Look at the NZ junior model - they have non contact for the young ones so they grow up enjoying the the game as kids. Mums don't have to worry about contact injuries for their young ones and they all get to run around, generally having fun. When I started playing, I was in primary school, at intermediate level guessing it must of been around 1950/1951. I had a little success in representing Auckland regional schools in a competition known as Roller Mills. Until that stage I never even owned a pair of boots! I did not progress in terms of my playing ability beyond grade rugby but I participated because all my mates participated. Just like you would run out with a AFL ball, we would play outside with a rugby ball until called in for dinner or bedtime! Being an average player did not dull my support of the game and when I attended my first test live in 1956 (AB v Boks at Eden Park), I was hooked ... am still am. The point I am trying to make is perhaps a little unrealistic, but what the Wallabies need to do is go 'back to the future' There will be tough years but with the stronger foundation the code will get stronger. In the earlier years NZ would not play Australia as AB's 'in a test', but rather a NZ 15 such was the perceived low standard in Aussie. Did it do rugby harm in in Australia?... I'd suggest no, it was really its formative years. I am not suggesting we go back that far but we need to go back and re-start to develop the game IMHO
RobC
Roar Guru
I only discovered Rugby in my young adulthood almost 30 years ago, having grown up with Aussie rules (grade school) and league (high school). Im of the opinion Rugby is a clearly better game than league, to play and watch. I share your opinion they should not refrain from competing. In fact its my opinion that Rugby should be compete actively, but wisely with the other codes. Focus should be on differentiator for the onfield experience of players, spectators and coaches. Too much focus on the international aspect. re $. If Pulver & Co successfully negotiates a $15M SR uplift for 2016+ - from $25M to $40M, then sustainability looks to be assured in the mid-term, and payments may be sustained. Doesn't automatically address grassroots issues though, which deals both with depth and the market. Administrators need an 'outside-in' view of the game. which is a reason why the Reds is doing well. The problem is the lack of effective articulation by leadership, market education / engagement, and sustainable vision of Rugby's future.
Rugby Tragic
Guest
Mate, in fact, I have some good thoughts about Wallaby Rugby... sure it is going through turbulent times at the moment but in spite of all the gloom, But the Administrators need to be proactive and make some serious decisions. I do not think that rugby will die in this country irrespective of opposing codes. The first thing rugby administrators need to do imo is NOT to refrain from compete with NRL/ARL ...Rugby cannot compete with them at this point so pitting up against them is going to be costly in a battle that cannot be won in the shorter to medium term. The ridiculously high player payments should cease to balance the budget, if players want to chase the almighty dollar, let them go... rugby needs to be rebuild from grassroots with people who enjoy the game for what it is... already it is a future pathway for them if the dollar is the sole motivation. It survived when it was a amateur code when the pressures of professional sports were raping the player stocks then. Biggest threat I think in the short/medium term is the cashed up French, Japanese and European Clubs but again we need to accept that we cannot compete with them in terms of $$$$'s. I say, suffer the pain now and 're-lay' the foundations for a stronger game in the future. The alternative is to continue to languish and destroy what we already have. I reckon we will come out a lot stronger for it ......... but will the fans accept this? Everyone appears to be worried about 'winning' and nothing else... expectations at this moment are too high . I am not suggesting to roll over and expire but ARU need to be realistic, fans need to be realistic... it will be a longish and hardish road but to me rugby is worth it!
RobC
Roar Guru
I reckon you're spot on, at least on two counts: - The lack of depth is a bigger issue - It is a sorry state of affairs
Rugby Tragic
Guest
You might be right (re injuries), I conducted no research prior to comment, just the feeling I had in feeling sorry for myself in missing so many players. But having said that, the depth at the moment is such that with injuries in the AB camp, another steps seamlessly into the breach. This Saturday will be interesting, it appears that Retallick might be a casualty ad if so it will give Thrush a crack at Matfield (that will not be easy), and Crocketts facial cuts might prevent him from playing. Crockett, I understand from an article on NZ Rugby Heaven website is likely to be replaced by Ben Franks who can play both LH and TH with Moody on the bench. Irrespective mate, the powers to be have to deal with it ... in a perverse way it increases depth.
RobC
Roar Guru
I haven't done the tally yet. Thats the third article Im going to work on. Still doing research on the first, re coaches :) From recollection the Boks/ABs injuries are significantly less severe. re TPN. Chieka brought in the guys from Sparta, Cali to help them condition their behaviour This is the one thing that I'm hoping that WBs have adopted lock/stock/barrel. Im probably an outlier. Im ok with EM. I guess you can call it lower (realistic?) expectations.
Rugby Tragic
Guest
I don't know mate the injury toll is just as bad in NZ but of course they have a bit more depth. I was at a function and had a discussion with Tatafu prior to the 1st Bledisloe in Sydney, talking about his approach to the game and his injury rehab. TPN has been a bit of a Kamikazi as everyone knows in the past and he is not a machine. He was expected to be back for Perth but that didn't work out, then at Robina when he did his ankle, I was really upset for him. In NZ a week after the Sydney test we were having a few drinks and with a couple of mates and AJ (Whetton) down at the Viaduct, up came the subject of injuries (we were talking more about AB at that moment. It was suggested since professionalism, injuries have increases as the players became more highly strung pushing their bodies to the limit. Not sure I fully understood (probably a bit impaired by alcohol at the time!). What was also discussed was that there is so much analyse on the game now the danger is that the game is being played too much on computer than on the field. I believe strongly though that if Aussie is going to challenge next year, Link needs to understand he needs to settle on both his squad and a consistent game plan that in essence does not change week by week until familiarity makes it second nature. He is of course under a lot of pressure to perform but created the rod for his own back... maybe time to reconsider a few of those objectives. Reality has hit him, the honeymoon is well and truly over he has got to start getting it right and soon.
RobC
Roar Guru
Good pointers RT. Thanks for raising this. I've pointed out since B1 the problem has been onfield leadership. And with that, the injuries which precipitated it. imo, the injuries comes from unrealistic expectations placed upon WB players. They are expected to be as competitive as the Golden years. But they cannot. As result they try too hard, and get 'broken'. This is epitomised by the following, in order of 'epitomy': - McCabe: 3 neck fractures / breaks - QC in RWC 2011 ruins his ACL doing an unnecessary step - Pocock knees (during SR) - TPN / Cliffy: concussions - Horwill snaps both hammies in a ruck engagement (during SR) If WBs and their administration dont change their mentality, approach and expectations: there will be MORE major injuries WBs will improve over time, but they need time. Having said that improvements need to happen visibly, because everyone else is also transforming and improving - not just internationals, but also SR and 3rd tier. So far no complaints for me, except for the injury toll. I have no delusions about their progress and their prospects
Rugby Tragic
Guest
RobC, the average skill set will improve considerably imo when a few of the long term injured return to the fold. If it doesn't the pain will last a lot longer. SA, AB, the Poms, Ireland have moved on, even Argentina have defined the way they planning to go forward. This might be Henry's influence over the past few year... not sure of that but in 2014 their game matrix has changed.. About time Link set about a squad to work with or forget RWC 2015. I fear they might not emerge from their pool if Link does not start consolidating his strategies. We are 11 months out from the RWC..
Harry Jones
Expert
Cheers Alex. Meyer has become flexible as coach; he took the job as one of the least flexible in world rugby... So maybe Link will grow less stubborn?
Alex Wood
Roar Guru
Thanks Harry. My major beef with Link here is that it was because of the kicking that the Wallabies had to make 170 plus tackles and that in turn made them tired, then the tiredness in turn allowed Meyer (the more flexible coach) to take advantage. The kicking strategy, execution aside, was fine. It just needed to be dropped once it stopped working. As always, appreciate your comments.
RobC
Roar Guru
Chan, I believe the SB plan was to 'obliterate' WBs in the first half. - Then continue the work in the second half. - The soft targets were (1) Saia (2/3/4) the three locks. - The SB plan didn't work, and ended up losing the first half by five. Fortunate (though not through luck - mostly through Duane) by not more - I'd be very surprised if the plan (maneuver) was to use the SB bench as the differentiator in the final quarter. I believe the WB plan was to match the SB pack then slice through the midfield when it opened up. - The plan worked for a great majority of the game, was in the cusp of winning - But the bench, did not match the SBs. And the backs turned over. Yup, WBs have a long way to be a consistent contender for #1, at least 2019 +in my reckoning: - But they are on the right path to correct the ten years+ of mis-direction. - Im not sure I see anyone gloating a 28-10 loss. - However, the comments re front row etc is to put it politely - unbalanced exaggeration. You can ask the SB what they think about the WB scrum and rucking
RobC
Roar Guru
100% re the various things they could have done. But they dont have the skill set, yet.. This is the list that I share weekly (along with the 'Folau daily regime'): (a) WBs needs to play a 23 man game (b) Power and lateral mobility of the back five (c) Rucking skills of the backs. (d) Kick/chase re-alignment, and as an attack option. (e) pick/go, hammer / leg drive (f) Institutionalised / drilled plays (akin NFL, All Blacks) that permeates WBs, SR and NRC. I was happy to see that finallly they are trying (d). But its around 20% of what it should be. Item (c) is improving. The rest of the points are not addressed, is probably further down the priority list. (a) went ok in Auckland and has plummeted since. re def wall, I thought the SBs had creaks in it, especially in the centres, and on occasion in the rucks. In general I thought WBs had visibly faster recycle when on attack. But WB 12 & 10 didnt capitalise In the final 15+' there was no possession by the WBs, due to 'soft' turnovers. This imo is also the other big part of what killed them. I think WBs were happy to defend as long as they can continue the 'Hindi drama' on attack.
Harry Jones
Expert
Excellent summary RT
Play the Game
Guest
To win games you need to attack and take the opportunities that arise. The Wallabies defended most of the game,therefore it was only a matter of time before the Boks scored. The odds were with the Boks to win,even though it took forever (last 10 mins). The Boks dominated the game. Mc Kenzie still has not selected a team to do the job or devised a game plan or plans to seriously compete with the top teams.There is no inventiveness.The players are also lacking in skill and fitness, so when it comes down to it both coaching and players standard are lacking.Looking at the outcome you could not expect any more as a supporter,but a good coach even with limited resources can devise ways to win and use your strength to the maximum. Mc Kenzie lacks this ability and is not an international coach..
Baz
Guest
Excellent piece. McKenzie should be sacked NOW to make way for Cheika, in my humble opinion.
Chan Wee
Guest
@ RobC : Bench is part of the manneuver , (like bombing is part of the plan to take out terror ) so that means Meyer did it to McKenzie :) As a neutral, IMO , OZ have not been that great this season despite the wins. they beat SA due toa silly mistake (and a ref). they beat Pumas who shud have never been that close. NZ never play thier first match well, against any opposition. I think it has been a case of looking at a half full glass and gloating over the few plusses against neglecting the overwhelming negatives. The front row is not good enuf, the 2nd row is not firing, the 3rd row is unbalanced, halves are average, centers are off color, no tests-class wings and a fullback who is still learning. add to that a bench that seems not to add any power when desired. it looks like most of the firs choice ae not in form, and injuriesmeans there is little depth. so the OZ depend on a lot of luck than performance to win.