Golden Wallaby performance again eclipsed by the darkness

Wallaby Tests are like the weather: you wait long enough, and every type comes along.

Saturday’s was not a great Bledisloe Test (there were too many mistakes by both teams, and not enough sweeping tries), but certainly right out of the top drawer, relentless both in attack and defence.

The All Blacks play this way consistently, but the Wallabies only occasionally. What is it in the Australian rugby psyche that drives this kind of intermittent high performance? It doesn’t seem to be an individual thing: every player seems to lift.

If we were to employ a sports psychologist (and we should), then their main task should be to get this team to play like this all the time. Then we’d be a real force in world rugby.

Their other task should be to understand why we regularly fail in the final minutes of games. No one can deny the famously fast-finishing All Blacks their 81st-minute win, but this isn’t the first time that we’ve been run down from behind by teams that increase their intensity at the end, while we make beginners’ mistakes.

Some commentators have said that this All Black team didn’t play at their best. They certainly played a different style of defence, although this surely was planned. They eschewed the usual rush (with its resulting big hits) and relied instead on a rugby league-style drift, with minimal commitment at the ruck.

In one sense it wasn’t a winning tactic, since it allowed the Wallabies fast ball and the opportunity to continuously attack, but neither was it completely a loss, because in the main the black line held. It was certainly good practice for sticky European grounds, where an organised passive defence can hold teams at bay with a minimal expenditure of energy, which is crucial at the end of a long year.

Did this change in tactics nearly lose them the game? People with an investment in the All Blacks always being the architects of their own demise, will undoubtedly say it did. They certainly missed more tackles than they usually do. On the other hand the Wallabies might just have played very well in attack, which they certainly did.

So, what really changed in the Wallaby attack? A combination of things.

Christian Lealiifano was excellent, in place of the demonstrably tired Matt Toomua, and what a difference it made. 12 is such an important attacking position right now. We went through a period in international rugby where 12s had become big lunks to truck the ball up. Now we’re at a crossroads, with Malakai Fekitoa perhaps the new model of the emerging inside center: elusive and fast (and still far from small). Lealiifano did a very good impression with his big inside step.

Toomua will be back, and better for a rest. And we have the Fekitoa-esque Samu Kerevi to perhaps vie for a Wallaby place next year. Kerevi is 104kg, and as elusive as anyone.

Israel Folau went looking for work, and was much the better player for it. We may not have seen so many of the blockbusting runs but he was everywhere, and always a menace, drawing two or three defenders in, and making space for the equally impressive Tevita Kuridrani, who was most people’s man of the match.

Most importantly, Nick Phipps continuously put the ball in front of the man, and those men ran onto it at pace. This was high-octane rugby, and for Wallabies fans a joy to watch.

What about the All Blacks? Conrad Smith was superb, particularly in defence. Richie McCaw was close to his best, and his long chase of Smith’s raking kick proved that he hasn’t really lost his pace. Aaron Smith and Kieran Read had their usual high-quality games. Read’s draw and pass to put Corey Jane in the corner was a lesson for any wide-ranging 8.

But their best – by far – was their indomitable spirit.

We can only congratulate them on the win, and a two-and-a-half to half Bledisloe series result.