The Roar
The Roar

Advertisement

Kiwis take the Sheen off the Kangaroos' past dominance

Is there a case for a full-time Australia coach? (AAP Image/Paul Miller)
Expert
16th November, 2014
90
1643 Reads

Losing to the same team twice in four matches in a tournament – including the final – should be enough to put the coach of Australia at grave risk of losing his job.

Regardless of the fact he coached them to World Cup victory last year and also putting aside the fact there were a lot of star players unavailable this time around.

It doesn’t look like Tim Sheens is at much risk of getting the boot in the wake of the Aussies losing the Four Nations final to New Zealand, but the subject should at least be up for serious discussion.

It is a very small field in major international rugby league and it has been a tradition for a long time now that Australia wins the vast majority of its matches.

Granted, the Kiwis have bobbed up to beat Australia in some big games over the years, but to go down twice to them in the one tournament shouldn’t be easily excused under any circumstances.

Particularly when in another game of the series Australia was barely able to beat England, which it has had comfortably covered for what seems like an eternity.

Yes, the Aussies were missing a lot of big names, but you’ve got to look beyond that to the way the team played in the final.

Australia really only opened up in the last 10 minutes, when they were desperate due to the combination of the game having gotten away from them and the clock having become their enemy.

Advertisement

Incredibly, they nearly rescued it during that time, instead of losing 22-18, which makes you ask what might have happened had they been a bit less conservative earlier on.

New Zealand were the team which played the more enterprising football and they were ultimately rewarded for that. Ben Hunt helped orchestrate the late comeback by the Aussies. Why wasn’t he sent on much earlier from the bench, with Australia needing a spark?

The size and power of the Kiwi forward pack was a concern for Australia in the final, as it was in their earlier clash. The Aussies were unable to call on several star props for the tournament and gambled on going in without many genuine front-rowers.

Some people will say they simply couldn’t match the Kiwis up front and had to be more conservative in a bid to try to find a way to win. But why didn’t they include a genuine, tough prop like Josh McGuire, who ended up playing for Samoa?

Selections, the style of play and the use of the bench are obviously all areas in which the coach has the biggest say.

Looking for something to compare to Australia’s situation in this tournament, I go back to the 1995 World Cup in England, when the Aussies didn’t call on Super League-aligned players but England and New Zealand were at full strength.

Australia lost the opening match of the tournament to England and would have lost their semi-final to New Zealand but for Matthew Ridge missing a conversion attempt right at the end of normal time, sending the game into extra time.

Advertisement

After surviving that scare, the Aussies beat the Poms in the final.

Australia went into that series with a bunch of tough props including Mark Carroll, Dean Pay and Paul Harragon, although Harragon’s tournament ended early through injury.

On Saturday night, Australia could have done with a number of those players who were unavailable, but they missed Johnathan Thurston at least as much as anyone and more than most.

Daly Cherry-Evans and Cooper Cronk in the halves doesn’t appear to be a smooth combination. Shaun Johnson obviously carved it up for the Kiwis, and he and Kieran Foran have a great understanding in the halves.

I’ve looked at that no-try right at the end of the game by Australia numerous times on replay and the pass does go forward, but it wasn’t by much.

I’ve seen play allowed to continue and plenty of tries awarded when it’s that close, but this time they pulled it up.

That’s just the way it goes. Australia waited too long to make a bid to become more threatening and based on what we saw when Hunt did come on, an earlier sighting of him would have helped their cause.

Advertisement

Sheens may well go on to have major success again with Australia, but that possibility doesn’t mean someone else shouldn’t be considered for the job now.

close