SPIRO: Here come the Waratahs... If they can win in South Africa!

Was it bravado or an insight into Stephen Larkham’s considered thinking that he insisted after their hard-fought 13-10 loss to the Waratahs, that the Brumbies would live and die by the sword?

I hope it was bravado in the face of a loss that could easily have been a victory if the Brumbies had left their rolling maul sword in its sheath and opted to kick the four kickable penalties they traded in for five-metre mauls.

You can understand a coach justifying a tactic that failed to take some heat off his skipper, Stephen Moore, who is the prime candidate to captain the Wallabies during the 2015 Rugby World Cup tournament.

But the decision to refuse the penalties and take the option of the rolling maul was dumb, in the context of the game and the talk before the game.

Before the game there was a concession from SANZAR’s Lyndon Bray that the Brumbies’ rolling mauls (especially when the backs joined in) and the rolling mauls of some of the other Super Rugby sides were illegally formed. Bray also suggested in a memo sent to me as an email and published on The Roar that referees would be instructed to rectify their wrong interpretations about the legality of players coming into the maul ahead of the player carrying the ball.

So the Brumbies knew that they couldn’t get away, in a blatant manner, with the formation and systems they had used so successfully, with three mauling tries, against the Highlanders two weeks ago.

They also knew that the Waratahs have a good maul defence anyway. And that during the week there would have been a lot of thought and effort going into the Waratahs’ preparation to detonate what is becoming, unfortunately, the Brumbies’ primary try-scoring method.

As it happened, all four rolling mauls were neutered by the Waratahs, by one means or another. One of the mauls involved a Waratahs lineout steal. The last maul sequence for the Brumbies saw Rob Horne given a yellow card for coming in from an offside position (in front of the proper defensive line) and cutting down a runner.

This was a decision I can’t understand. Even if we accept that Horne did come in from the side, why the yellow card? Obviously, the infringement was in the red zone. But there was no likelihood of the tackled player scoring a try. If there was surely a penalty try would have been ruled.

But somehow an infringement from a defending side is invariably considered to be more objectionable than infringements from the side rolling the maul forward.

But it is the side rolling the maul forward actually committing an illegality – the forwards in the maul being offside in front of the ball carrier – that really should receive this sort of harsh, strict liability treatment.

This point becomes more relevant when it is considered that referee Glen Jackson allowed several Brumbies backs in particular to join the mauls ahead of the ball carrier, a no-no according to Bray.

Moreover, in the other matches in the rounds in Australia and New Zealand particularly, the refereeing of the mauls proceeded as if the Bray Instructions had never been given.

So we need a further explanation from SANZAR why the referees are refusing to heed their instructions.

Getting back to Stephen Larkham, he needs to give instructions to Moore to follow Spiro’s Law: Take the penalty kick, and when in doubt consider the matter, but still take the penalty kick.

I am presuming that Moore will captain the Wallabies even though his field play is not up to the standard of previous years when he had some claims to be the best hooker in world rugby. He still is the best lineout thrower in Australian rugby. And he is not Michael Hooper or David Pocock.

I see that Peter FitzSimons is pressing for Pocock to be the Wallaby captain. Come in close now Fitzy, and confess that this is because, at least in part, you admire his political beliefs and his courage in standing up for them.

This same opinion has been expressed, too, by rugby writers.

But, essentially, there are problems with this approach because there are many other rugby people who disagree with some of his actions backing up his beliefs. The court charges Pocock faced, for instance, put him in conflict with the Brumbies Code of Conduct protocols.

There is another problem, too. This relates to the fact that Pocock’s main rival for the Wallabies number 7 jersey is the current (acting?) captain, Michael Hooper.

Given the fact that selecting one of them, Hooper or Pocock, as the captain means that Cheika is somewhat required to make that player his first choice, something that could change depending on the opposition.

The Brumbies vs Waratahs match, anyway, was seen as a showdown between these two fine number 7s. Pocock played his usual terrific tackling and over-the-ball game, while Hooper played his usual terrific tackling and running game.

Who plays number 7 for the Wallabies depends a lot on what Michael Cheika wants from his number 7. Does he want a Pocock-type or a Hooper-type. Both have their pluses and minuses.

There is also a possibility that he might play both of them, in the old-fashioned Australian method of left and right flanker, the system that allowed Simon Poidevin to be one of Australia’s greatest flankers.

In this case, Cheika would have to get some jumping out of Pocock or Hooper (both relatively short players), in the Richie McCaw manner or/and play a lineout jumper at number 8, someone like Scott Higginbotham. An advantage with Higginbotham is that he is fast, strong, can jump well in the lineouts and he scores tries, something that few Australian forwards, even loose forwards, seem to do.

Pocock and Hooper as flankers would put a strain on the Wallabies’ lineout, especially as Will Skelton is staking an irresistible claim every match for a Wallabies starting jersey.

Against the Brumbies, as against the Hurricanes, Skelton was a colossal figure in the middle of the field, forcing the defence to assign a couple of tacklers on him. Skelton’s size, mobility, vigorous running and soft hands to set up outside runners like Adam Ashley-Cooper and Israel Folau give the packs he plays for – the Waratahs now and presumably the Wallabies for the Rugby World Cup tournament – a huge advantage.

This brings us back to Stephen Moore. Making him the Wallaby hooker and captain resolves the Hooper/Pocock dilemma in a way that allows one or both of them to play in a Wallabies run-on side.

The points table now looks like this: Hurricanes (plus a match) 43, Bulls 34, Brumbies 32, Chiefs 38, Highlanders (plus a match) 33, Waratahs (plus a match) 31, Stormers 30, Lions 27, Crusaders 26, Rebels (plus a match) 24.

The interesting team in this mix of possible final six teams are the Rebels, who had a really splendid and deserved victory over the Chiefs. They are essentially a team of no-names with several young and gifted players who are going to become big names.

They are being well coached by Tony McGahan, who is coming through, along with Cheika and Larkham, as a potential Wallabies head coach.

The match in hand the Rebels have puts them, in theory at least, ahead of the Lions and Crusaders, and within a point or two of the Stormers. The Rebels play the Blues at Melbourne next week, a match they should win. Then they go to South Africa to play the Stormers and Sharks. If they beat the Stormers they can make their final-six hopes quite realistic.

As it happens, the three leading Australian sides are all still to play the South African part of their schedules.

The Brumbies play the Stormers at Cape Town in two weeks’ time, and the Lions at Johannesburg. This looks like a tough schedule, despite the fact that the Stormers lost over the weekend.

The Waratahs make their South African trip at the end of May with a match against the Lions at Johannesburg and then the Cheetahs at Bloemfontein.

All matches in South Africa, for various reasons, are hard. The Crusaders are the only overseas team that has (or had) over a 50 per cent winning record in South Africa.

But the Waratahs are more likely than the other Australian sides to do well in South Africa this season, because they have won four of their five away matches in 2015.

To be competitive in the Super Rugby tournament, and to make the finals especially, a team has to win a majority of their home matches and a number of away matches. The hard part of this equation is the away win part.

The weekend’s round underlined how hard it is at this time of the season to win crucial matches away from home.

The round started with the Highlanders turning a brilliant performance in smashing the Sharks (or should we now call them the Sardines?) at Dunedin. Admittedly, the Highlanders had their three All Blacks stars back in their line-up (Ben and Aaron Smiths and Malakai Fekitoa). But the difference between this outstanding display of running, effective rugby and the hesitant, mistake-ridden display two weeks ago against the Brumbies at Canberra was startling.

The Hurricanes ran away with their match against the Crusaders, who played their best game of the season according to coach Todd Blackadder, for another victory for a home side.

The Blues defeated a stubborn Force side at Eden Park. The Rebels defeated the Chiefs at Melbourne. The Cheetahs upset the Stormers at Bloemfontein. The Bulls beat the Lions at Loftus Versfeld, Pretoria.

The odd result from all these home victories was the Waratahs’ victory over the Brumbies at Canberra.

Moreover, it is not as though the Waratahs have any history of winning at Canberra. Remember the coaching gimmicks Ewen McKenzie used to go through to try and get his Waratahs up for victory there?

Cheika relied on good coaching, not gimmicks, to get the Waratahs up for their victory. Of course, the Waratahs were helped by the Brumbies ignoring Sprio’s Law. But as the great Fred Allen used to say, “A win is a win, son.”

For the Waratahs, it could be the win that ignites their campaign to achieve a rare back-to-back tournament wins in Super Rugby 2014 and 2015.