After the Australian Under 20s side 46-13 defeat at the hands of the South African juniors it is clear that something has to change in Australian rugby.
The South African’s comprehensively dominated the scrum and their brute power was far superior in every facet of the match. The scrum dominance shows that the ARU’s coaching of scrummaging is way off-target.
Under age scrummaging laws are pretty similar per country when you get above under 16s so what is the ARU doing in the coaching directives and courses to develop potential props?
It all starts from the roots, rather than working on it at a more specialised elite level, but they are still being taught how to scrummage at national senior level. Props are maturing earlier now compared to previously and pathways need to evolve to reflect this.
The ARU are keen to throw money at certain players and you know who they are, particularly in the backs, however with a certain percentage of income spent on salaries, as a result of the bargaining agreement with the Rugby Union Players Association (another topic for another day), the money needs to be more evenly spread across positions rather than splashing out for big names in the backs.
Just from looking through the transfers lists on various sites these are the Australian forwards that have signed for overseas teams in recent years or about to head over, with few likely to ever return:
Ben Mowen
Sekope Kepu
Sitaleki Timani
Hugh Pyle
George Smith (yes he went in 2011 but did stints in Japan that allowed for loan deals in Australia if approved)
Kane Douglas
Leon Power
Dan Palmer
Anthony Hegarty
Peter Kimlin
Salesi Ma’afu
Lachlan McCaffery
Damien Fitzpatrick
John Ulugia
Jordan Smiler
Sam Wykes
Scott Higginbotham
James Horwill
Wycliff Palu
Dayna Edwards
Ben Hand
Paul Alo Emile
I am sure there are probably a few more that I have missed or haven’t announced their departure yet.
I know a lot of these players aren’t current Wallabies and are not on ARU contracts but that is half the problem. These are the players that the ARU should be developing into future Wallabies. The ARU has to do something to ensure that the depth of Australian forwards is enhanced, not compromised.
People complain about certain selections in the pack but often there is no one better to select. When Joe Schmidt took over as Ireland coach he stated that one of his primary aims was to develop a wider squad of players that were able to slot in when an injury occurs with little impact on the side. This strategy replicates the methods he used quite successfully during his time at Leinster and appears to be working in Ireland as well.
When Cian Healy injured his hamstring playing for Leinster Jack McGrath was able to fill in and although he is a slightly different player, his performances have been stellar to say the least. The same can be said for the numerous players who have covered for Séan O’Brien in the back row. This is the sort of depth that Wallaby coach Michael Cheika desperately needs to succeed in the long term.
It is vital that the ARU ensures that young players are developed into Test-quality players rather than allowing them to drift off overseas at the age of 24 or 25 because they aren’t getting a look in for a Gold jumper. Players are accused of giving up a potential shot at a Test shirt but you can’t blame them when they aren’t valued and have a very shot space of time to maximise their rugby-related earnings.
Out of the departing Australians, the majority won’t be on big money contracts but it is more than what they were or are getting in Australia. I know Kane Douglas isn’t on big money at Leinster and they only have a limited amount of overseas contracts to fill.
A scrum school was mooted many years ago but it should be a finishing school not a place to be taught from scratch. Greg Feek the Ireland scrum coach has a large number of players to work with not because he has developed multiple Test-quality props from scratch but because the provincial development systems are ensuring that when they get to him, he only has to complete their development.
Over to you, Mr Pulver.
Colin N
Guest
Lahiff has barely played for Bath since his return but, when he has, he's played on the tighthead side - it seems like they are trying to convert him. That was an option coaches in Australia seemed to ignore.
Colin N
Guest
Northampton weren't too sad to see Ma'afu go. I think their supporters described his progress as - following the coaching from Dorian West - going from a terrible scrummager to a mediocre scrummager. They are getting an upgrade by bringing in Kieran Brookes from Newcastle. Also, my abiding memory of Ma'afu at Test level will be when he was destroyed by Tim Payne of all people in 2010.
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
On scrummaging. It was reported they had no coach and did not focus on this in 2014.
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
If that's the case Bakkies then blame the Waratahs. That's $200k Australian. If Douglas played every test he would earn $140k in March payments alone plus any bonuses or incentives. That means that where the shortfall lied was from the Waratahs part of the offer. If you split your super rugby salary cap across the entire team it's $125k per player. Generally most outside the 23 will be on less so your starters can earn more though. Either Douglas offer was $265k based on performance at a minimum and probably more, or the mail you have heard is wrong. If Douglas got the average super rugby salary and played 8 tests he would earn at least that supposed amount.
Bakkies
Guest
Yeah certain props have been on the wane since the changes. Domingo hasn't been the same player. Props like Heinke van der Merwe's stocks have risen. He has to be in the Bok squad
Bakkies
Guest
Jez his base salary would have been sweet fa. Leinster fans were shocked that he is on around €140k http://www.the42.ie/kane-douglas-leinster-rugby-1477993-May2014/ They didn't have to offer him much to entice him over.
RobC
Roar Guru
Thanks Bakkies, good one. Not just players. Issue is coach quality and quantity
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
Obviously you can't blame the guy for taking a guaranteed contract. Generally you or I would and I don't blame him at all. But the ARU is putting the financial opportunity there. Many have blamed them for guaranteeing money to players that didn't work out, now some are seemingly blaming them for not guaranteeing money to players who have not proved worthy of it. In this case the ARU acted prudently. They made an offer which it would be possible for Kane to earn what he would in Europe. But they also made sure he only would, if he proved to be one of the 23.
jeznez
Roar Guru
It's an opinion Mike, do I need to go compile a video of these guys pre and post the rule changes? Sorry but I have neither the time nor the inclination. I'll just stand by the fact that the ability to shift your feet post-bind and pre-set has changed scrummaging significantly. Guys who used to be dominant because they could get in great positions in closer engagements and/or who were able to employ techniques that took advantage of the dynamic hit have lost the advantages they had. I have pulled the boots on to give it the new sequence a try myself, I am confident in my opinion but doubt I will change yours.
jeznez
Roar Guru
Thanks. Fair play to the ARU on KD then. And fair play to KD since he has been injured and is therefore much better off financially than if he had signed here. Hopefully he comes back down the track.
jeznez
Roar Guru
Don't mean to run from the point. Just attacking the straw man you raised. They are both poor scrummagers, Alexander more frustrating because he briefly displayed some really good form.
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
But right now the only people to pay more are the ones we are saying aren't doing their job properly.
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
http://m.dailytelegraph.com.au/sport/rugby/waratahs-powerless-to-keep-kane-douglas-as-arus-new-system-doesnt-allow-them-to-pay-any-extra/story-fni2fylx-1226914841141 "It’s understood that the ARU’s offer to Douglas is similar to Leinster’s when Test match fees are considered, but those payments would not be forthcoming if he misses internationals due to injury or non-selection."
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
It's not all relative. If your best five-eight is the 2nd best in the world and your best tight head prop is the 8th best in the world they are not equal. And that's where we are at. Some of our backs have been some of the best in the world. Some have been nominated for IRB player of the year. Yet since Horwill's peak, only Stephen Moore has been the top 3 in the world out of our tight forwards. For years the wallabies got by through excellent backs salvaging wins the team probably never deserved. That was because of the excellent backs. Quade Cooper basically lead the Reds to a Super Rugby title on the back of a mediocre but hard working pack. I understand your point, that without good forwards to lay the platform, the backs cannot achieve their peak. But those good forwards generally have not been there, and the only option has been to try and rely on backline magic.
Bakkies
Guest
When the changes came in Stephen Moore admitted that the test side had barely practiced under them. That's an indictment on the mindset itself
Mike
Guest
"You mean the transformation from no coach and minimal training, to a dedicated coach and a training focus?" I think what you meant to say was "no dedicated scrum coach" - that doesn't mean there was no coach. And "minimal training"? Why do you make these baseless assertions - they do not assist your credibility in the slightest.
Mike
Guest
Yes, I was going to respond, but Bakkies says it all very well.
Mike
Guest
"Guys like Mas, Ryan and Robinson are not as effective as they were while guys like Kepu and Mtawarira have become more effective." Sounds like a theory in search of some evidence, except the evidence just isn't there: * Nicolas Mas is getting selected more consistently for France after the law changes than before. Saint-Andre's silly brain seizure during the 2014 tour of Australia doesn't change that (sacking his front row didn't solve anything, just made things worse for the French team). * Ryan - do you mean Paddy Ryan? You are drawing a very long bow if you base conclusions about the effect of law changes on a young gent who plays a single test when he was 23 and then was selected again a couple of years later. * Robinson - there is no empirical evidence that Robinson performed differently after the law changes than before. Certain *assumptions* were made by people in Australian rugby, just as they made other assumptions about the effect of the new laws, which mostly turned out to be wrong. * Kepu clearly was not better after the new laws than before. If that was the case he would have scrummaged well in TRC 2013, and he manifestly did not. * Sure Beast is scrummaging better, but that is simply because he has been improving, therefore he is better in 2015 than in 2012. Its not because the new laws suit him particularly. This is a classic example of selecting facts to fit into a theory.
Mike
Guest
"That does not make Baxter or Alexander good scrummagers" It doesn't make them bad scrummagers either. In context, it just sounds like you are running from the point, which was about the incorrect conclusions drawn in many cases by Australian commentators.
Mike
Guest
"He is still a good prop but the new engagement sequence has robbed him of his greatest weapon" I have heard that suggested before Jeznez, I've just never seen any objective reason to think it is the case. He wasn't some all-dominating super LH before the laws change, just a competent and experienced test prop, which he remains now (and I might add for completeness, so are Slipper and Kepu, and possibly others). I agree he scored some signal wins from time to time, which is all any loosehead can do anyway. There are times when the LHP can score over the opposing THP in an individual fashion, particularly if the THP makes a mistake like packing too high, or with his weight too far forward. But mostly scrums aren't about individual achievement. I can only think of a handful of occasions (5 maybe?) in tests where Robinson clearly and individually got under the opposing THP. That's very few in a test career spanning 8+ years.