SPIRO: Wallabies strong but why isn't Cheika blooding new players?

Let us put the Wallabies’ 34-9 victory against the Pumas at the Estadio Mavlinas Argentinas (yes, those Malvinas) into some perspective.

It was overall an impressive performance that gives the Wallabies some momentum going into their Sydney Test against the All Blacks.

The Wallabies win created their first back-to-back Test victories in nine Tests. As a result, their dismal recent record of two wins and six losses was given a small but significant lift.

When the World Rugby rankings come out, it should show that the Wallabies have moved up a place in the rankings from fifth to fourth place, pushing England down to fifth ranking.

Last year’s Test against the Pumas at the same intimidating stadium resulted in the Wallabies being defeated by the Pumas 24-17.

That victory last year was the first by the Pumas against the Wallabies in nine previous Tests. Because of this 2014 result, it was widely expected that Sunday’s Test would be an extremely difficult for the Wallabies to win, let alone win with four bonus point tries.

Wayne Smith in The Australian on Saturday, for instance, had an interesting article headlined: Why Argentina choose the Malvinas for Wallabies.

His explanation was that the ground is the equivalent of Eden Park (the All Blacks fortress), Ellis Park (Springboks fortress) or Suncorp Stadium (Wallabies fortress) for the Pumas.

The Pumas, apparently, have lost only once at the ground and that was to the Springboks in 2013 by the small margin of 17-22. The crowd is boisterous, wildly partisan even to shining lasers on the eyes of opposition goal-kickers, an experience that upset Bernard Foley last year playing for the beaten Wallabies.

In The Rugby Championship, too, up to Sunday’s Test, five of the six meeting between the Wallabies and the Pumas had been settled by losing bonus points margins, 7 points or less.

When these factors are taken into account, it needs to be said that the Wallabies’ victory was a strong one by any standards.

It matched the performance of the All Blacks in putting away the Pumas two weeks ago at Christchurch.

Most pleasing was the way, for the second time in two consecutive Tests, the Wallabies were able to come back from lackluster first halves to score points, two tries on both occasions, in the last 10 minutes of play.

Dean Mumm burst down the sideline to score, a run that resembled his last charging, bullocking burst for the Waratahs a couple of years ago, to score the first of these last-quarter tries.

Minutes later, after a Bernard Foley penalty that resembled a shot duck in flight (rather like Stephen Larkham’s famous drop goal in the Rugby World Cup 1999 semi-final to sink the Springboks), but which somehow went over the cross bar, Tevita Kuridrani produced another Super K Special bursting his way through to score near the posts.

There was time for one more try, the bonus point score, that saw the ball go through multiple hands before Adam Ashley-Cooper, playing his century of Tests, finished off with a searing run down the sideline.

The last pass in both the Kuridrani and Ashley-Cooper tries was given by Kurtley Beale.

It always seemed to be a strange decision by coach Michael Cheika to play Quade Cooper and Kurtley Beale, both very similar players, on the reserve bench.

As it happened, Cooper came on early in the first half as a replacement at inside centre for Matt Toomua who charged into a tackle, leading with his head, and was concussed.

Toomua has two weeks to recover before the Wallabies play the All Blacks at Sydney. But there has to be some concern for this whole-hearted, fearless player who is being injured on a frequent basis.

There needs to be some plan by Cheika, too, to groom another strong player to play in the crucial inside centre position. This presumes that Toomua, even if he comes back, is likely to be injured again.

That player is not Matt Giteau. He is far too small for the position. Giteau’s role for the Wallabies must be as the super sub capable of playing every position in the back line.

Readers of The Roar will not be surprised when I state that another alternative starting inside centre is not Quade Cooper. He came on early for Toomua and, as with his play at number 10 against the Springboks at Suncorp Stadium, did not impress.

His out-of-hand kicking was dreadful. And he continued to play too deep when the Wallabies were trying to run the ball.

Rod Kafer was forced to point out, once again, that his passing is made with shoulders facing the touch-line rather than square on the defensive line. And although he was busy in defence, it was the hyper-activity of a gnat trying to bring down an elephant on most occasions.

Presumably, Cheika brought him on early to give him a last chance to show him, the Wallabies supporters and his fan club among the Australian rugby writers, just what riches in enterprising play he could bring to the Wallabies game.

As it happened, it was Beale, an experienced and successful inside centre for the Waratahs, who provided the riches in a brilliant cameo that resulted in the two crucial tries.

You would like to think that Beale is being seriously considered for a position in the starting Wallabies backline, either at inside centre or fullback, where he played with distinction until he was injured during the 2011 Rugby World Cup tournament.

I would like to see some time in the next two Tests against the All Blacks, or the friendly match against the USA (the last three matches for the Wallabies before the 2015 Rugby World Cup tournament) with a back line featuring Kuridrani and Ashley-Cooper as the centres.

I would also like to see Folau switched to the wing and given the licence, like David Campese in his heyday, of being able to roam all over the field to come into play whenever he wanted to.

This would allow Beale to play at fullback, which is probably his best position, all aspects of his game being considered.

But whether Cheika will be inclined to make such drastic changes as these remain to be seen. He does not seem to be an imaginative or particularly bold selector.

Certainly, you couldn’t see him doing what the All Blacks did for their Test against the Springboks at Ellis Park and selecting Lima Sopoaga as their number 10, with no Tests under his belt, and Codie Taylor, with the experience of one Test, as the reserve hooker.

As it happened both newcomers played so splendidly that they established themselves as the obvious replacements in their respective positions, behind Dan Carter and Dane Coles.

Talking about selection and which player should be in which position for the Wallabies, I received on Sunday morning, not long after the Test against the Pumas finished, an email from a former Wallaby who is very thoughtful and passionate about the Wallabies and the quality of the rugby they play.

“The difference when Tatafu Polota-Nau is hooking – even with the inadequate Holmes and Slipper – is clear. When he and Sio are there, we suddenly transform to being up with the best. We murdered the Argentinian pack in those last few scrums. Even with P-N’s lineout throwing and concussion issues, he has to be given more game time. If he were run-on hooker, the training time spent with his lineout practice would be far greater (we all know what happens with the reserves – they get less practice time and mentality is all focussed on the run-ons).

“Foley is inadequate as a kicker and doesn’t stand out enough as a five-eighth to justify selection in the run-ons. I don’t know the answer, but when I think back to how green Colin Slade was when the All Blacks had to use him, I feel Debreczeni is worth a try.

“The Wallabies generally look entirely unconvincing but fixing the scrum might affect their whole demeanour …”

This is the sort of assertive set of statements I used to be confronted with doing my university history exams, and was told to ‘discuss’.

I would disagree with the “unconvincing” description given to the Wallabies performance. They scored 26 points and conceded only three in the second half of the Test against the Pumas, who were playing at their fortress and were well in the game at half-time.

But I must admit I am ambivalent about the play of Greg Holmes against the Pumas. I’ve been pushing for him for some time. I noticed, though, that in the first few scrums he went to ground, in the Al Baxter/Ben Alexander manner.

But, apparently, it was James Slipper who was penalised, at least according to Rod Kafer.

The front row of Sio, Polota-Nau, Kepu was very solid – dominant, in fact – towards the end of the Test. But was this because there was a changed Pumas front row?

I would be inclined to start with a Sio, Moore, Holmes front row against the All Blacks and make adjustments to the personnel as required during the Test.

During the pre-Test discussion, Greg Martin, admittedly a fellow Queenslander, suggested that Rob Simmons “has to be in the starting side because he calls the lineouts.”

I say tosh and nonsense to this.

Lood de Jager, the young, inexperienced Springboks second-rower, called the lineouts for his side at Ellis Park. If a relative youngster in the Springboks can do this, playing his second game for the season, and get his calls mainly right, why not one of the other experienced Wallabies forwards?

Simmons is a starter because of his play, period. If his play is not up to the high standard required of a modern, athletic, aggressive second row forward, then he needs to be replaced.

I don’t understand why Cheika hasn’t looked at introducing Rory Arnold, the Brumbies tower, the tallest forward in Australian rugby to Test rugby.

Cheika left Will Skelton on for the entire Test, as a sort of test and perhaps a punishment after his disappointing play against the Springboks. There is an element of the lead-boot shuffle about Skelton’s running around the field. And a question mark against his scrumming.

His pushing behind Holmes wasn’t particularly effective.

But he does provide a large-sized x-factor for the Wallabies when his gets his run and his tackles in sync.

The Wallabies also won an important lineout against the throw to thwart a Pumas lineout drive with Skelton lifting Simmons, something (Skelton as a lifter) I have been suggesting for some time.

The most important selection issue that was resolved, I believe, was that Michael Hooper and David Pocock can play together in the same pack, at the same time.

Hooper is incredibly quick and plays best in the wide channels. Pocock, although he showed some muscular pace in one sideline burst, is more of a grafting, tackling number 7 and plays very close to the ball.

Because these two players are very different in their methods and skills, and because they are the two best forwards in Australian rugby, they should be played together.

This means Pocock playing at the back of the scrum where he seemed to be effective and enthusiastic with his pushing, and on the ball all the time in general play. And Hooper playing in the wider channels as a sort of old-fashioned wing forward before the days of the fetcher.

By way of a digression and explanation, the reason why Richie McCaw has never worked well with another similar type of number 7, Sam Cane or Matt Todd, is that all three of these players play the same game of being on the ball.

They get in each other’s way, especially when McCaw is given the number 6 jersey, as he was for the Crusaders this season.

It was only when McCaw came back to number 7 and Todd was told to play as a number 6 that McCaw found his form, which he is carrying on for the All Blacks.

I liked the suggestion about Jack Debreczeni, and was amazed that he wasn’t in any of the large training squads Cheika organised throughout the season.

The number 10 position is just about the most crucial position on the field. There are no world class Australian number 10s right now. Foley, in my opinion, is the best of the talent in the Wallabies squad. But he is behind the leading number 10s (the Sextons, Carters, Pollards) of world rugby right now.

Why is Cheika content with this situation?

An expert of Wallabies statistics assures me that the opening Test of this season was the first time since 1995 that the Wallabies did not present a new Test player.

The Springboks have blooded eight new caps this season. The All Blacks have blooded seven new Test players.

If you don’t try to find gold, you won’t find it.

I agree that Debreczeni, who is big, quick enough, has great hands and a huge boot, should be looked at. As should his Melbourne Rebels halfback mate, Nic Stirzaker.

Stirzaker could be the best halfback in Australia right now. But how can Cheika see this unless he gives him a chance to play a Test?

It makes no sense to me that the two best teams in the world are open to new, young talent and that the Wallabies, who are more in need of some young enthusiasm, are bringing back veterans from Europe and re-cycling former stars whose glory days are well behind them.

I will say one thing about Cheika as the Wallaby coach, though.

He has brought back ticker and belief to his 2015 squad. How far this will take his brave, never-say-die players against the All Blacks at Sydney will be intriguing to watch.