In the build-up this week to the Sydney showdown, all the talk from the Wallaby camp was about their newly found physicality.
They want to change the perception that their forward pack has a soft underbelly.
But the naming of the Wallabies starting side suggests Michael Cheika’s troops are set to try and run the All Blacks ragged. Maybe it has finally hit home to Cheika’s mind that physicality is not something that can be taught or coached in a fortnight’s time.
Physicality – you either have it as a player, or not. And, if lucky, it may take a few seasons to groom a player to switch from the “nots” to the “haves.” Dean Mumm will not outplay Brodie Retallick in the physicality department after a couple of weeks’ preparation no matter how hard he is coached.
Scott Fardy will not outmuscle his All Blacks counterpart in Jerome Kaino just because Cheika instructed him to through out training this week, and openside-turned No 8 David Pocock will not suddenly get the better of Kieran Read in the physical stakes.
When a player is coached or driven to play more physical than they really are, they tend to be involved in over-zealous play and give away preventable penalties. Think back to Will Skelton in the Waratahs match against the Crusaders.
So, what does Cheika do? He names a team apparently designed to run the All Blacks off their feet. He leaves monstrous Skelton on the bench, along with Ben McCalman – one of the more physical Australian players in the squad.
Perhaps he had to play Mumm to strengthen the short lineout with Pocock and Michael Hooper both on the paddock.
It appears that Cheika’s Plan A is to out do the All Blacks in the fitness and speed department, probably banking on the observation of some that the New Zealand forwards are ageing and some may have lost a metre or two in pace.
The All Blacks have proved to have superior fitness to all other teams over the past two years, and don’t appear to be slowing down.
If Plan A doesn’t work, Cheika will look to bring in the likes of Skelton and McCalman and try and up the physicality.
Hansen was quoted as saying he is trying to work out why Skelton is not starting. That’s Hansen at his best – he would have already worked out the game plan that Cheika is looking to play.
The All Blacks would have their systems in place to counter what the Wallabies throw at them.
Wanaby
Guest
Apache, I hope that you watched the game. Mumm was outstanding, and Hooper, although not that big, is being more physical in the tackle than most! His hit on Savea just before half-time was a game changer - not many would have stopped him from there. Anyone asking for AAC to be out of the starting line-up needs to watch a few more Wallaby games. There is no replacement for pure commitment and guts!
Boomeranga
Guest
So it hasn't been "all the talk" and it may not have been any of the talk at all unless you interpret an allusion to mean that. Fair enough then.
Old Bugger
Guest
Exactly - it was an attempt to pull the wool over the ABs eyes. To make the ABs think the WBs are going up the middle all night hence, concentrate their defence patterns accordingly while they really intend, to go wide and make the ABs chase, all night. Problem for them was Hansen had already announced his side before Cheika did likewise, hence the illusion no longer existed and even more concerning, Hansen had anticipated the twins (Hooper & Pocock) selection.
taylorman
Roar Guru
Phipps alluded to it in one article I saw.
Boomeranga
Guest
"In the build-up this week to the Sydney showdown, all the talk from the Wallaby camp was about their newly found physicality." I haven't heard them talking like that at all. Did I miss it?
taylorman
Roar Guru
And reading this four or so hours out...the perfect comment to come back and bite me should the W's get up., along with others. For sure we are underestimating them...
taylorman
Roar Guru
I hope so for your sake machooka, I just find as the game gets nearer a rolling big black machine is going to preside over this match, and I seriously question the true inner confidence of this oz side as the match gets nearer at the individual level. Foley for example, what protection will he get from either side of him? hooper and Giteau on either side? If he gets sacked early a couple of times this match could get painful, and that's exactly what the ABs will do...strangle Foley out if the game, cut of the ball to the backs, force defensive kicks...and that's when that wave I mentioned comes in. Anyway, dream over... Llllllllllllllllllllllllllet's get ready to rumble!
The Saint
Roar Guru
Thanks RobC. Yes, to won the WBs need to control the tempo
The Saint
Roar Guru
So right Taylorman
The Saint
Roar Guru
Thanks for the feedback Moaman. Good call ...I'm not convinced on Cheika's plan. And Holmes and Skelton...on a scale of 1-10 I will have them on 4
Machooka
Roar Guru
John... nice timely piece, and I concur with your thoughts regards this game. As you've astutely pointed-out Cheika has not had the chance to invoke his theory of physicality to the Wallaby as yet. Although, this is his ultimate master plan... and it makes sense. To best the best you must match their own physicality. So Cheika, as Wallaby coach, has to now play what's in front of him... this time it's your Blacks... with all the available cattle he thus far trusts. Therefore, the team he has chosen is for a style of speed, and mobility with a hint of physicality to possibly wear down the opposition during the course of the game. Then he'll sub-on some heavy artillery to try and punch it up through the middle. It's not Einstein at work. But it's a plan that suits the situation. And I'm sure that Hansen is very much aware that this is the case. It should be a game of last man standing stuff... I sure hope so... and the winner will be the one that makes the least mistakes while taking the points on offer.
taylorman
Roar Guru
Yes I'd find it very strange if this us about physicality rather than pace then he's picked the wrong players. Quite frankly it's one of the weirdest selections I've seen for some time, but certainly Skelton would have started if physicality was the primary goal. Though I do agree with your assertions. You can't send a boy out to do a mans job, figuratively speaking, in that if a player has been raised and performs based on a high level of skill, he's hardly going to appreciate someone telling him to go and bash all week. So if Cheika wants pace, and bash from the same players- against the ABs- then he sure is asking a lot. An awful lot.
Dave
Guest
They were 'smashed' at the breakdown because they chose not to contest with force. When they did, it led to the turnover and the Smith try. The ABs pick their moments and that conserved energy invariably gets them over the line in the 82nd minute.
RobC
Roar Guru
Thanks for the post John. It will be impossible for WBs to run ABs off their feet imo But WBs definitely need more mobility. The key is for WBs to control the tempo, instead of allowing ABs control the pace and direction of the game.
moaman
Guest
Ben is on record describing the ABs at Ellis Park as "horrible''. That doesn't say much for the Sprinboks considering the venue and what they brought to the table. That a slow and over-rated,"horrible" team actually won against the world's 2nd ranked side on it's home patch kind of turns logic on it's head; particularly when it wasn't a flash in the pan once off result.
moaman
Guest
Interesting piece John; You use the words "suggests" and "appears" and "apparently" all of which 'indicate' ( ;-) ) to me that you are possibly unconvinced by this cunning plan.Am I right in that assumption? The bench that will (may) run the ABs off their feet---are you of the opinion that Holmes and Skelton are tailor-made for this ploy and on a scale of 1-10 how successful to you expect this to be?
Apache
Guest
If you want physicality, you don't pick Dean Mumm to start with Will Skelton to lumber off the bench. Nor do you pick Foley and Giteau with AAC on the wing. Beale to come off the bench? If you want physicality in the forwards then you'd leave Hooper on the bench, run Pocock at 7, pick a big hard running 8, and get a lock with some balls ie not Mumm. Toomua at 12, Speight on one wing and Tomane on the other. AAC can be cover from the bench instead of the insipid Beale.
Chuck
Guest
Ben Could've should've is not a expression in international rugby coaches like too express disappointment.not good enough is the term. I take it you didn't see the game against broke and wallabies ,before the whole front row bokee was replaced ,destroying The wallabies pack all over the park just bad call by coach too pull them off
Ben
Guest
Cheika is definitely looking for mobility. The Blacks back row and front row have definately slowed. Just look at the Boks game.....they were smashed at the breakdown, and in the mid field. If it were not for uncontested scrums the Blacks would have lost that game. I think this is a smart ploy by Cheika.......our front row is much more dynamic than theirs and should hold its own in the scrum. Our Backrow will have to run and run, but we saw this from the previous 2 tests where the Wallabies went sideline to sideline. Our 2nd row should hold up. I think Romano is over rated.......Retallic however is a monster. Going to be an amazing game to watch.