The Wallabies Test matches this year have been punctuated by quality replacement decisions among the many other fresh ideas Michael Cheika has brought to the fray.
We have noted throughout the year the change in culture and attitude around the team, and the dedication to the group and their training each Wallaby squad member has shown in the lead up to the World Cup.
However, Cheika might be slightly disappointed with his ‘Finishers’ from Australia’s first World Cup pool game against Fiji. He should probably be disappointed with himself even more so.
Not the one to dwell on misfortune or negativity, Cheika was quick to dismiss the importance of a bonus point win. He wants the Wallabies to believe they will win every pool game, so there’s no need to worry about a mechanism that rewards losers with a second chance.
He is correct.
Cheika cannot play for his bench, but he decides when they play. The most disappointing move in my opinion was replacing Scott Sio and Sekope Kepu at the same time.
I can only imagine this occurred to give each starting front row a run on together. If that game was against England or Wales he may not have been so quick on the double switch.
That double replacement altered the continuity of the lineout and to a lesser extent the scrum, which in itself was a positive. At no real fault of his own, a positive impact from Dean Mumm’s inclusion was also lacking with the combined effect of a new front row and a new lineout caller hampering the second half.
One gets the feeling that although the Fiji game had been touted as the warm up for the October 4 blockbuster with England, Cheika didn’t want to show his whole hand. The replacements impact and Cheika’s ability to wield its power has been the wonder of the new team dynamic.
Cheika gave us a taste of the starting 15 but not of how he really wants the team to finish.
Matt Toomua basically just marked his name off the attendance sheet only getting a minimal stint at the end of the game. I fully expect he will make his presence known earlier in the games against England and Wales, particularly as the Wallabies lacked any real backline penetration.
Bernard Foley and Toomua have gained Cheika’s favour for advancing at the line. Foley probably didn’t get too much help in that department against Fiji, although he may have been a touch keen to hit the line himself throughout the match.
Why are people still referring to the Michael Hooper/David Pocock double as something strange and unheard of? It’s clear that it works. Both players have swapped skills and complement each other with Hooper jumping in lineouts and Pocock running freely. They are by far the Wallabies’ greatest weapons.
Let’s thank our lucky stars we aren’t in South Africa’s shoes before we throw the toys out of the pram over a lost bonus point.
A solid platform was set to build on for the next round for a team that has done nothing but smash itself at training for a number of weeks.
Even Michael Cheika can get a bit rusty without match practice under his belt.
RobC
Roar Guru
Thanks Andrew. 2H issues for the WB is lineout.
riddler
Guest
agree davo.. plenty of time of a 4th try we just didn't execute it.. the pommies got their 4th after the 80th minute i think or nearabouts.. personally am kaks with this one.. very happy for the win.. was it perfect, heck no, but which team is.. i love reading intelligent, insightful analysis of wins and losses.. what is getting tiring on the roar is the usual wannabe neverbe pushing their own agenda/players and not seeing the bigger picture.. i said before the game that i am sure some of you guys would love the wallabies to lose just so you can a be 5 year old saying i told you so and so was useless.. really??? is that what you fans are?? those 5 yesr olds had no mates then and i am pretty sure the correlation hasn't deviated much into later life.. we won against a good fijian team and we got through with minimal injuries, which is a blessing all things considered.. now we play uruguay.. am hoping for another win and building of confidence in the whole squad.. get behind the team, whether your fav player/bro love or whatever weird fixation you may have is playing or not.. so please enjoy the game.. c'mon wallabies.. and sorry i am not going to apologise if someone of you guys take this personally or feel attacked.. how the heck can we have 400 comments on two players.. tunnel vision much???
ChrisRedRose
Guest
Birdy- I think I'm right in reminding you that Australia have only beaten England once in the last 5 meetings, so where exactly are you basing this statement that Australia are clear favourites against england. Certainly not on that game against Fiji where they managed to get a bonus point despite not looking impressive. Now you and I know that england can play much better than that do have more gears than what they showed in that game, so if i was you i would reserve my judgement until after the game.We abslutely support ur teams passionately and rightfully so but lets not make such flimsy comments.
Davo
Guest
I'm not sure the game was already won though, while Fiji was within two converted tries. It was won after Foley got that goal and the margin went out to 15. There was still plenty of time for the Wallabies to get the 4th try after that, they just made too many mistakes late in the game.
Birdy
Guest
I thought Fiji were utterly dreadful in the first half. They kicked ball out on the full (direct from the kick-off at one point); threw ridiculous passes in their own 22; gave away stupid penalties which allowed the WBs to kick to the corners and unleash their main (only?) weapon of the driving maul, and generally looked tired and out of sorts. The disruption in losing one of their players in the first minute and their scrum half clearly being hampered for the last 10 of the first half may have had an effect, but the idea that they were better than they had been at Twickenham seems barking to me. I think they got an absolute rocket at half-time, cut down on the ludicrous number of errors which allowed them to go through the phases and put the WBs under significant pressure. The point is that anyone who wrote an article or commented on one after the England-Fiji game saying that the English performance was inept and showed the WBs to be clear favourites to top the pool, must either use the same logic after the Aussie performance to reappraise or show themselves to be incapable of bias-free discussion.
somer
Guest
The obvious response to such a claim is that England never allowed Fiji to play well. To many people are to desperate to not take both games at face value. I thought both England and the Wallabies gave competent performances, neither stood out overly from the other. The match up between the two will be very interesting.
PeterK
Roar Guru
Birdy - You ignore that Fiji for their first game were rusty and played quite poorly, 30 missed tackles, lots of poor kicking and poor handling. They fixed most of this for their second game.
Mike Dugg
Roar Rookie
Aussies looked very rusty. It was a joy to see the big Fijian backs with who are very skilful and their forwards have such mobility
rugbyhead
Guest
I think the bigger picture was to cruise to victory without asking too much of the bench because they back up in a few days. Big picture thinking often leaves people exasperated. But there is a greater good. I though fiji were very good in the final 30minutes also. lets not disrespect them. A 15 point victory is a fine result.
Kaks
Roar Guru
Not saying it was a positive start and the whole world should fear us, but we got the win (the most important thing) in our opening world cup game (those butterflies would have disappeared) against a team who has already played a world cup game, is dangerous and can score points with their fast and strong backs. I will reserve my judgement of the team, and England for that matter, after the Wallabies vs England
Birdy
Guest
Kaks, having read the articles and comments this morning, I'm not sure the problem is an overly negative appraisal of last night. There's the usual whining about individual players but, apparently, while England's performance of securing a bonus point against a fresh and fit Fiji clearly illustrated that the 'poms' have little chance in this tournament or even of troubling the WBs; the Wallabies performance in not achieving the bonus point against a tired Fiji having lost their lock before the game, one of their most dangerous players in the first minute and their scrum half at halftime, was 'knocking the rust off' and a positive start.
Playmaker
Guest
50 mins into the game , 3 tries scored , game already won and you don't go for the bonus point. Yes ,if you win all your games you are through, but why waste a bonus point. Surely by getting the bonus point would help and may prove invaluable at the end, especially when England and Wales are collecting them. However, a win is a win and Fiji are capable of upsetting Wales.
Kaks
Roar Guru
Yes bringing Toomua on for a 5minute cameo was odd. Yes our bench had minimal impact which is different to how good the bench had been previouslly this year. BUT can we put all the negativity aside (I know its hard whenever the Wallabies play as everyone only looks at the negatives for some reason) and be content with winning our opening world cup game against a tricky opposition?