A shudder ran down the collective New Zealand spine yesterday. Raw memories of all those times in the past when the Wallabies have crept up on them and stolen their silverware have been stirred.
It could happen again. In fact, the odds on it happening again are beginning to shorten alarmingly on the strength of Australia’s almost flawless burglary at Twickenham.
You have to hand it to this Wallaby squad. From a nervous, tentative outfit brimming with self-doubt they put on the most comprehensive demonstration of fast, error-free and adventurous rugby we have yet seen at this World Cup.
This was the kind of footy that the Wallabies played under John Eales, and orchestrated so cleverly by George Gregan and Steve Larkham. All that nonsense in the British press beforehand about Bernard Foley being unable to run a game or kick effectively, and that the dramatic unpredictability of Quade Cooper is a better bet for the Wallabies, was blown away for good.
In reality Wallabies sides are always at their best when they stick to the formula of fast accurate passing and high speed recycling away from the breakdown. Cooper’s eccentricities get in the way of that, disrupt the flow and cause no end of anxiety among those around him.
There has been a lingering slight, not just in the British media, which has the Aussie pack as a collection of easy-beats, a pushover for the All Blacks, Springboks and English. Well, that assumption came a very sudden thud at Twickenham. Perhaps it was the work of the great Argentinian hooker Mario Ledesma who Michael Cheika called in to stiffen the Wallabies up at scrum time that caused the English such a shock.
Clearly, England were intent on imposing their in-built sense of superiority backed by loud renditions of sweet chariots swinging low, grinding the Wallabies down and relying on their tactical kicking to take the game away from Australia. They wanted to negate the impact of the two sneak thieves, Michael Hooper and David Pocock at the breakdown by committing more bodies to the cleanout.
The most astute English commentator, Simon Barnes said as much beforehand: “Emotions, scrums, nullification of the flankers and kicking should save England.” On all counts the English failed.
The greatest failure, apart from the scrum, was their sheer inability to stop the Hooper/Pocock roadshow. These two effectively turned the game. Time and again the English cleaners-out simply couldn’t get there quickly enough to cut them off and showed what a difficult job that is against a double act as phenomenally gifted as this.
Michael Cheika’s seemingly bizarre experiment earlier in the year in the Sydney Test against New Zealand has paid off and lumbering English forwards simply couldn’t cope with it.
With their set pieces in high retreat the English backline began to panic. In the second half in particular their performance became a carbon copy of their capitulation to a Welsh team that never really expected to win until the last five minutes.
The English backline showed all the tactical acumen of a cabbage and we can now assume that the futile experiment with Burgess in midfield has come to a merciful end, submerged in the welter of recrimination and scapegoating that only the British media are capable of indulging in.
Unless Wales, who have clearly burned up most of their emotional stockpile, or the French who, true to character, will keep the punters guessing all the way through the tournament, or the Irish who are good for at least one heroic effort at the business end of the tournament, manage to make their way through to the semis, then it is once again destined to be a southern hemisphere show.
Coconut
Guest
I would not make too much of the RC this year PK, cut down competition and all..... wasn't it one win apiece? And where did Aussie play its most important two games again? Seriously, I don't think the Kiwis cared too much.... Losing the Bledisloe would have hurt though I think.
Jibba Jabba
Roar Guru
Very true Coconut; I do know a few referees and several were (unfortunately) the victim of schoolyard bullying and as a result become aggressive when not in any physical danger and passive when they are; hence the need for a whistle (or a keyboard) to espouse or enforce their views... However as low as their standards appear to be - we - or shall i say 'the game' still needs them :) In the case of pk it is obvious he has a passion for the game, some knowledge and the willingness to do some research - and that is great to see.
Coconut
Guest
Its about as humorous as you continually playing the victim PeterK... who is bullying who? This is a forum, where its normal to have robust discussion, and comments and debate can get heated (and often moderated) - what's up with the 'bullying' accusations? Geez, you wouldn't last 10 seconds in the Telegraph rugby comments section mate - we aren't discussing tiddlywinks here!
Coconut
Guest
PeterK, I read your stuff in these forums, mainly because its a bit difficult to avoid, since you post with such regularity and with seeming authority on a very wide range of rugby related matters. But I do keep coming back to the conclusion that you exhibit a strange mix of passive aggressive behaviour. You claim to not having much interest in the All Blacks at all, yet your repeated posts on them would indicate otherwise. You claim others are arrogant yet the way you respond to people with opinions different to your own suggests you might be the one with a problem... I don't believe you posed a genuine question here, and I suspect I'm not alone.
Colin N
Guest
Burgess' issue isn't his athleticism, it's his skillset, it simply isn't as good as SBW or Folau. That's one of the reasons he should be a back-row and not a centre.
Colin N
Guest
Birdy was correct in quite a few aspects, particularly in regards to England looking to employ an attacking and expansive game plan, as well as them having a lightweight pack. But England were guilty of overplaying and, if anything, going wide without having an adequate platform - it was rather, well, Australian in its style. Worse than that, they looked to play expansively without their most attacking fly-half and a carthorse for a centre, as well as not having the correct cover on the bench should an injury arise to a back three player. Once that happened, England ended up having a midfield combination of Ford, Farrell and Barritt. England actually looked better in the second half which makes you wonder what they might have done with two proper centres. They would have lost because Australia were better in every facet up front but still...
bazza
Guest
AAC is playing like hes 21 and MOORE is in his prime..GITS..?? Toomua wil do his job better
bazza
Guest
Not quite Semi Finals- FRA vs RSA AUS vs ARG with the Final being FRA vs AUS.
bazza
Guest
Only 32 minutes together ?? THE POOPER....hehe... They 'll play 80 minutes in finals buddy ( and not at EDEN PARK )
bazza
Guest
Did your son ask " Dad, if we are the best, how come that frenchman got the MOTM award " !!
StrYdeR
Roar Rookie
Nice JibJabs, you earn 10 out of 10 for your homework, mostly coz you bothered and I'm getting ready to go today's game rather than watch the Scot v Bok game for the 3rd time... Can't say I noticed the SA locks tactic you mentioned I'll look out for it today and give them grief from 20 rows up in the stand if it is the case, nor did I notice De Jager 6m 30s indiscretion, apparently I need to find some neutral tinted specs... so I defer, the Jannie case I think could be made either way, from the reverse angle it looked like his arm was in there and perhaps the UK commentators influenced my opinion too... they were certainly of the opinion the YC was harsh...
Alex L
Roar Rookie
Did you only read the first line of my comment? The second line is literally about not ruling out Ireland and France.
marto
Guest
Choice bro!! hehe
Nobody
Guest
Starting to agree with pots, this SH vs NH thing is getting old
Graeme
Guest
Australia face the same problem that has knocked out the AB's in previous World Cups, and could still knock out either team in this world cup. Chance and statistics. Even when you're by far the better team going into the knock-out games, and if you assume that you're 80% likely to win each game, there is still only a 50% chance of winning all three games. For Australia the equation is rather worse. We probably are 70% confident against an injured Wales, 80% against Scotland and 50/50 against France or Ireland. And obviously under 50/50 vs the AB's (or a team that beat the AB's).
Jibba Jabba
Roar Guru
Boks very lucky not to lose de jager, etzebets and the even the beast for yc- all committing no arms shoulder at the head tackles. In the locks case they also deliberately and repeatedly moved underneath the jumping opposition lock. Haven't seen tactics like that for awhile Both boks locks did it from start of the game until de jager got pinged for it after about half the game was gone. - then he did it again but tried to be more discreet. Potential for injury serious. Both locks doing it from the start suggests it was deliberate tactic; either 2 silly young locks taking it on themselves or a team tactic in which case its rubbish. De jager should be cited for his no arms shoulder at the head in about the 6m 30s mark - not moving as fast as hooper but he is 205cms and 125 kgs ....and aimed and struck the blokes head. In jannies case his arms come around after the impact... so yc deserved...
Colm
Roar Guru
Fair enough biltongbek, we could argue for hours on what is relevant and irrelevant. Ireland do kick a lot but with good reason in my opinion. We don't have fast, exciting centres like Kriel and De Allende or big men like Bateraud and Nonu. We used to have with BOD and Darcy. What we do have is a quick back three, who all have experience of Gaa and a quality number ten. Therefore we need to get the ball out the wingers quickly, be it by cross field kick or quick hands. My fear for Ireland is that you can only go around teams so many times before being found out. Thats why strong ball carriers like O'Brien, Healy, Henderson and Cronin are vital. As for the boks, I'm sure we will see a different team at some stage. South Africa is too good a rugby nation, with too many intelligent rugby people like youself for change not to happen. I wouldn't put it past them beating anybody at this world cup but their scrum has to be solid and their kicking game accurate. I don't think ye have the consistency at the moment to win a world cup though ?.
Connor33
Guest
Sorry, I've not got back sooner. I seem to be on a slightly different schedule to everyone being in the U.S. But, before I hear anything: - McCal for Hooper to empy the tank by 50, with McMahon to come up in for the remainder of the game. Fardy will need to play even better at the breakdown to make up for the Hooper loss. - Horne should not play. A dislocation far too much of a risk and plays on the confidence of the player. CLL should come into the squad. Beale played very well, so it would be hard to not keep him in the 15. Though, Toomua may start on the wing and play the same defensive role that Horne plays.
StrYdeR
Roar Rookie
Ireland and France maybe even Wales still to fly the NH flag...
StrYdeR
Roar Rookie
Boks forward giants & squad depth are a myth... We're running pretty thin on Props, Scrummies & Full Backs for that matter... Someone better recalibrate that rock-ape conveyor belt...