What. Did we. Just watch? How good were Scotland? How did the Wallabies score five tries to three and only win by a point?
>> PUMAS STUN IRELAND
>> WALLABIES SCRAPE PAST SCOTLAND
>> ALL BLACKS CRUSH FRANCE
>> SPRINGBOKS ADVANCE PAST WALES
More importantly, just how good a game of footy was that? It certainly wasn’t perfect, but both sides showed so much attitude, strength and commitment.
It was tense, tough and tight. There was so much pressure on all the players, and while it didn’t necessarily bring the best out of all the players at all times, it made for engrossing viewing. You would have had to be the staunchest of neutrals to not have your heart pumping during the closing stages of the match.
If this were a normal game, the fact that the commentary was out of sync with the action for about 20 minutes of the game might rate a mention here. So might Australia’s next opponent, Argentina.
More:
>> WALLABIES VS SCOTLAND MATCH REPORT
>> THE ROAR‘S LIVE BLOG
With the result what it was, and the action as good as it was, it doesn’t. Here are my five talking points from the Wallabies’ win over Scotland.
That penalty
The Scots were ropable after Craig Joubert blew the penalty that won Australia the game. The post-match interviewer pressed the issue with Vern Cotter and Greig Laidlaw, and the skipper and coach did well not to blow their tops.
But let’s get one thing straight.
It was a penalty.
From my perspective, the ball bounced off a Scottish shoulder after bouncing at the back of the lineout, and went straight into Scottish arms.
It was ugly. It was unfortunate. It was lucky. Depending on your perspective, it was a whole raft of things.
What it definitely was was a penalty, and as Michael Cheika said after the game, you still have to kick them once you get them.
The really interesting thing about that penalty for me was the calm under pressure showed by the Wallabies players. No one seemed to be panicking, despite only having two minutes left on the clock.
Kurtley Beale had kicked long a couple of minutes earlier. Nick Phipps had backed his pace with ball in hand, and none of his teammates got cranky with him when he slid over the sideline. They knew there was enough time left to win the game, and that’s what they did.
Five tries, one point
Five tries to three. Scotland spent ten minutes with 14 men on the park. The Scots were plucky, but largely unthreatening with ball in hand.
When you put it like that, it sounds like this should have been a shellacking. The game was anything but, and it took a penalty in the dying minutes for the Wallabies to win the game.
The Wallabies were slick for a lot of the time they had the ball in their hands. They were also very sloppy for short periods, and Scotland made them pay dearly each and every time.
And the decisions certainly didn’t all go the Wallabies’ way. The try that was pulled back for a Will Genia knock on was questionable, but so were a number of things for both sides during the game.
Basically, it’s hard to make much of Australia’s performance. Scotland, on the other hand, really excelled in the contact, and put their fancied opponents under a heap of pressure.
The Aussies didn’t like that much. Perhaps that’s telling.
Get. Israel. Back
I mentioned last week that it wouldn’t be such a bad thing if Australia chose to rest Israel Folau and David Pocock for this game to allow them to overcome their injuries.
How wrong could you be?
‘Surely the Scots couldn’t really test the Wallabies,’ I thought.
Yeah, about that… I suppose at this point I better apologise to the Scots, and the Wallabies supporters for jinxing us.
Anyway, the point is Australia need Israel Folau back, badly. The Wallabies backline without him is like soft-serve without a Flake; a Manhattan without a cherry.
He is the pizzaz, the class and the muscle.
An improved performance from Tevita Kuridrani needs to be acknowledged here. He was immense. Scored a try, set one up, and made metres every time he had the pill in his hands.
Where does Scotland go from here?
Vern Cotter and his team were bitterly disappointed after the game. Why wouldn’t you be? It was their grand final, and they had fallen a point, or four minutes, short.
They’re ranked ninth in the world. It’s a team with a relatively young captain, and a relatively young average age.
Stuart Hogg, who seems to have been around for an eternity, is still just 23 years old.
But is this team just an abrasive team? Or are players like Finn Russell, Mark Bennett and Hogg going to develop into world class backline players? And will forwards like Richie and Jonny Gray develop into the best locking pair in the world?
It’s hard to see this team going backwards after a performance like that. Let’s just hope it’s the start of something great.
Can we stop it with the yellow cards?
Okay, I’ll admit that this is something of a bugbear of mine, but my gosh that yellow card against Sean Maitland was harsh!
Having seen so many players sent to the bin for seemingly minor infringements, I feel like a summit is needed on what exactly a yellow card offence is, offering some clarification when it should be brandished.
At this stage the definition seems to be getting broader by the day.
There’s no way Sean Maitland, the Scotland winger, was cynically trying to knock that ball down.
Frankly, he didn’t have enough time for that thought to even go through his head in the time it took him to make a play at the ball. It was a simple case of see ball, touch ball.
Sure, his hand wasn’t pointing up. But it wasn’t pointing down either. And if he pops it up and catches it, he streaks away for 50-metre gain at least.
What made it worse was the fact the decision was made after they reviewed it on the replay. To be fair to the referees, slow motion does make everything look much worse?
Am I the only one sick of teams being a man down for what I think are minor infringements? Or are these cards justified?
What were your talking points Roarers?
William Tell
Guest
I think many, if not most, of those offside events, where a player down field collects a ball played by one of his own, are just reflex responses. You spend the whole game trying to get your hands on the ball, and then suddenly - I mean suddenly! - there is the ball and you grab it and then the realisation hits....bugger! In that crazy scramble at that critical moment who wouldn't grab for the ball if it fell within arms reach? The ball came flying, everyone was contesting each other for space and dominance, and it happened! "Sorry" doesn't cut it when a player in an offiside position denies possession to the team entitled to have the ball. Bad luck is the appropriate call - but penalty is the result nevertheless. In the case in question, the ball did not come bobbling along the ground advertising its presence and giving warning to an offiside player - it happened at speed. And it is position, not speed, that is the essence. Hard luck Scotland - but a run away try down the line with 80 minutes on the clock (or an intercept, or a charge down) might seem just as "unfair" but just as entitled to be counted.
William Tell
Guest
Foley was down the back, part of the defensive pattern, fielding kicks - just as well it wasn't Quade Cooper down there doing the same thing. We'd have heard about it ad nauseum.
William Tell
Guest
Let me mention Quade Cooper - just one of Foley's errors, if committed by QC, would have seen a crazy chorus of "there he goes again". That Cooper still turns up, regardless of the unremitting vitriol spewed in his direction speaks to the way he has remade himself as a person and a player. If he does get called on we know that he has at least 13 points to his credit before he can be called worse than Foley. Foley did no more than his job with that last kick - it is why he is hired, it is what he trains for every day, and it is what he is paid a heap for. Good kick. Well done. Move on.
TheBuck
Guest
I totally agree. I never thought it was a penalty and couldn't believe anyone would be foolish enough to write that it was. That all being said, Australia were the better side. 5 tries to 3. Two of those three conceded were somewhat freakish. Scotland got the raw end of the stick on the refs decisions, for sure, but they really were not close to the Wallabies who played pretty poorly. I suspect Joubert called that a penalty because he'd previously called a similar incident (also against Scotland) as accidental. That previous incident was a much clearer example of offside play, and he made a mistake. I suspect this was weighing on his mind as he blew the penalty at the end.
etienne marais
Guest
Now that WR has released their statement regarding the controversial penalty, I trust the author and the many others who were so vociverous about their certitude on knowledge and interpretation of the laws, will quicky book some WR Laws 101 night classes as repentance.
etienne marais
Guest
"He has declined significantly from 2011 onwards." Certainly so. What is worse though, is his arrogance and sense of infallability that has become such an overbearing feature of his craft. I used to admire his relative accuracy and poise. Now....uggggh
hopalong
Guest
The ref,s rankings in no particular order. Bryce Never to be seen again Craig If fans are to be believed.(Should not be seen again)From hero to zero. Poite. Rhymes with ??? Barnes The best so far. Come on guys.Refs do not deliberately cheat.(Well maybe one of the above did) So Scotland were hard done by. And the sun still rose (Perhaps not in Scotland) today. Teams will once more play each other,in the game that we all love."Plus ca, change" And we will sustain our passion for the game. And Spiro will continue to denigrate the Boks."Plus c,est la meme chose) The worst thing about this wonderful game are the churlish and less than magnaminous comments of supporters.whether in victory or defeat.. And go well Cuthbert.You are a good man/player who had one careless moment.Suffer your crucifixion bravely. "If you can live with triumph and disaster .and treat those two disasters blah blah blah......... Well then perhaps we can have a civilised debate on the game. And above all,Go Bokke.
Dingleberry Hufflethwaite III
Guest
"...and of course, in the Dunnydoo under-11 grand final in 1967...."
Biffa
Guest
Glad to see RWC had the guts to clarify the decision and throw egg all over the faces of those on this forum who think it was a penalty. The sight of those Aussie players squealing at Joubert to award a penalty when Phipps knew full well the ball came off him last says it all. Lost all respect for Australia - hope Scotland put a banning order on Phipps entering the country next time Australia come to play in Scotland. Cheats - end of !
ThugbyFan
Guest
Is it just me or did the WB looked jaded? Perhaps over-trained close to the match. On the WB scrum, they (and Joubert) were outsmarted by the Scottish front row. It will be interesting scrums next week. Argentina scrum vs WB scrum coached by an ex-Puma. Rugby NH style: Get in opposition half usually by constant up-n-unders with lots of chasers, force a scrum or ruck penalty, pick up 3 points. Start over and repeat ad nauseum for next 80 minutes. No wonder its 4 SH sides in the semi-finals.
Hills Dinosaur
Guest
Qn for the "experts" in the Laws of Rugby. How far is the ball carrier allowed to crawl after being tackled; he is flat on the ground and the ball has been grounded ?
ThugbyFan
Guest
Outlier, sadly your knowledge of the Laws of Rugby is lacking, due to you only reading with one eye. For starters what Laidlaw said is totally wrong. The two events that you are crying about were penalties, get over it. TMO cannot be asked to adjudicate on many events in a rugby game, only foul play, events in scoring a try and the touchdown of a try. Its why Genia's knock-on leading to a try was reviewed and pointed out to Joubert and the "try" reversed, but the Scottish half's knock-on from a scrum (about 59 mins) was not called by the TMO, simply because he cannot. Maitland's action stopped potentially an Australian try so he was carded. No different to if he has tackled the Australian winger before he got the ball. As for that last penalty, you are wrong there also. The Scottish player knocked the ball forward, which accidentally struck Phipps before being caught by a Scottish player in FRONT, ergo a dead set offside penalty. Again the TMO has absolutely no input in this matter. To suggest Joubert is angling for an Aussie passport is ludicrous and defamatory. He already has a Kiwi citizenship and a kiwi knighthood from the RWC 2011 Final (just kidding!) :) . If you wish to gripe about Joubert, how come you haven't mentioned his laxness in not penalising Scottish players who were repeatedly diving into breakdowns, off their feet and often interferring with the ruck whilst on their back. Some of the scrums were a farce, but obviously the Scots knew how to hoodwink Joubert on that count, so its "good rugby brains". What about the 1st Scottish try, which should have been pulled up as the player in the ruck picked up the ball and ran, apart from he may have entered so-called ruck from the side. That should have been a penalty to Australia. True Joubert did has a bad game, but he erred lots against both sides. He allowed Scotland an amazing amount of slack without penalising for multiple infringements but oh that right, those offences would have been seen by your other eye, which was missing. :)
connor33
Guest
Twas, C'mon: Mitchel''s first try. Without him that try simply would not have been scored--i.e., 28th minute. Pick and drive 10 yards to the right of the posts. Genia makes a very good pass to Foley (10-12m). Foley throws an equally good 15-18 m pass, threading both TK and Moore. And then KB throws an excellent pass to Mitchell. So, Foley played a pretty big role in this one. And basically should have had another had Mitchell caught the ball in the 3rd minute. But what these two plays tend to demonstrate is a short and long passing game. I’ll admit, though, he does tend to play better with KB in the side—and Genia has been providing some pretty tidy service. ***And while not a great pass to TK for AAC's try. He actually passed the ball a little behind because had it been in front, the player that tried to tackle TK would have intercepted the ball. I think he was the same one that intercepted Slipper's try later.
Chinmay Hejmadi
Roar Guru
Yep, I stand corrected.
krk
Guest
The calls for TMO intervention have been made because some refs are interpreting those 'strict' rules for TMO review very loosely.In 1 game of the pool stages the TMO had been used to determine which side gets the put-in in a scrum after being questioned by the captain...
RobC
Roar Guru
Thanks Paddy. Nice pointers: - Scrums - Kicks - Spirit - Kicks Hope Sio recovers soon. We need him fit Foley. Foley. Foley. You are favoured for your kicks. Do your job SCO were winning collisions on attack too easily. Unacceptable, saved only by the win. It is a win. Pretty good result for the Phar Lab of Rugby. Keep going WB.
Ian Wight
Guest
I thought at the start of the article, we were getting the Australian blinkered review of yesterday's match with Scotland. The 'why bother with facts' when Australia got the decision. It improved towards the end, but for all your love in with the Australian national team, it will have to improve drastically to win the competition. Australia were over-confident & the referee got them 'out of jail'. I hope Scotland can move onwards & upwards after this game. I know, in your hearts, you can get over the laughable self-deception. Please don't take Argentina for granted, as much as you did Scotland-because the ref might not always be there to save you!
Shane D
Roar Rookie
Shame Joubert couldn't read his mind then. Perhaps should have gone up to Joubert & told him he played st the ball instead of appealing for the penalty.
choke_tackle
Guest
would you be saying that so trivialy if the boot was on the other foot, I think not!!!
Welshmagician
Guest
10 metre rule your'e referring to only applies from a kick. Phipps made an attempt to play the ball which puts the Scot onside according to me, knock on is the original offence and a scrum should have been given, attacking team put in.