The Hume Highway between Sydney and Canberra has been good to me over the years; the couple of hours of dual carriageway provides plenty of time to think, and more than a few columns have written themselves at 110km/h.
It was the same story on Sunday, with plenty of time to contemplate what I’d witnessed the night before. But with so many issues within and around the Wallabies’ performances against New Zealand, things didn’t quite flow as nicely as I’d hoped.
With so many ‘what went wrong?’ thought-bubbles floating around, it was and still is easy to jump from one to the next without actually solving anything.
That in itself reminded me of something.
Before the June Tests, Eddie Jones told me that when you take over a team, there’s always 50 things that need fixing, but only enough time to fix three. And the key – and what sorts the good coaches from the really, really good coaches – is the ability to work out addressing which three things can have the biggest impact on the team.
That’s the challenge for Michael Cheika this week. He’s obviously not taking over, but he is effectively starting again. All the ‘what were they doing for four weeks?’ questions are valid, but reviewing that now doesn’t help what needs to happen this week. Plus, there isn’t the time anyway.
The Wallabies have probably already identified that they were comprehensively thumped at the breakdown, and annihilated in the lineout, and smashed in defence, denied the gain line and any semblance of go-forward.
They would already know that the depth they were forced to play at meant their already limited kicking length was further eroded. And that they didn’t kick well anyway. And that they then missed too many tackles. And that they were then thumped at the breakdown. Rinse and repeat for 80 minutes.
But what are the Wallabies’ three things? Is it even possible to find three that will have an impact within a week?
The three I’d be targeting are making the gain line, the breakdown, and the lineout.
Addressing these three elements will almost certainly necessitate changes, but changes on their own won’t make a lot of difference. As it was, Cheika made eight changes to the starting XV alone from the last Test against England in June. And named a whole new bench. Mass change didn’t work last week, and it’s hard to see how it works this week.
That’s not to say some changes wouldn’t be justified. More than a few reputations took a beating on Saturday night, and the questions being asked are generally on the money. Where the line falls between too many changes and not enough is anyone’s guess, though. (Click to Tweet)
Changes in the midfield will be required, obviously. Even though Cheika says he still sees Israel Folau as a fullback, he probably needs to play outside centre. Not necessarily because he’s the best option at 13, but because Dane Haylett-Petty is a better option at 15, with a kicking game that the Wallabies desperately need, but have dumbfoundingly ignored to date. And yes, Folau hasn’t done a lot of defending at 13, but neither has Bernard Foley, and look how many times the All Blacks ran at him in Sydney.
The gain line and breakdown go hand in hand to a degree, and one of the reasons Foley played so deep was because the Wallabies essentially never made the gain line. Compounding the issue was a lack of breakdown presence, which couldn’t produce quick ruck ball in order to play on the front foot.
And it’s certainly true that the All Blacks’ incredible defensive line speed and intensity were factors in the Wallabies’ woes. But they also brought a fair amount of it on themselves.
Ben McCalman has always been a serviceable player, but he isn’t that big, ball-carrying No.8 the Wallabies need, nor does he bring the breakdown intensity of Scott Fardy, the man he replaced.
Kane Douglas started with plenty of intensity, but none of that translated into gain line metres. Is it time to see if Lopeti Timani can be the rampaging ball-carrier that so many want him to be? It can’t hurt. If he can bend tackles against New Zealand, then he’ll bend tackles against anyone.
The question then becomes does Timani add enough at the breakdown? Timani 8 would bring the curtain down on the Michael Hooper-David Pocock double act, and getting Pocock back to his roots would have to help the breakdown situation. But Timani would probably also mean the Wallabies need a Fardy-type player back at blindside, for both the left-edge ball carrying and breakdown presence he brings.
And that, in turn, would also give another prong to the lineout. Keiran Read’s post-match assessment that the All Blacks “just got in front and jumped quicker” would’ve been funny if it wasn’t so accurate. The Highlanders turned their own lineout troubles around by getting in front and jumping quicker than the Brumbies in the Super Rugby quarters, and indeed, Eben Etzebeth has made a career out of the tactic.
The Wallabies made the job easy for the Kiwis though, by starting with Rob Simmons and a secondary jumper in Douglas, and occasional options in McCalman, Pocock, and Hooper. Getting in front and jumping quicker was always going to work, and you could see all night what kind of pressure Simmons was under from Read and Sam Whitelock. If Read didn’t get up quick enough, Whitelock still made it a contest in the air.
More genuine lineout options are desperately needed. But that doesn’t mean picking a lineout-only option like Dean Mumm is going to fix anything. Mumm doesn’t address either of the ball-carrying or breakdown problems, and his selection on the bench was one the Wallabies didn’t need with Fardy there too.
A functioning lineout can help build a base from which other aspects of the game can flow. A solid set piece is needed to win quality ball, and from there the breakdown and gain line components follow.
Just focussing on defence – as “easy” as Nathan Grey worryingly thinks that is – and making backline changes won’t matter a jot if you can’t provide a platform from which to use the ball.
David Sibley
Guest
CUW, I meant the individual players in the team that lost to Germany so collectively that particular team, not the entire country. I also wasn't talking about the Brazilian team generically although I'm pretty sure the 7-1 defeat was not enjoyed by many fans in Brazil. I'm happy for the Brazilian team of the Olympics who won a gold medal - they won't have any scars to bear. I'm sure that the Wallabies who lost on Saturday night will never forget that experience and I certainly won't forget it either - at least that loss won't be on my playing record but it will be on theirs. Sport can be very cruel.
Dandaman
Roar Rookie
Bretto making the ad line is another critical aspect to this and d'oh Reece Hodge is spot on (not having fox i have seen bugger all of him and he is a bit of a mystery still). I am working on the theory that if they can smack them around in a bit in defense the attack will start to sort itself out (I am an optimist). For weeks everyone has been suggesting that the ABs would put pressure on us through good defensive line speed like the Canes, but the Canes let the opposition dominate possession and they also had some holes in their line that the opposition could exploit. This ABs team did not have to worry about those issues, one because they are sooo good and two because we were terrible on the day. I feel sorry for these guys they are not that bad a group of players and i do not think the ABs are 30+ points better than them on a regular basis. Onwards and upwards, go wallabies!
Tombo (L)
Guest
It is about time someone finds some acetone.
HiKa
Roar Rookie
+1
HiKa
Roar Rookie
I think he missed it due to broken vertebrae from a Colombian's knee.
CUW
Guest
he is not a memorable player tbh :) only time i recall him is , i think he is the one who gave Read a concussion in super game in 2015. !!!
CUW
Guest
last weekend Hoani matenga did a chip and chase and almost scored playing for wellington. that was cool :D it is in the mitre 10 highlights reel http://www.planetrugby.com/news/video-mitre-10-cup-top-tries-round-1/
CUW
Guest
surely it can be learnt. i mean creevy for eg is no spring chicken , and he does well in that department. i remember the super rugger match in which Ranger got injured. before going off he tackled and turned over the ball 3 times in like 15 minutes. that is an old center !!!
CUW
Guest
not really - i know what u mean ur point is that the country BRAZIL and its footy team will be known for losing to Germany 7-1 rather than the individual players who were on the park that night. but then my point is , such things are relegated to history books - and memories of old people. the actual scar of the shame will be with the players. a lot more than with those who follow of watch footy. and i think none of players from that match were at olympics (not sure if neymar played against germany )
Same As It Ever Was
Guest
Been watching Hooper play since he was a teenager and frankly nothing has changed in his game . He has the ability to be a devastating ball runner and can pull of an amazing one on one hit but where is he for three quarters of the game ?? Had never been a complete 80 minute player and it might have been ok at schoolboy, club and even super level but at the highest level we just can't have a sometimes player in such a key position as 7. I think he is the most over rated player in Australian Rugby and that's a big comment when you consider the number of tests blokes like Simmons , Phipps, Foley and Horne have played . Hooper is a bench impact player at best but I reckon he is the first player Cheika picks in his team each week .
David Sibley
Guest
CUW - Thanks for posting, but i think you missed my point!
Coconut
Guest
This is a good point. I kind of 'felt' that there was no real spark from the Aussies from the get-go, no intent. If they come out and play with aggression, get in the faces of their opponents, spoil the ball, then they will keep the scores close. Keep the scores close, and they have a chance at doing what Aussies are so good at doing, stealing the game at the death!
Coconut
Guest
Quite right there, Smith was a far better all rounder, and great link player...
Coconut
Guest
Read has the value of two Aussie loosies... :(
Coconut
Guest
PeterK depends if the extra passes lead to better field position and/or points being scored. The turnovers in themselves as it transpired, didn't amount to much because the attacking opportunities were cancelled out. I agree the Folau is a potentially great attacking weapon, but the key word is potential, and this isn't being realised, perhaps because as others have said, he is being played out of position. Between him and Dagg its a bit horses for courses, but overall perhaps Dagg offers more options, hence why he has been selected to play for the All Blacks at that position instead of Ben from accounts.
Coconut
Guest
After reading the posts from Highlander and Crashball2 on this thread, I really appreciate the insight and analysis that has gone into their comments. It gives me a better appreciation for the kind of thought (or forethought) that has to go into coaching the top teams. The chess-like strategic thinking that goes into nullifying perceived strengths of a side. I am not convinced Cheika is doing this (or perhaps he doesn't have the luxury of doing so) but for sure the brains trust in the All Black outfit is - completely focussed on nullifying the attacking options of the opposing side and maximising their own strengths. Of course when I'm watching the game I'm too caught up in the speed and emotion of it all to actually appreciate the amount of preparation that goes into it, other than just a general satisfaction of seeing the end result. The quality of dispassionate analysis here by some of our posters is very good, coming from Kiwis, Aussies and South Africans irrespective of which team they support - one of the main reasons I like to visit this website as it makes me appreciate the game of rugby even more. Cheers guys.
canadiankiwi
Guest
Franklin has been a starting lock for the Highlanders the past two seasons and was called into the All Blacks pre-season camp in June ahead of all the other locks mentioned by CUW.
canadiankiwi
Guest
Best team selection I have read but I would drop Kuridrani and start 12 Kerevi and 13 Folau.
canadiankiwi
Guest
Perthslayer: That is the biggest and most physical back row the Wallabies can currently field- I agree with your selection. Now select the most physical second row- drop Simmons and Munn, as they are both cupcakes. Drop Skelton because a lock who cannot be lifted and jump is useless. Douglas, Arnold, Coleman, Another - pick the three most physical, nastiest second rows who are legitimate jumpers from the five Super teams. The front row is the only forward unit that is quality test standard, although Moore needs a rest.
Homer Gain
Guest
Looks like the 98 tour served it's purpose in highlighting the inadequacies of the players selected (JW excepted). Any process that helps demonstrate what a prat (and what a mediocre player) Healey is/was gets my tick VG.