The Wallabies’ 2016 season is on the final stretch. There are five games against Wales, Scotland, France, Ireland and England.
These are all that remains in a year that has left much to be desired by the fans and the team alike.
All the statistics have been beaten to death coming off the back of the third Test between the Wallabies and All Blacks. Not to steer away from the script, New Zealand piled on 22 unanswered points part of the way through the second half to comprehensively crumple the Wallabies.
It was hard to watch.
I’m a die-hard fan and no amount of losses will ever have me supporting another team, nor stopping to support the Wallabies at all, but some of the aftermath of the game has irked me.
The whole clown saga is an embarrassment and I won’t touch on that any further; the rest of the rugby world seems to have done that for me. What has annoyed me is attitude about that game.
Now, generally, I would be regarded as the optimistic fan among some of my friends.
Keep on playing Moore? Sure, I can get behind that. Dean Mumm to wear the 6 jersey again? Not my first pick, but it could be worse, and so on.
However journalists and commentators have been a fair bit too foolhardy in their praise for the Wallabies’ supposed improvement.
Did the Wallabies play better than their last two games against the All Blacks? Hard to quantify depending on what part of the game you’re looking at, but I’d say it was. Our best performance of the year? I wouldn’t go that far.
Immediately after the game, Tim Horan referenced the Wallabies as being “not that far away (from the All Blacks)”. That’s a load of rubbish. We’ve had three opportunities this year to avenge the Rugby World Cup final of last year.
In our closest game, we lost by 20 points including being outscored four tries to nil. In our ‘best’ performance, we lost by 27 points and were outscored six tries to one. That doesn’t sound like a close performance no matter what way you skin it.
If you’re one of the positive few who were happy with the first 55 minutes of the match, I won’t take that away from you. I was, for the most part, fairly impressed too.
That doesn’t mean a thing in a 80-minute performance, because whatever confidence was gained in the tight contest of the start of the match would’ve been extinguished as the All Blacks ran rampant, making this Test match look like a walk in the park.
It’s hard to say whether all of the controversy regarding being offended and left-field selections is just to act as a smokescreen to the lack of impressive results this season, but let it be known that I am ignoring all off-field issues and having eyes only for the style of our play.
I don’t think there is anything inherently wrong with our squad. We have a fair few players that will be used out of position, some who are absent with injuries, others who are absent through contracts with other clubs, but in reality, it is a squad that could beat any of the five upcoming teams on their given day.
However, I find it odd that natural reaction to a 37-10 loss is “well now that we have improved, we can head to Europe and complete a Grand Slam.”
Did I miss something?
I was pleased with some of the changes we made and a fair bit of how we played, but you’ll forgive me for being a little doubtful about our chances.
So far this year we have had a 3-0 series loss to England, a 3-3 performance in the Rugby Championship where we managed to breakeven and that included part of a 3-0 series loss to New Zealand.
Given those fixtures, mathematically speaking, winning more than we lose while overseas would be an improvement.
This isn’t to say I’m not confident of snagging a few wins, but the last time we headed to Europe for an end-of-year tour I was startled by how easily we were overcome.
In that tour the following results were obtained:
Beat Barbarians 40-36
Beat Wales 33-28
Lost to France 29-26
Lost to Ireland 26-23
Lost to England 26-17
Recalling back to this time and the confidence I had leading into it, I now face the emotional struggle of where to set my expectations. My hopes are as high as ever, I’d love to think we could go through unbeaten and restore some faith and lustre into the Wallabies.
The initial Test against Wales is a very opportune time to start the revival. We have good history against the Welsh. Despite losing Will Genia, Samu Kerevi and Mumm to France, injury and suspension respectively, if we can show the Northern Hemisphere what we’ve got with a dominant performance first up, we’ll be well on our way to boosting the self-esteem and morale that seems to be lost in the team (including coaching staff!).
The team I’d like to see being used for this first match would be something like this:
Scott Sio, Stephen Moore, Sekope Kepu, Rory Arnold, Adam Coleman, Lopeti Timani, Michael Hooper, David Pocock, Nick Phipps, Quade Cooper, Sefanaia Naivalu, Reece Hodge, Tevita Kuridrani, Israel Folau, Dane Haylett-Petty. Res: James Hanson, James Slipper, Allan Alaalatoa, Rob Simmons, Sean McMahon, Nick Frisby, Bernard Foley, Mariko Koroibete
What do you think our chances are? Are you feeling confident or doubtful; optimistic or pessimistic?
RedandBlack
Guest
Rugby has always been a game that you play for 60 min for what you can do in the last 20. Its not a great insight from TM, or just the All Blacks, or even just international level. Its part of what makes it the game that it is and a facet that has survived all the rule changes over the years. To quote an American race horse trainer whose competitor had said 'one more inch and we'd have had him' - 'The race was a mile, not a mile and one inch.'
John
Guest
Does it take a rocket scientist to work out why's the AB'S field 3 fullbacks?
Republican
Guest
.........I believe Ireland derive their players from both the north and the Republic. Having said that I am aware that in Eire, the code is fairly minor in status compared to the real codes of Hurling and Gaelic Footy. Bordering on blaspheme to be using 'Eire' in respect of their Rugby team and even moreso, since it is a Sassenach game. Apologies.
ClarkeG
Guest
Don't you forget it.
ClarkeG
Guest
Ohh I noticed what Moore did to Whitelock at Wellington. Yet there was a lot of focus on Coles using a forearm and an eye gouge that wasn't an eye gouge.
ClarkeG
Guest
Take his pill? - he needs to change the pill. :-)
Blinky Bill of Bellingen NSW
Guest
'dominating because you have more ball and more possession is fools gold if you don’t turn it into scoreboard dominance'. Actually I'd say it's even worse than fools gold. Failing to convert territory and other stats into points effectively has you thinking 'holy crap......we're done for'. And then you're suddenly aimlessly kicking the pill away because everything else has failed. I'm a Wallaby fan through and through and want the team to succeed at the highest level. From my observations we need to work on skills, fitness, selection and of course the right game plans. From this will come confidence and then we're away. For a team that plays the All Blacks more than any other team, I am disappointed that we don't seem to have figured out how to beat them. Stage 1. Recognise that the AB's are an exceptional Rugby team; then Stage 2. Work smarter and harder than them to become better than they are.
Gonzo
Guest
But Jeff. Nathan Grey said they would have no difficulties fixing their Defence HAHA Who are we to question the wise words of Horan.
Rugby Tragic
Roar Rookie
Not so much off base. Todd is and has been a good player for a number of years and had a great game for the AB's (MOTM performance)... He is very unfortunate though that he had Sam Cane (who is much more physical) and Ardie Savea (who has got that 'X' factor) ahead of him. The AB selectors have since before the RWC 2015 rated Todd behind McCaw and Cane. With McCaw gone Ardie Savea has leapfrogged Todd. Hansen suggested before the June series, the unluckiest to miss out on the AB squad was Matt Todd. Good to see him though in the squad for the Northern Hemisphere jostles.
Deano
Guest
"However to suggest that “the AB’s were systematically emptying the Oz tanks over that period” (the first 60 minutes of the game) is hubris at its finest." Yet Steve Hansen said exactly that after the test against the Argentina...the match you referred to: "But it takes a lot of energy too, to do what they[Argentina] were doing ..." The way Argentina played, copied by Australia: select a very large forward pack, have them run straight exchanging short passes. Commit numbers to the breakdown to prevent turnovers. Build up huge territory and possession stats. The ABs instead of employing a rush defence, employed a drift defence, don't commit numbers to the breakdown, stay patient. This made me chuckle: "Maintain the rage for the length of the game." As if rage has to do with anything.
Riccardo
Guest
That's actually a really nice mid-range Shiraz Ralph...
Riccardo
Guest
No Shane it's not. Love it.
jaysper
Roar Guru
Frisky, you are committing the same sin that you are admonishing others for. . I agree that you can't say that it was a close game except for the score board. But, you CANNOT then turn around and imply that the difference would have been bigger had Barrett kicked better. . The score is the score is the score. The teams played and the ABs were 27 points better than the Wallabies - no more, no less! . The only argument I would make is that the Wallabies defence was far superior to what it was at the beginning of the season, but unfortunately their attack is still as weak as a kitten. . Whilst this performance level will see them crushed EVERY time by the ABs, it is probably good enough to dispatch any other side on the planet. Not every time, but at least 50% of the time.
lassitude
Guest
I think you'll find there's a difference in aerobic fitness that has been growing over the last 5-6 years and is most marked between tight forwards. This isn't something that Oz rugby will fix in just one pre-season either IMO - but they need to assess and get started.
jaysper
Roar Guru
I really do think the Wallabies have improved a lot since that whitewash against the poms. I know it doesn't really look like it, because they have been smeared across the park by the ABs on three separate occasions. However, their defence was MUCH better in the 3rd Bledisloe until they ran out of puff and I don't think the poms will have the wherewithal to grind the Wallabies to the point of exhaustion like the ABs did. . So, I will pick a close win to the Wallabies. At least I hope that's the case. I don't much care for either coach (they're both clowns IMO), but as an independent observer I will generally prefer an Ozzie win over a Pommy one.
jaysper
Roar Guru
Sorry, yes you are correct in terms of multiplying out the probabilities. But, that assumes the outcomes are independent, whereas I would argue that success breeds success and each win they take will increase the odds in each subsequent match.
Tiger
Guest
Antoni "The Kiwi Hater" is in the house! You feeling alright buddy? You take your pill today?
Frisky
Guest
It was not a "close game" except on the scoreboard. B.Barrett had his boots on the wrong way around. His goal kicking was terrible - The worst that I have seen from him by far. Foley missed a few sitters as well. Maybe there were deceptive winds putting them off. However if one allows for "normal" goal kicking outcomes, the AB would have been demoralisingly ahead by half time. Despite the above, the AB (thanks to DC) were comfortably ahead at 50 min in the WC and the WB still gave them a fright. The only conclusion one can draw is that the whole "50 min" analysis is a waste of time. Given the pattern of the AB consistently finding an "extra gear" in the last quarter, we should be discussing their fitness regime. Is it superior to the rest of the world's?
What!
Guest
They beat Aus 3-0 and set records against Aus in Aus. Theyll be at home this time and I dont think Aus has improved throughout the season much if at all. I think Aus has about 35%. Against Scotland I give them 50%. Against France I actually give them 40%. France will be better imo. Against Ireland I give them 45%. I think theyll win 1 or 2.
What!
Guest
Wow. Is this about Australia or just Australia vs NZ? There is more to international rugby. I think Aus and Eng look the most likely to challenge NZ in the next 5 years myself anyway. Aus prospects look very good. Genia, Beale and Cooper seem to be getting form back. Arnold and Coleman look like quality prospects, real quality. Timani looks like he could do a job at 8 and Hooper and McMahon are brilliant prospects at openside. They are both young still. I think Cheika will opt for 9 Genia/Phipps 10 Cooper/Foley 11 Koroibete 12 Beale 13 Kerevi 14 DHP 15 Folau 23 Hodge In the backline. Aus has a great team in the making. Eng do too. Watch out for Scotland, theyre going to be good. NZ are going to remain the best for a while but I think next year and 2018 will be much harder for NZ but I think this winning record will extend well into the 20s.