“One hundred per cent, mate,” came the direct response from Wallabies coach Michael Cheika.
“One hundred per cent,” he repeated, for dramatic emphasis of what would become the immediate soundbite, simultaneously setting the tone for the build-up ahead of this weekend’s second Bledisloe Cup Test Match.
It was a very deliberate answer, pointedly delivered eyeball-to-eyeball straight back from where the very deliberate and equally pointed question came in the opening moments of the press conference on Saturday night.
After the Wallabies missed 37 first-half tackles to trail 40-6 at halftime, sending the press corps and broadcasters alike scurrying for the record books, Cheika was always going to be asked if he continued to have full faith in the defensive systems implemented by his defence coach, Nathan Grey.
And Cheika knew it was coming, clearly, because there was no pause before the answer. He couldn’t be seen to have any doubts, even if he did. So, he tried to jump straight on it, not giving it any chance to get away from him.
“One hundred per cent, mate. One hundred per cent.”
[latest_videos_strip category=”rugby” name=”Rugby”]
Sure enough though, Sunday’s headlines told the tale of woe.
“Wallabies stunned by All Blacks in bizarre Bledisloe opener”, Fairfax ran with. “Cheika defends the indefensible”, the Daily Telegraph in Sydney followed, while for the Courier Mail in Brisbane, former Wallabies skipper Andrew Slack opined with scything accuracy, “Somehow, the Wallabies debacle was worse than it looked.”
The test for Cheika, and especially Grey now, is how to address the many defensive issues.
The Wallabies introduced a new structure for this Test, so they said post-match, which still looked remarkably similar to the same players in motion, swing-your-partner-round-and-round, overly complicated musical chairs structure that’s been causing defensive issues for 18 months now.
Whether it looked any different to the New Zealand attackers is immaterial, because they did the same thing they’ve always done: eyed off the likely chink in the alignment, and run at it.
When you look at Australia’s missed and ineffective tackle numbers, the one thing the stands out is that the bulk came from the three-quarter line of Curtis Rona, Kurtley Beale, Samu Kerevi, and Henry Speight. There were 17 missed tackles between the four of them, according to the official SANZAAR numbers.
In the case of Rona and Speight, most of the ten they missed collectively came in midfield, where the two wingers defended in the centre channels. Now, Rona has defended at 13 for most of the season for the Western Force, but never at 12 or 13 having come in from the wing. Likewise, winger Speight doesn’t defend in the centres for the Brumbies for very good reason.
A combination of two guys defending in unfamiliar territory and circumstances, a lack of communication, and no real evident trust in the inside defenders meant defenders were pushing in too far, or worse, not far enough all night.
Slack summed this up perfectly: “Time together is crucial and with debutant Curtis Rona given some midfield defensive responsibilities, the All Blacks smelled blood in that area and drank it like a thirsty vampire.”
Photo by Mark Nolan/Getty Images
Similarly, for Beale and Kerevi, many of their seven combined misses came when acting as the designated shooter in defence, where the idea is to pressure the ball-carrier and make the tackle – or at least slow the opposition player down – well behind the gain line. But again, a combination of poor initial-contact and the slide defence not reacting quickly enough in behind created way too many gaps for the All Blacks to create second-phase opportunities.
Beauden Barrett worked this out quickly; if he just took the initial shooting contact, or looped around another crash runner into said shooting defender, the lack of cover in behind was where the space was.
Too many moving parts, not enough trust, and lazy cover in behind the shooting defenders are the three major failings of the Wallabies’ current defensive system. And if that’s not attitude of the individuals, like Cheika suggested post-match, then it must be a failing in the system itself.
Grey knows he’s under pressure, but worryingly doubled down on his strategy.
“As a defensive coach, it’s difficult. But that’s the great thing about the game. You get to look at things you did wrong and how you can improve. You lick your wounds, pull yourself together and get stuck in again,” Grey said, as the Wallabies set up base in Christchurch on Monday.
“We had a good look at it and really believe the way we’re trying to do things … is going to be really positive for us and when we get that right and everyone executes we can get the results we’re looking for.”
Their staunchest defence at the moment does indeed appear to be when defending the clearly indefensible.
If the crucial step of beating addiction is admitting to the problem in the first place, then the Wallabies appear to be a concerning distance from the rehab clinic just yet.
Akari
Roar Rookie
Well informed, OB @12.50pm and totally agree @6.07pm.
Akari
Roar Rookie
It's good to know as I have always wondered why he was there and his role. All cleared now and thanks, Brett. I have also wondered whether there has been some communication disconnect as the 3 assistants, Grey, Larkham, and Byrne are never seen with the coach during a game. I guess being mic'd up is close enough.
Akari
Roar Rookie
Not aimed at you, J. I was just saying the description matched Ned Hannigan (and I should qualify that with) at this time. He is still a boy and can and will become better as he grows into the role expected of him one season ahead of time I guess.
Jock Cornet
Guest
We should target NZ & more Fijian juniors and make them Oz citizens. We have no cattle.
Kia Kaha
Roar Guru
The problem with shooters is that they invariably turn the gun on themselves.
Kia Kaha
Roar Guru
Love that line, Brett. Grey's reappointment was a huge mistake. Cheika is all about loyalty. He's not going to throw a colleague under a bus. So instead he builds a trench and a moat and the irony is that the defensive structures he's building around his defence coach are much sounder than the systems that same man espouses. He realizes too that defence is not intuitive. He can't say now well into the international season: 'yeah you're right, he's rubbish. Let's bin him, mate.' Because who does he bring in and how does he teach that new system to the players. Do they walk onto the field and face the haka as they peruse Defence for dummies? The players know the system is a lemon. They know they bled tries against New Zealand sides like a group of hemorrhaging hemophiliacs. My belief is the only hope is to find a leader to preach to the unconverted and make them believers.
Kia Kaha
Roar Guru
Love your work, Harry. I think I dreamt last night Phipps badgered the ref at Dunedin about a card. The ref promptly replied: 'Sure. Here you are. Off you go for ten minutes. Goodbye, you are the weakest link.' Now if that were to come true...
Boonzie
Guest
"Their staunchest defence at the moment does indeed appear to be when defending the clearly indefensible." So sad and so true... And the comment is the only smile I've had about rugby this week.
Suzy Poison
Guest
Thanks Link. You are correct Conner 33 did NOT answer the question. I may be wrong, but the top four teams in World Rugby don't shift the 10 in defence, at least NOT on a regular basis like the Wallabies. All Blacks, as Shane D has pointed out rarely move out Beadon. He defends at 10, 90% of the time. Owen Farrell is good defender and is not moved for England. Neither does Sexton move for Ireland. And Jantjies who is the most lightweight of the lot of them (Note the Boks have moved to 4th place ahead of Wallabies) still stays at ten the majority of defensive plays. This means the players gets used to and trust the player next to them in defence, and I personally believe the Wallaby system is flawed.
ClarkeG
Guest
One might ask ...if Barnes used the theory that it was not clear and obvious that Folau was offside and thus the try stood then why would not Barrett's try be allowed on the basis that it was not clear and obvious that Foley grounded the ball at least simultaneously. I'm pretty sure I know what the answer would be however it would be interesting to have the lawmakers explain why. Having watched it again I'm not convinced that Foley, although he made contact with the ball simultaneously...possibly...with Barrett, had downward pressure on the ball, whereas it was clear and obvious that Barrett did.
Machooka
Roar Guru
What I find really disturbing here is that this 'two dads' actually thought he had a point... and further thought he should share it. Post it.
Charging Rhino
Roar Guru
If a shooter can hit ball and player at the same time then it can be very effective and lead to intense pressure and create turnovers. JP Pietersen was very good at this and reading the oppositions attack. BUT you have to be 90% sure as a defender you're going to make that tackle and pressurise the attack. And certainly not at every play. It depends how deep the attack is standing. You need to read it and strike at the right times, like JP back in the day. But playing it as a set plan and structure at most plays with players constantly changing their positions in the defensive line is just ridiculous. Ludicrous system imo. Jean de Villiers and Jaque Fourie were also very good but read it and executed at the right times. It's why the 2009 defensive pressure from the Springboks was so good. Conrad Smith was excellent on defence too.
soapit
Guest
these constant 3 man overlaps have been happening for at least 12 months,
Andy
Guest
Jacky probably still thinks the all blacks only won due to dodgy refereeing decisions
Brett McKay
Expert
Can someone explain to me why this even matters?
Brett McKay
Expert
Sure, no problems...
Brett McKay
Expert
They did, effectively. That was how they decided that there it wasn't conclusive a try had been scored..
ClarkeG
Guest
But none of that matters of course. The only thing that does matter is....when he released the ball, was it in a forward direction...yes or no. If you can't be sure then it's a no. I'm saying I'm not sure. Funnier things have happened (e.g. they ruled that it was not clear and obvious that Folau was offside) but I would have been surprised if the try had been disallowed for a forward pass on the basis of the replays I have seen. But yet again it just proves that we can all watch the same pictures and come to different conclusions as to what we see.
stillmissit
Roar Guru
None taken WNM and likewise with your insights. You are totally correct. All I was trying to say in an aphorism was that if the guys were trained, had a plan but could not Hit, Stick and Hold on, then it is all in the attitude. Guys in the Wallabies hanging out an arm is a damaged shoulder waiting to happen.
Shane D
Roar Rookie
Genia, Foley, Beale, Rona, Folau, Phipps & Hodge will surprised to hear they are now Fijian! Foley & Beale will be even more shocked to hear that the reason they couldn't find holes is that they are Fijian.