The Wallabies have copped a 24-point loss against Eddie Jones’ England, and it’s safe to say that result was much less than Australian fans hoped for going into the match.
That said, it was largely a competitive performance until England ran away with the match in the latter stages, and many will say that the scoreboard didn’t truly reflect the game.
Is that true? One way to answer the question would be to look at the individual performances of the players, rather than the overall result for the team.
And for that reason we’re opening up our DIY Player Ratings to you, Roarers. Have a vote and let us know what you thought of each player’s performance.
If you’ve not done our DIY player ratings before, it’s a simple enough process. Hit up the form below and rate each player from 1 to 10 based on their performance. We’ll keep track of the results and publish our findings tomorrow.
You’re free to rate players as you like with 1 being the lowest and 10 being the highest – or toss an NA on any player not worth rating – but if you’re looking for a bit more detail than that, our handy little guide might help you make your judgments…
1. Had he not played, the team would have been better off. Negatively affected the performance of the side. May God have mercy on his soul.
2. Anonymous. Was he even there?
3. Did some things that you expect a player to be able to do, but did a whole bunch of other things that sucked.
4. Was passable in patches, but not up to standard in a squad of such depth.
5. Performed his role without anything really noticeable happening.
6. Good.
7. Pretty good, actually.
8. Very good.
9. Excellent.
10. Might as well have been John Eales.
USrugger
Guest
Oz beaten by a better Pom side. Nuff said!
Quading in...
Guest
Let's admit that O'Keefe was under a lot of pressure and did make some blunders. He didn't officiate offside at the ruck well, and let England off despite penalties following the warning. That said, we prob cant blame anyone other than ourselves for the disallowed tries. If korobeite managed to kick the first one then hoops would be onside. If Moore keeps out of the way korobeite scores an absolute ripper. We should feel encouraged by the 2nd and 3rd quarters of the game, which we dominated. The big thing for me was the lack of awareness of Beale in going forward and not tracking the kicks in behind the defensive line. Big risk and repeatedly poor positional play. His lack of urgency to get to kicks was woeful. McMahon, Koro and Kerevi were brilliant in attack. Foleys kicks were horrible but the conditions play a part in that particularly. Last thing for me is that hooper had improved in his approach to refs. Less petulant now. Sure he was by the end but that was somewhat understandable. And at least O'Keefe was good in not presuming the wallabies had the worse scrum... Sio and Kepu showed they were clearly dominant...
Jp
Guest
Complaining about the ref? I thought only kiwis done that..
Farcical Rugby
Guest
Right, so because Allan says so, all 4 decisions were correct? I'll take Cheika's word over yours any day mate. Corruption is alive and well in English rugby. That stunk, and if you think England weren't getting a pre-ordained free ride through the puppet TMO whenever it was possible, you need your head read.
Cheikmate
Guest
Rubbish. If Beale caught that he was away for a try. As if he shouldn't go for it. He's caught much harder than that.
Allan
Guest
Why focus on the ref and the so-called controversial incidents? That is not why the Wallabies lost !!! Ben O'Keefe had a good game despite the fact that certain Wallabies showed him little respect. They probably thought they could dominate a younger referee. Well, they and Cheika cannot intimidate this excellent referee. O'Keefe was calm and objective at all times. All the "so-called" controversial decisions were well reviewed and correct. Any good international referee would have done the same. 1)... Hooper WAS offside in front of the kicker. He should have stopped, so rightly his try was disallowed; 2)... Hooper deserved his Yellow Card, as did Beale; 3)... That England try was correctly awarded as the ball clearly did not touch or cross the line. 4)... Moore obstructed the tackler and it was right to award a penalty.. Sadly, once again Cheika demonstrated his juvenile instincts on camera during the match and with the press. Yes, Mr. Cheika as you said, "Everyone has Eyes"; however, sometimes I can't help but wonder what sort of glasses you are looking through. As an Australian rugby lover I hate to see such petulant immaturity both on and off the pitch. . The Wallabies were just not as good as England overall, although both teams played similar over-structured physical campaigns. There was little imagination from anyone until the English subs showed good creativity late in the second half. The Wallabies had far too many handling and execution errors. Poor skills were on display, we saw many forward passes and dumb immature decisions; they did not look like a well-coordinated experienced or skillful side. To be fair, England were not perfect but generally they played with more maturity. They looked more experienced and were comfortable with the wet conditions. In short ENGLAND deserved their win.
rebel
Guest
Very accurate observation Dave. Neither side was favoured.
PeterK
Roar Guru
Beal'e not even close to 50/50 a yc everyday
PeterK
Roar Guru
knocking the ball out like that is considered intentional knock on, ref also said Itoje was not bound and was offside, I didn't review it but at the time he struck the ball he was unbound , the question was did he unbind before the ball left the maul.
PeterK
Roar Guru
england were better and played very good wet weather rugby, however ref wasn't even handed at all. England offside a lot not penalised, collapses maul, side entry not penalised. England warned infringes again and not carded. Hooper penalised and carded when not offside and no prior warnings.
JimmyB
Guest
I'm not sure why you're upset with the Itoje incident when you clearly don't think that he did anything wrong, which I agree with btw.
Dave_S
Guest
Even if Beale’s palm is up, he is zero chance of intercepting that. Steve Smith wouldn’t have caught that one. I think it’s a dumb rule, but it was applied consistently with other similar decisions.
Timbo (L)
Roar Guru
I can't agree with that statement. The only one that left me bitter was the Itoge knock down and Beale's Yellow.. It was Either Yellow or play on. The ball was out, He had pushed his way through the Maul Legally, He knocked it backwards. Is there some law that you can;t go for the ball if you are still bound in a Maul that has finished? If there is a low, it is cynical play, yellow! Beale made the mistake of having his hand sideways when he went for the intercept. 45 degrees upwards would have got him out of trouble. It felt a bit harsh but is one of those 50/50's
Dave_S
Guest
Seriously, he wasn’t perfect but he was even handed. The Poms has better luck, but that’s the Rugby Gods. The only way the WBs win that game is if the ref really tilts it in their favour.
Sgt Pepperoni
Guest
Without the ref it would be anarchy - very hard to win in that situation
Mark
Guest
Score of 1 to the ref. Had he not played the wallabies would have won