The Wrap: Foley TKOs Cooper as Australian conference tightens up

By Geoff Parkes / Expert

Folau fatigue allowed Australian rugby’s second-most divisive talking point to resume centre-stage on Saturday night, with Waratah’s fly-half Bernard Foley showing that he’s not about to hand over the Wallabies No 10 jersey to Quade Cooper any time soon, helping his side to a 23-20 win against their conference rivals.

While this was an important match with implications far broader than two players squaring off against each other, these aren’t two ordinary players, so the opportunity to match them up in analysis is too tempting to ignore.

Cooper has enjoyed a strong, consistent year to date, but by every measure he was well beaten on Saturday night. To illustrate, I recorded the number of involvements by both players, rating them as positive (eg long kick to space or touch, high kick to contest, effective tackle, effective cleanout, et cetera), neutral (‘average’ touch-finder, standard pass, et cetera) or negative (missed tackle, missed touch, missed shot at goal, handling error, et cetera).

Cooper had a total of 14 positive, 22 neutral and 8 negative involvements. Foley’s tally was 21 positive, 21 neutral and 4 negative.

In Foley’s shame file were two early penalty touch finders that went dead in goal (perhaps worth double points?), but he settled into the game, grew noticeably in confidence, and was near faultless in the second half – an outstanding achievement for a playmaker on a tricky, slippery night.

Foley also won the key moment of the match, a one-on-one battle when Anaru Rangi overthrew to a 58th-minute lineout. Both players made a beeline for the loose ball, Cooper attempting to snatch it and spin, while Foley hit it chest on.

It was Foley who emerged out the other side with the ball, into clear air on his way to the try that would prove to be the winning of the match. A knock-out punch!

Behind the statistics, it is clear that Foley benefitted from the excellent platform his pack provided in the second half, compared to Cooper who struggled once his side lost all semblance of shape.

In fact a number of Cooper’s involvements came at halfback, with the Rebels so ragged and lacking in ‘go forward’ that any opportunity for constructive backline play, already deemed marginal due to the greasy ball, was lost.

Denied front-foot ball, and with Will Genia’s penchant for being the central point of the Rebels’ attack, Cooper should by no means be written off. He once again made a couple of excellent tackles and provided a vital clean out in the lead up to Bill Meakes’ first-half try.

But this was Foley’s night. His body language and demeanour told the story at the end of the match – he had been served up a challenge to his Wallabies starting position and he answered it in the most emphatic way possible.

(Photo by Mark Metcalfe/Getty Images)

So the Rebels now have the same questions being asked of them as they were at this time last year – are they the real deal or not? Can they go the distance?

Certainly not if they continue to offer their opponents a head-start with the poorest discipline in the competition. Of the seven consecutive penalties that cruelled their second-half, some were due to nothing more than sheer inattention and laziness.

They are not a lazy side – far from it – but there will need to be some soul searching over their bye week to ensure that the values of hard work and playing for each other are once again brought to the surface on match day.

It is this that will concern Dave Wessels more than the fact that the Rebels missed an opportunity to put space between them and the chasing pack – with the Reds and Brumbies both winning on tour, the Australian conference now resembles the ‘Titus Afficius’ South African conference.

The Brumbies are no strangers to winning in Africa, but this was one of their most noble efforts, required to effect no less than 224 tackles on their way to beating the Stormers 19-17.

They also took their opportunities, Pete Samu and Rory Arnold showing impressive finishing skill for their first-half tries, before holding their nerve to free up Tom Banks for an easy run-in to put them ahead mid way through the second.

It was a lead they would never relinquish, the Stormers growing increasingly frustrated by their inability to turn possession into the points that came so freely in Melbourne only a week ago.

The story wasn’t much different for the Reds in Durban, their 21-14 win demonstrating a growing maturity in Brad Thorn’s side. This was a composed effort, built on defensive intensity and willingness to run in support, as for Tate McDermott’s excellent second half-try.

(Photo by Steve Haag/Gallo Images)

For the Sharks read the Stormers – an off week at home and a missed opportunity to skip clear in the conference.

The Lions are not the high-flying side of recent seasons, but they were another side to get the job done impressively away from home, 23-17 against the Chiefs.

The Chiefs fell back into the bad habits of the first three rounds, showing little respect for possession, miracle offload attempts merely turning into a regular supply of possession for the visitors.

The Blues will have to wait a while longer for a win at Forsyth Barr Stadium, the Highlanders stepping up in the second half to close the game out comfortably, by 24-12.

Blues blindside flanker Tom Robinson has (rightly) been receiving plaudits for his energetic and physical performances this year, which seemingly served to spark Shannon Frizzell into a dominating performance, his best of the season – just the type of game to warm the hearts of three All Black selectors.

Club golfers know the feeling of whenever things go well early in the round, when their score is ahead of the card and a good result is looming, of tensing up and playing defensively on the back nine to ‘protect’ the score – invariably moving away from the things that were serving them well in the first place.

That’s exactly what happened to the Sunwolves who, after jumping out to a 23-7 lead against the Hurricanes, stopped playing far too early, kicking away possession and allowing the Hurricanes to take the game back to them.

23-29 represents an opportunity lost for Tony Brown’s team, while the packed bleachers represents an opportunity lost for SANZAAR and the game. The Japanese Rugby Union may well see their future closer to home and outside of Super Rugby, but this type of tribal, enthusiastic support is sorely lacking in Super Rugby.

Quite simply, more should have been done to find a way to keep the Sunwolves in the competition.

Meanwhile, anyone seeking relief from ‘Folau fatigue’ by focusing on the federal election campaign instead should have quickly regained their senses and be eying off Folau’s code of conduct hearing, tipped to take place sometime during the week starting 29th April.

This hearing is not a court case, and as such, Rugby Australia’s legal eagle Justin Gleeson SC, merely has to convince the three-person tribunal that Folau has breached conditions of his employment.

If the panel agrees that Folau is in breach, then the matter will run its course; Folau will be terminated, and will either accept his sacking (unlikely, despite previous assertions to the contrary), or initiate court action against Rugby Australia for unfair dismissal, which would then result in either a court hearing, or a negotiated settlement.

The chances of the matter proceeding to court are the same as Folau ever playing rugby for Australia again – somewhere between very slim and zero.

Rugby Australia will not allow the matter to fester in the media and court of public opinion, continuing to divide the game, when its very action in calling Folau to account was designed to take the discussion off the front and back pages.

If things were to be allowed to drag on, an opportunity to use the matter to galvanize widespread support around Rugby Australia’s values of inclusivity and respect would become mired in complex legal minutiae, religious diversion, free speech martyrdom and plain untruths – like Mark Ella’s comment in Saturday’s The Australian, where he erroneously claimed “Michael Cheika said this week that he would not pick Folau because of his religious beliefs.”

In crusading on behalf of Folau, Alan Jones unwittingly hit closer to the real nub of the issue from Rugby Australia’s perspective, mocking the involvement of Raelene Castle and Andrew Hore because they are “both Kiwis talking rubbish and questioning the character of Folau”, before adding, “The difference is, Folau is authentic.”

It is Folau’s very lack of authenticity that has so upset Castle and her administration. Not the genuine strength of his religious beliefs, but the fact that he was prepared to shake hands across a table, agree to a specific set of behaviours in turn for accepting a lucrative financial contract, before welching on his word.

For that breach of trust alone Folau deserves strong condemnation. It is also the very reason why ex-teammates have spoken out publicly against him.

(Anthony Au-Yeung/Getty Images)

Also notable is the non-role that Folau’s manager Isaac Moses has played since the matter re-ignited. Moses is no shrinking violet, but a fearless advocate and negotiator on behalf of his clients, regarded by some in the NRL as more powerful than CEO Todd Greenberg.

Yet in this case he remains conspicuous by his absence, perhaps because Folau is now taking counsel closer to home.

Castle would have had a realistic expectation that her past role with NZ Netball, and relationship with star shooter Maria Tutaia, would have provided her with an ‘in’ to Folau, at least to the point of reinforcing the spirit of last year’s negotiation.

That door has been slammed shut, and in the process, it will make for a frosty negotiation between Castle and the power couple, who, for the reasons stated above, know how keen Rugby Australia will be to avoid taking the matter to court, even if their advice suggests that they will win.

Whatever the eventual settlement, Rugby Australia can also expect to be pilloried about the ‘cost’ – which would conveniently ignore the fact that it was Folau, not they, who brought the situation on, and that Folau’s salary is not an additional cost, but an amount already budgeted for.

Also, the confident assuredness in the play of Kurtley Beale, Reece Hodge and Tom Banks at fullback on Saturday night, and the looming return of Dane Haylett-Petty, suggests that there already exists viable alternatives for the Wallabies within their existing salary structure.

The Crowd Says:

2019-04-26T03:36:51+00:00

Ex force fan

Guest


"Whatever the eventual settlement, Rugby Australia can also expect to be pilloried about the ‘cost’ – which would conveniently ignore the fact that it was Folau, not they, who brought the situation on, and that Folau’s salary is not an additional cost, but an amount already budgeted for" Yes Folau initiated the breach and a settlement is the most likely outcome. However this is additional cost as you will not only pay a settlement amount, therefore paying a player that is not playing, you would also need to contract another player to fill the gap left with Folau's exit. If it will be within the amount budgeted will depend on the amount RA negotiate in the settlement and what they will need to pay to fill the gap. They surely have not budgeted for this scenario.

2019-04-26T03:30:25+00:00

Ex force fan

Guest


Numpty, I do not share your view that Aus rugby is in a better place than 12-24 months ago. - Australia was ranked #2 on the IRB Men's rankings by end of 2016 we are now at #6. Despite axing the Force, the gap between the Wallabies and the All Blacks are bigger than in 2016. Other teams like the Boks and Ireland had success in 2018 against the All Blacks, the Wallabies are no closer to success than they have been in the previous 3 years. - It was expected that axing a team would provide a short term boost from concentrating available talent in 4 teams and making funds available to buy Genia, Beale, Folau etc as well as retaining coaching staff. However was this meager short term "improvement" in Superugby worth it? Especially if you remember that it comes at the cost of sacrificing the Western Australian rugby community, the 3rd largest player base in the country? This closed off the pathway to the Wallabies in WA as only a single players from WA made the U20 Wallaby side. - Did RA improve as organisation and addressed their core issues? No, the lies continue from the very top with Cameron Clyne stating that RA saved $14 million in 2018 by "axing the Force", while it is well known that RA only provided $4.3 million to the Force in 2017 as finance and just over $16 million over a ten year lifetime. How can you save more than everything you spend (the $4.3 million)? With this kind of leadership, who can blame the players from not following through on their promises? RA as been plagued by crisis after crisis and the underlying cause is a lack of integrity at leadership level. We are no closer to resolve this core issue.

2019-04-26T03:01:51+00:00

Ex force fan

Guest


I do think that RA should examine if the big stick approach was appropriate to prevent a repeat of an incident that happened in 2018 - and a breach of contract. The heart-to-heart chat with Raelene failed to have the impact she wished for, however I would suggest that a mentor for Folau that could help moderate Folau's fundamentalist views. Surely there is something to learn from this incident.

2019-04-25T01:44:01+00:00

Fox

Roar Guru


The vote was not overwhelmingly in favor of same sex marriage and this has been analysed by professional statisticians The survey returned 7,817,247 (61.6%) "Yes" responses and 4,873,987 (38.4%) "No" responses. An additional 36,686 (0.3%) responses were unclear and the total turnout was 12,727,920 (79.5%) nearly 8 million Australians said yes but nearly 5 million also said no - and this is the big but pointed out by statisticians - over 20% of the population did not return the survey so their views are - the unknown voters. The argument could equally be made that 5 million Australians could be offended the other way - or does their offence not count? Certain well organised and mobilized sections of the community love to play the victim, and being offended has been turned into a global neurosis where the other sides opinion is systematically, and too often, irrationally shut down and and shut out of the conversation by a loud and yes - increasingly intolerant political left who attack by branding and demonizing any political views that don't harmonize with their own political agendas. This is a form of political totalitarianism and has nothing to do at all with being tolerant of differing and diverse points of view.

2019-04-25T01:19:23+00:00

Fox

Roar Guru


I don't agree with former Wallaby coach Alan Jones on everything but he makes a valid argument IMO when he says "“How odd that Rugby Australia preaches ‘diversity’ and ‘inclusiveness’ when what they really mean is uniformity or exclusion,” ( from The Australian Newspaper)

2019-04-25T01:11:32+00:00

Fox

Roar Guru


I agree with you Geoff about the ARU not wanting it to go to court because they know that will open up a lot more legal cans of worms and Folau might win and if that happens it would mean that they can no longer shackle a players freedom of religion and speech regardless of the contract and that would then stand as a legal precedent that all codes would have to adhere to. Their only option then would be to instruct coaches not to select them - but then that can be argued with not much legal twisting at all, as a restriction of legitimate trade ( the product being their football talent) based on religious or any other belief as the case may be. So like you Geoff, I think the court case is the absolute last thing the ARU would want - because if he wins, then by legal definition they were in the wrong and they would have to pay his big legal costs as well.

2019-04-25T00:57:16+00:00

Fox

Roar Guru


Ahhh nice one Geoff - yes the never ending transparent masks of the bigot against kiwis and it's this raging bigotry that always soon reveals the truth behind each new mask. If I want to find out - and he certainly loves to be vitriolic toward me in his blogs - I just say something I know will get under his new masks skin and sure enough, the mask comes off!! Ahh Drongo - there you are :)

AUTHOR

2019-04-23T10:52:14+00:00

Geoff Parkes

Expert


It will be fascinating if it does go to court somer, but I am certain that RA will avoid this at all costs. Which of course makes their negotiating position weaker, with the Folau's knowing this. Re Qantas, I think you make too strong a link. Although they're major, they're not the only sponsor, and not the only sponsor with the same view. If it came to it, RA would likely argue potential damage to something like 'their revenue base', and quantify it in broader terms, as opposed to anything specific Qantas may have said or asked them to do.

2019-04-23T10:04:24+00:00

Muzzo

Roar Rookie


Hahaha!!!!! What about "Beaver", T/man? Lol.

2019-04-23T07:59:13+00:00

somer

Guest


It's a tough one, you could argue that he didn't freely agree but was coerced into doing so by the AR. Can an employer write any demand they want into an employment contract? The answer is no, it has to be within reason. One could put forward the argument that the religious opinion of a singular player isn't really detrimental to the AR's brand, values or financial position and likewise the same argument could be applied to Qantas. Is the public really going to punish Qantas because of the opinion of one contractor who's not even their employee? Especially considering that Qantas and AR have made it abundantly clear they strongly disagree with Folau's opinion? I think Folau actually has a strong case that the contractual demands of the AR were unreasonable because they were based on the personal political agendas of Qantas's management rather than any real business negatives that Qantas will likely to experience. I think it will go to court and Folau's legal team will ultimately argue that the personal political agendas of the sponsor don't get to trump Foalu's freedom of religious expression. Of course, Qantas are well in their rights to withdraw sponsorship, they have no legal obligation to the AR or Folau, but the AR is bound by employment law.

2019-04-23T07:15:16+00:00

Corw

Roar Rookie


His breakdown work and tackling have all come on well this year, and he is consistently the chasing threat on the box kick

2019-04-23T05:55:30+00:00

Ken Catchpole's Other Leg

Roar Guru


The trouble with both being selected is that it changes the rest of the backline when you do.

2019-04-23T05:50:59+00:00

Ken Catchpole's Other Leg

Roar Guru


Harry, “QC is a 2:1 man, and Foley a 1:1 man. I’d go with Cooper as WB 10, because he makes things happen.” Spot on in a nutshell. This has been true for at least five years, and we sadly have less than 1:1 win/loss to show for it. How anyone believes that the status quo is superior to a ‘risk’ on QC beggars belief. Never take a knife to a gunfight, (or a popgun for that matter).

2019-04-23T04:11:10+00:00

Jimbo81

Guest


Quade reacted to Foley's hand in the ruck which the referee missed - he escalated the situation by shoving Foley for cheating which deserved a review from the ref as it would have meant Foley in the bin and a Rebels win. The commentators picked it up as did I watching the game. Hand in the ruck JUST as the rebels pass the ball causing a fumble.

2019-04-23T03:45:50+00:00

Danny

Roar Pro


True on timing numpty, but it's been on my mind for several years. RWC is creating interesting competition, but it's also disrupting teams with enforced resting. Might have cost Highlanders v Rebels for instance. And SWs just don't look like they belong despite their run of tight losses. I truly hope SANZAAR rebuilds the comp from ground up. The Heineken Champions Cup looks much more elite these days. Super rugby needs to regain the mantle of the best elite provincial comp going round.

2019-04-23T03:34:56+00:00

taylorman

Roar Guru


True, though CLL is probably in I guess if Cheika's already crossed Quade off previously. Not a bad set of options really. We have Barrett, Mo'unga and....Black? Ioane? (bar DC, Crudes, Hayden P of course)

2019-04-23T03:21:33+00:00

Timbo (L)

Roar Guru


Some gold in your comments. Cooper is great when all is rosy but struggles when the pressure is on. Foley is consistent, and relatively dependable but doesn't produce an x-factor attack. In my opinion, in international rugby, Defense and consistency come first, flashy comes second. Foley has always been my preferred choice over those two. I have always seen Deegan, Lance, CLLF and Now Hegarty as better options with Jack Deb, Jackson-Hope, Mason and Stewart waiting in the metaphoric wings for the opportunity to develop. That is before we mention Hodge and Maddocs potential in the position.

AUTHOR

2019-04-23T01:51:29+00:00

Geoff Parkes

Expert


"One intercept, as good as it was in not the way to judge a player." Which is why I analysed the effectiveness of their involvements over the whole match RG. Foley's try was just the cherry on top for him. And no argument about Foley missing touch twice from penalties - unacceptable. But he was good enough to put it behind him, and he hardly made any error after that. Love a good halfback who can pass swiftly, straight off the deck! There's not enough of it in Australian rugby.

AUTHOR

2019-04-23T01:46:28+00:00

Geoff Parkes

Expert


"I think its obvious both should be selected" Hard to argue that, despite CLL having a strong couple of weeks.

AUTHOR

2019-04-23T01:44:45+00:00

Geoff Parkes

Expert


That's a fair point in general Jacko, although every situation has its own context and specifics. How about we say instead, Raelene Castle is bitterly disappointed personally about Folau breaking his word? That's not what the case rests on, just a comment about an (important) aspect.

More Comments on The Roar

Read more at The Roar