Facing a full-pitched Ben Stokes delivery at Edgbaston, Steve Smith’s front foot was outside leg stump, his back foot deep in the crease as he creamed another boundary through the covers.
Stokes stood bemused mid-pitch. He uttered some words towards Smith, presumably some technique tips. Smith shrugged his shoulders and gave a bit of lip back. Stokes, like many of the world’s bowlers over the years, no doubt wondered how Smith can be so unconventional yet so incredibly effective.
It wasn’t as if his footwork was sluggish because it was early in Smith’s dig. He was on 89 in Australia’s second innings of the first Ashes Test in Birmingham, with the score at 4-209 and a lead of 116 runs.
Smith, of course, went on to make 142 – his second century of the Test – to set up Australia’s thumping win after being in massive strife on day one.
His batting is intriguing for many reasons; the fidgeting, the idiosyncrasies, the wrist-work.
But what makes Smith so unique is how he values practicality above anything aesthetic. He plays some stylish strokes, but he’s not as graceful as Ricky Ponting or Michael Clarke. He doesn’t whack it as hard as Matthew Hayden or Andrew Symonds.
He’s more Steve Waugh than Mark Waugh. Smith is so proficient is working the ball into gaps and so attuned to the risk and reward depending on the state of the game.
Smith isn’t worried about appearances and being lauded for his elegance and polish. Smith infuriates opposition bowlers.
His technique isn’t textbook but he thinks deeply about how he can steer, manoeuvre and guide the ball around the field.
Pragmatism is key. In fact, selectors were happy for the Australians to get into the grind with England by picking Peter Siddle and not Mitchell Starc.
They went for Cameron Bancroft and not Marcus Harris. They weren’t focussed on blowing England off the park with pace and power. They were comfortable to be patient and combative.
It worked. Australia only really got on top midway through day four.
Steve Smith of Australia (Photo by Visionhaus)
It’s not too far-fetched to draw a parallel with the mindset the Wallabies might look to adopt as they head towards the World Cup with two Bledisloe Cup matches against the All Blacks, starting with Saturday’s match in Perth.
One major similarity is practicality.
We’re all familiar with the recent record: four wins from 13 Tests in 2018 — the worst year for Australian rugby since 1958.
The Wallabies conceded a heap of points. They averaged just 19.2 points per game – just the second time since 1984 the Wallabies failed to average more than 20 points per match. Stephen Larkham, Australia’s attack coach, was sacked.
So the Wallabies can’t expect to light it up during the World Cup in Japan. They aren’t going to morph into a lethal attacking juggernaut over the next few months.
Plus World Cups, in the knockout stages at least, tend to be low-risk battles. Springboks coach Rassie Erasmus and All Blacks coach Steve Hansen have already stated they expect this World Cup to be dominated by smothering, rush defences that will likely mean low-scoring affairs.
So how should the Wallabies approach the Bledisloe Tests? Aim to win ugly.
Michael Cheika has repeatedly stated that he wants to craft a Wallabies team that Australian rugby fans can be proud of.
It’s an admirable ambition, but it seems like the coach might quantify that goal as moulding a side to be entertainers, with an emphasis on keeping the ball in hand and moving the pill side to side.
It hasn’t worked. Wallabies fans can be proud of a side that can keep it simple and grind out a victory. To win ugly.
Are the Wallabies ready to shelve the running to win ugly? (David Rogers/RFU/The RFU Collection/Getty Images)
Kick for territory. Get Nic White or Will Genia throwing up box kicks for Reece Hodge and Marika Koroibete to contest. Get Christian Lealiifano chipping and grubbering in behind rush defences.
When deep inside opposition territory, set up for field goal attempts and be content with moving up by three points. Kick for the corners and try to scrap for a lineout win against the throw.
Stay disciplined and aggressive in defence, and ensure that if only two tries are conceded per game, you’re always in with a chance. South Africa have proven this works over the last few years against New Zealand.
The Boks have stripped things back and have pushed them hard every time, including a memorable win in Wellington last year and a draw in the same city a few weekends ago.
Don’t think Boks fans are depressed that Erasmus hasn’t got them being overly creative in attack. They’re very happy to win ugly.
Do you think Brumbies fans were overly concerned that a good chunk of their tries during this year’s Super Rugby season came from lineout drives?
That hooker Folau Fainga’a dived over for 12 tries because of the simple and efficient ploy from the lineout? No way.
Perhaps Cheika doesn’t think the Wallabies can win ugly. Does he think that he doesn’t have the cattle, especially the dominant forward pack, that can assert themselves physically and bully other teams?
If so, the win over Argentina in Brisbane should give him confidence that they can grind out victories in big games. That’s a fine and feisty Pumas side, and to beat them, even in Australia was a top-drawer win.
Strip it back. Dial down the second-man phase play and wide midfield passing. Kick for space or kick it high and then pile through in defence. Win ugly.
It’s what the Wallabies need right now. Wallabies fans don’t expect nor crave 25 phases of running rugby.
They crave a gritty win over the All Blacks that gets them excited for the World Cup. There’s beauty in simplicity. It doesn’t have to be fancy. Just find a way to get the job done. Like Steve Smith.
Ryan
Roar Rookie
Stu - agree. A penalty shot in the opp red zone is sometimes a concession of great defence. Mentally, a plus for the opp.
Stu
Roar Rookie
When the true heart and soul of Aus Rugby makes his long awaited Kingly return, I hope we might start to accumulate more ugly wins than lovely losses. As long as he's put in at 7 and captain, that is. I might be waiting a while.. :-|
Stu
Roar Rookie
I agree. Taking a lowly three from a penalty every time it's on offer might get you 15 to 20 points, but also gifts NZ (for example) a halfway kick restart back to deep in our territory. Meanwhile during 80 minutes, they run in 5 or more converted tries anyway, and don't p1ss away the chances for seven points over three. I don't think building score board pressure in three point instalments bothers the Kiwis in the slightest!
Machiavelli
Guest
Hi Will, We could be converging on strategies. My comments on how to win the WC from a post (article???) earlier today: Machiavelli Guest August 10th 2019 @ 12:19pm There is nothing new in this world, and everything old is new again. So how to beat the AB’s? The Wantabe’s are too boring and predictable, right? When was the last time you saw them do something creative/innovative? My strategy would be to mix it up….put simply, don’t do the same thing twice in a row…most of the time…keep them guessing…all game long. Do the unexpected. Then when you do something twice in a row, then it becomes a big surprise. Rugby is not cricket, we are not bowling out swingers all day long with a surprise in swinger every now and then. Rugby is too short and brutal for such subtleties. So what does “Do the unexpected” mean in concrete, physical examples? How about these for starters: Kick offs The options are short, medium, long…in combination with flat along the ground, medium pop kick, or a rain maker. My personal favourite would be to place the ball flat on the ground, and drill it at the 22m line, as hard as you can. Rugby’s version of a flat out mully grubber. Woe behold any forward that gets in the way of that kick. Best outcome: Knock on or line out on the 22. General play Gee, the leaugies do the 2nd man play so well, don’t they? Why haven’t we adopted it? Plus all their other good moves? We are stuck in some kind of fly half wrap around time warp, never to get out of it. Adopt all the leaugie plays that work well….such as cutting out the fly-half by passing to the the inside centre who acts as the playmaker with support streaming off each shoulder….the list goes on. Why aren’t we learning anything new? Kicks in general play Rush defence getting up to quick?….start chipping over the top. Defence now hanging back? Good, opens up the field to run onto the ball. How about the new drop torpedo that the leaguies are using this year? Uncatchable….get on board. 22 Drop outs Short, medium, long etc…..or my favourite, 6 men stand spread out across the 22. They pass it quickly until someone has a gap in front, dribbles it over the line, picks it up and off the next support play, they score at the other end. Sorted. Attack lines Flat attack, deep attack, outside centre as fly-half? All good attacks…mix it up. Defence Oh how I would love pick the best 15 defenders in Super Rugby in their positions and give them a shot at the Wallabies. Stop the AB’s from scoring anything (well, maybe a couple of penalties) and all you need is 1 or 2 pentalties to win. Never going to happen, of course. Boring as bat droppings. People want to see attacking flair…gets the punters through the turn stiles, you see. Personally I couldn’t care less if we beat the AB’s 3 to 0 for the next 10 years. But you get what I am saying….pick better defenders based on the stats (Watch Moneyball a few times). Anyway, don’t they say that defence wins World Cups? Well, lets prove it…what have we got to lose….we are headed for a pool stage exit at best. But seriously, defence needs to become a better weapon. Embrace the crunching hit. Find people who love to tackle and put some real hurt on the opposition. Maim that flyhalf!!! Instead of kicking the ball out for lineouts, I would love to see the drop torpedo bomb used to put some hurt and some fear into the opposition. We just need some hard nuts to do it. They must be out there somewhere in Super Rugby land. Defending in the 22 The opposition know that you want to get out of the 22, so they try extra hard to attack you in your own 22. So you either kick it out….rarely byond the 22..(especially from in your own in goal) and immediately hand the lineout, posession and field position back to the opposition. Or you kick downfield as far as you can (rarely past half way) and give the ball back to the opposition who are attacking you in your 22 again. Either option is not real smart – but easy and lazy. Again, I turn to League (and I am a rusted on rugby fan – but I have been enjoying the League this year!) where they tend to tough it out with runs up the centre until finally swinging it wide and finding space out on the wings. In other words, do the hard work to get out of there rather than the soft option of handing the ball back to the opposition. Even better, if you have a forward pod on each side of the field, just pass it back and forward between them until you break out? Sound simple? Sometimes the simple plans are the best. And here’s the kicker (pun intended)….in the meantime, the opposition have been trying extra hard and burning all their petrol to put pressure on you to force you to kick. They know you want to kick. They know you will take the soft option of kicking, if they just keep pressuring you. Ever heard of rope a dope? Let them burn themselves out on our solid but brilliantly planned waves of attack. That comes at a big price later in the game, which should be taken advantage of. I know there are flaws in every one of my suggestions above. But where has the strategic and innovative thinking gone in rugby (Declined ever since the annual city vs country games)? The Wallabies have nothing to lose…they are at their lowest ranking (or close to it) ever. For a small fee, I am available for the Wallabies annual strategic (long term) and tactical (short term) planning sessions! But what would I know? I am just a mug punter/keyboard warrior/disgruntled/disenfranchised fan. I may never hear from RA anytime soon….or will I (Maybe after the next Wallaby Walloping)???
Oblonsky‘s Other Pun
Roar Guru
At the very least we should force other teams to beat us. Not let them beat us, or beat ourselves.
PeterK
Roar Guru
exactly
Oblonsky‘s Other Pun
Roar Guru
I don’t think that’s what rugby has ever been about, to be honest. Go back and watch World Cup finals from 91-11 if you don’t believe me.
Oblonsky‘s Other Pun
Roar Guru
Personally, I think 12 try games are terrible. GRR is like an American sport to me, essentially saying: ‘no one is having fun unless teams are scoring every 5 minutes.’ It’s boring, and robs the sport of its diversity. I would be surprised if scores were much lower now than in the 05-12 period. I think it has been pretty consistent for a long time.
Oblonsky‘s Other Pun
Roar Guru
Not sure we can out grind them at this stage. But we can try and grind and then hope that some of our players with flair can bring it home.
Ex force fan
Guest
Low scores, conservative rugby played and few tries scored tells me defenders are dominating. I prefer the 12 try games played in GRR that the two tries test matches.
Ex force fan
Guest
The laws should reward those teams that are prepared to play positive rugby. It do not.
Ex force fan
Guest
12 tries with 2 power tries in 70 minutes. Too one sided but that is how rugby should be played with both teams attacking from anywhere. The Valke will realise that GRR is a step-up from Div1 Currie Cup and that need to work on their skills and fitness before next year
QED
Roar Rookie
sure point taken . I will pay that
Chivas
Roar Rookie
A swallow doesn’t a summer make. For all DC’s sublime skills and good looks, he is no Lescabora. In fact in terms of drop goals he doesn’t even rate among the top 20 drop kickers of all time. In fact not a single New Zealander makes the list. Zinzan got a couple over too, but I am pretty sure he also doesn’t compare to players like Wilkinson, Porta etc. and that is what my response was too, not whether or not he got one over in front of the sticks off his less favoured side.
Oblonsky‘s Other Pun
Roar Guru
I actually think the laws have gone too far in favour of the attacking team, the team in possession. Also, making teams play the ball in the scrum when the opposition goes down but it is at the back. I would love if referees were a bit more balanced when it comes to breakdown refeering - siding with the defensive team a bit more often, rather than almos always the attackers. To balance this, they could start being more ruthless when it comes to calling rush defences offside.
Waxhead
Roar Rookie
exactly .... so you'll be booing WBs, cheering for ABs and helping them a home game win :)
The Slow Eater
Roar Rookie
Love it
Don
Roar Rookie
I think you’d have to conclude we don’t have the talent based purely on SR results and our test record in the past 3 years. However, I’m not totally convinced that we don’t have the “cattle” purely because we’ve got / had such a poor group of coaches in key sides like Graham, Stiles and Thorn at the Reds, Gibson at the Tahs and above both, Cheika with the Wallabies. I’d have to expect people like Jake White, Rennie, Lancaster and co to have gotten more from recent Reds sides. Likewise Jake White or a quality foreign coach would never have sunk 3 years into Phipps, Foley and Beale all playing poorly but assured selection. No sane coach who had a concern for their employment or even had some respect for the other players trying their guts out would have given Ned Hannigan 25 tests. So… whilst I suspect we don’t have the talent, seriously, we lack quality in our coaching ranks to a greater degree than we do amongst our players. And good players being forced to play dumb footy is never going to win our share of games.
GrahamE
Guest
We’ll be there in “Force” - blue and treat the Wallabies with the same respect that East Coast Rugby and RA have treated the Western Force over the last 3 years.
Bourkos
Roar Rookie
This scoreboard you are talking about is 1:2 this year. The wallabies lost to a SA side that drew with the all blacks, which they played at altitude. They then beat the argie side that was close to beating the ABs. Think you need reality. That's not to say I am not looking forward to cheika leaving.