WILL GENIA: 'Absolute machine', 'Slow under pressure', the Wallabies' good, bad and ugly

What about that game. It was pretty much exactly the same as the first one, except the French didn’t butcher it.

They deserved their win and if we’re being brutally honest, they deserved the first Test as well. It should be series over.

They’ve surprised me massively. I thought Australia would win the series 3-0 and win comprehensively, just because of the star power that’s been left out of the French team.

The weight of possession and territory probably favoured Australia but France were good defensively, holding off Australia on their line for large periods.

Their physicality was impressive and the changes they made in the pack – those guys were monsters.

I knew they would be better than Brisbane because they haven’t had much preparation because of Covid and because of quarantine.

In the first Test they really simplified their game and looked so much better for the run with a lot more rhythm and running in the legs.

In Melbourne they looked on another level physically from game one – very impressive and dominant and had more parity at the set piece than in first game, which allowed them to play a little bit more.

Their players came over here being told they were a second or third string side and that Australia should win.

The fact they should have won in Brisbane, despite being written off, would have given them so much confidence.

The French group is young. They’re guys who don’t have a lot of experience at that level. It’s essentially the gift of youth – they’re not held hostage by all the baggage. Yes, it’s 31 years since France won in Australia, but it wouldn’t have sat in their psyche, the things that have happened in the past.

France’s head coach Fabien Galthie looks on during a training. (Photo by Anne-Christine POUJOULAT / AFP via Getty Images)

It goes to show what Fabien Galthie is developing over there – a good culture that when it’s your turn to step up into the jersey you’re expected to deliver a performance that the likes of Antoine Dupont and Romain Ntamack themselves deliver.

It shows that French rugby is in such a good state that they’ve got depth right up to the third string players and they’ve got a lot of good young players coming through as illustrated by the fact that they won the last two under-19 World Cups.

Tactically, I think they realised they had the edge over us in physicality and they really tried to assert that dominance, particularly in and around the breakdown whether it’s in defence putting on pressure to turn over the ball or in their ball carries.

When they punch in behind the line and they get go forward they don’t then look to shift the ball wide, they just keep it in tight and keep rolling through the middle with the pick and goes and that’s where the Wallabies came unstuck on defence.

It was hard to stop and obviously through that pressure you infringe and their fullback kicked seven penalties.

Wallabies need to step up a level

There were two areas that I felt were to blame for why the Wallabies didn’t win.

The breakdown was obviously one of the key points but the other one was really simple unforced errors.

They dropped ball in contact, there was poor positioning in the back three, not catching balls on the full. Simple things like that really kill off momentum.

It was a similar story to the first Test too when Marika Koroibete scored that try early. It was very similar to Hunter Paisami’s disallowed try in the first Test. If that counts it changes the whole complexion of the game – Australia get momentum and ascendancy and can push their way into the game.

Across the game we were so dominant with territory and possession and we have to make that count in the form of tries.

Part of the problem is the change in levels.

Everyone asks me what the difference is between Super Rugby and Test rugby and for me it’s two things. You have less time and space and you have less room for error.

The first means you might be able to execute a long cut out pass or play someone into space in Super Rugby because you’ve got more time, but at the top level the time and space gets cut down, so you have to make decisions quicker.

This is particularly important for young players coming through. You need consistency of selection because they have to get used to that lack of time and space compared to Super Rugby.

With less room for error in Super Rugby you might get away with a missed tackle because someone covers you on the inside and outside. You might be slow to the breakdown but you get covered because the level of opposition, while high, isn’t at its absolute peak.

(Photo by Graham Denholm/Getty Images)

When you get to Test level, you play against the best of the best so if you miss your mark at the breakdown by a step or two, you’ll get turned over. If you miss a tackle on the inside or hit a poor kick where there’s no chase, you’re going to get stung.

The more someone plays at that level they will understand the differences between Super and Test rugby and understand they’ve got to be a little bit better in terms of making decisions without with the time they’re used to at Super Rugby.

What we did right

I liked that off the French kicks we tried to counter-attack. It played to our strengths because the Wallabies are a multi-phased based team.

We like to hold onto the ball, we’re fit and I liked we didn’t get into a kicking battle with them off the counter attacks – we got the ball into guys like Marika Koroibete’s hands.

I thought Tom Banks had a strong game and on a couple of occasions he looked to use the ball off the kick-off as well and caught them by surprise.

In the first Test, and probably over the course of his Test career, he’s struggled at times to get involved and find himself with the ball in hands in time and space. It seemed like he tried to get in at first receiver a little bit more to get his hands on the ball and get involved.

He carried very strongly and I thought he was good out the back in terms of his position and communication, and he set up that potential match winning try for Michael Hooper.

Hoops again, what can you say? He’s an absolute machine. You run out of words to say how good he is – constantly involved in the game, always having an influence whether it’s at the breakdown, in defence or his ball carrying.

They’re a completely different team depending on whether he’s in or not in that side.

Being there at the end to score that last try – that’s always been his game. He’s such a consistent performer at elite level, has a big engine and never stops.

He’s always where he needs to be in defence and attack and he’s not just there – he’s always making an impact with his touches, whether it’s his carries or his tackles or his work at the breakdown.

Well within the last 10 minutes and he was the one pushing through to get that ball to score that try. That’s when you want your big players standing up and he’s constantly doing that over the course of the 80 minutes. He’s immense that bloke.

Marika, though, was far and away our best player.

His ability to be involved in the game at all times is just amazing. He’s either chasing back on kicks, chasing back on opposition line breaks or, if he’s not getting the ball in space on his side of the field, he works to the other side, gets behind the breakdown looking for work off the 9 and 10.

You have to be at the ground to fully appreciate how much he gets involved. His enthusiasm is just infectious and I love watching him play.

He was my roomie and one of my good mates when I was down at the Rebels and he’s an incredibly relaxed guy off the field – loves to have a beer, really chilled – but the moment you put him on the field for training or a game he goes 100per cent all the time. There is a switch that flicks and he goes and goes and goes non-stop.

(Photo by Graham Denholm/Getty Images)

Back to Brisbane

Dave Rennie has said he’ll make some changes and if James O’Connor is fit enough you’ll probably see him given an opportunity.

I think Noah Lolesio played pretty well again, so do you keep him there and slot JOC in at 12?

The interesting one for me is Taniela Tupou. He played really well but I thought he has much more of an impact coming off the bench like he did in Brisbane.

I think at the start of the game when everybody’s fresh he still be a physically dominant and influential player at set pieces and with his ball carries. But I think his influence becomes more exaggerated when he comes on with 30 or 35 to go like he did in Brisbane.

I wonder if they’ll consider putting him back on the bench for the third Test.

I think the coaches might be disappointed with Tom Wright. Tom is one of my favourite players and I love the way he plays – he has incredible foot speed, he’s strong in contact and maybe he’s just lacking a little bit of confidence.

I’d like to see them stick by him because moving forward into the Rugby Championship he’s someone who can give headaches to teams like South Africa in New Zealand. I want to see him be able to build some confidence and build some rhythm.

Dave might also think about giving someone like Fraser McReight a go. Fraser is our best exponent of the pilfer at the breakdown, so maybe they will bring him in off the bench to combat what the French are doing.

And I know I wrote about this last week, but I’d like to see Tate McDermott play and nothing changed my mind in this game.

While I thought at times Jake Gordon was quite good, at times he was a little bit slow on his delivery and maybe that’s because of the pressure they were putting on him at the breakdown.

You’ll never know until you give someone like Tate a go to see what he can do at the start of the game.

It’s an opportunity to give him a chance to see if he can be a starting Test player. You’d probably rather give him that opportunity now rather than against the All Blacks in a few weeks’ time.

Leave some comments and I’ll drop back tomorrow and answer a few.