'No answers': Only questions and confusion left lingering from Wallabies' loss to England

By Brett McKay / Expert

It’s now more than 48 hours since the Wallabies lost to England on Sunday morning, Australian time.

And now that the immediate emotional post-mortems and reaction of varying levels of rationality are behind us, I’m left with a strange but somewhat familiar feeling of unknown.

On one hand, 32 points to 15 looks pretty comprehensive, yet it really wasn’t. Two tries to none, and one of those coming in the final seconds of the game, doesn’t exactly scream 17-point English domination.

Yet on the other hand, 18 penalties conceded, two silly yellow cards, and 18 missed tackles don’t exactly paint the picture of a team that narrowed the margin to four points on four separate occasions and back to one point just after halftime.

(Photo by Laurence Griffiths/Getty Images)

It took England 72 minutes to get out by ten points, their biggest lead of the match by that point. So if there’s a point to be made that the Wallabies didn’t play a lot of rugby, then England really didn’t play that much more.

And if the Wallabies could stay in the game as much as they did, why on earth were they so ill-disciplined to gift England so many point-scoring opportunities? Particularly given the recent history of this contest?

Honorary Wallabies statistician Matt Alvarez made a telling observation on Twitter several hours after full time on Sunday:

When indeed? Owen Farrell missed a relatively kickable attempt in the 53rd minute, too, and of course Marcus Smith kicked the penalty to create the ten-point gap in the last ten minutes.

Post-match, Dave Rennie made mention of the one-sided nature of the game, “we got hammered in the penalty count. I think the possession and territory stats were in the 60s in favour of England.

“They choked us down there and we just made too many errors and dumb penalties. They put us under pressure, so it was frustrating.”

(Photo by Shaun Botterill/Getty Images)

It’s here the official Autumn Nations Series website earns some due credit. In looking for some numbers last week, I discovered that the official site has been providing a much bigger set of the same Perform stats that many of us see on sites like Rugby.com.au, ESPN, and even the SANZAAR sites.

Yes, all the sites will tell you the final penalties conceded count for this game was nine against England and 18 against Australia. But it was here the extra stats on the ANS site tells us that five of them were in the ruck, three in scrums, and another five conceded on the ground.

And these were still being made until the 72nd minute, remember. How many more had to be conceded before the penny dropped? How any more for the same thing – off feet in the ruck, or running kick-chasers off their line?

“Halftime we hadn’t had a lot of ball or territory, but it was 16-12 and we fought hard. I thought if we could string a little bit more phases together, we could put them under a bit of heat,” Rennie said, kind of speaking to my point above about staying in the game almost in spite of themselves.

“But not accurate enough, not good enough, tonight.”

(Photo by Ian Hitchcock/Getty Images)

Not smart enough, either. And not quick enough, for that matter.

The extra data on the ANS site tells a bigger story here, too. Of those 41 Wallabies rucks won, 21.6 per cent produced ball in three to six seconds, and 37.8 per cent took more than six seconds. Add those two together, and you see that nearly 60 per cent of all Australian rucks took at least three seconds to clear.

By contrast, the same stat splits tell us 45.9 per cent of England’s 65 rucks won recycled ball in under three seconds, and another 34.4 per cent in three to six seconds. That is, more than 80 per cent of their ball was won in under six seconds. It’s no wonder the Wallabies attacked from a standing start so often.

But again, I keep coming back to the same point: the Wallabies got back within a try on four separate occasions.

Worryingly, the defensive efficiency has slipped for a second straight week, with the 18 missed tackles dropping the rate back to 83 per cent success rate.

(Photo by David Rogers/Getty Images)

Equally worrying, England missed one in every four tackles attempted and the Wallabies couldn’t make them pay for that, despite making several second half line breaks.

At a guess, some of the 12 bad passes or 15 handling errors were probably related to this.

And I do wonder now about the impact – or lack thereof – of the overseas contingent over this past fortnight?

I’m quite sure the Wallabies coaches and selection panel were hoping for considerably more than what we’ve seen, and right now, I’d welcome suggestions as to why they shouldn’t be sent back to their European clubs this week with the best wishes of their country, and we’ll go back to the guys we were using before, thanks very much.

Yes, Rory Arnold has been good in the lineout and the maul defence, but so were Darcy Swain and Matt Philip. Tolu Latu didn’t show me anything in 16 minutes that Connal McInerney or Feleti Kaitu’u couldn’t. Kurtley Beale was decent under the high ball, I suppose, but so has been Andrew Kellaway.

(Photo by Paul Devlin/SNS Group via Getty Images)

Will Skelton, in 47 minutes, has totalled three runs for two metres, made three tackles and turned the ball over.

As far as I can tell, the only positive to their filling holes in the tour squad is that some young guys have been able to start and will complete full pre-seasons back in Australia. I’m confident that was not supposed to be the sum total of the decision to pick European-based players.

And in fact, given the way James O’Connor continues to sit back in the pocket, I now wonder why it wouldn’t make more sense to slot Noah Lolesio back in at ten for the last game against Wales and rebuild the same tactics and game plan that delivered a series win over France back in June. Which feels like a decade ago, suddenly.

Sports opinion delivered daily 

   

It would be rather ironic to finish the season the same way it started, given the journey in between, but it also feels like we’re pretty much back to where we started.

What worked a month ago now doesn’t. What seemed to make sense a month ago has amounted to nothing.

Hence my confusion today. Hence all the questions.

This has been one of the harder columns to write in recent months, because it’s really hard to make sense of anything about the Wallabies right now.

If this feels like a bunch of collected thoughts loosely cobbled together, that’s because it is.

I have plenty of questions, but simply no answers.

The Crowd Says:

2021-11-19T04:34:08+00:00

Gepetto

Roar Rookie


The TMO only has to intervene a few times and ignore a couple of things and the balance swings substantially to the home team. I appeared to me that the Welsh maul was held by the Fijian pack on several occasions until three or four Welsh players detatched from the back and charged a Fijian player not invlved in the maul creating a safe obstructed path to the line. No TMO involvement there; I suppose Fiji is used to it.

2021-11-17T06:39:44+00:00

Pinetree

Roar Rookie


Yeah, it was more a pondering thought… :laughing: Not expecting you to drag up stats on behalf of my lazy ar$e! :thumbup:

2021-11-17T05:11:24+00:00

Stu

Roar Rookie


Home ground advantage is a massive, real thing: not many teams win the penalty count if they're the away team.. I'd be interested to see in top tier matches how many times England has lost the penalty count at Twickenham / the Wallabies have lost the penalty count at Suncorp, Sth Africa has lost the penalty count at any of their grounds. The ref and TMO interpretations of Rugby laws and rules are an utter lottery to start with. That match had a lot of adjudicated 50/50 calls that seemed to go England's way, which is an anomaly for a 50/50 penalty. Such moments entirely reverse any progress the penalised team would otherwise have made if they'd received the 50/50 call. When scrumming front rows collapse at the exact same time and the ref awards a penalty, one team is enormously put under pressure from the ensuing kick and attack up field.. when all along it was hard to say who caused the collapse in the first place. Adjudication of rugby rules is a farce most of the time, so you'd better hope you're playing at home to assume 50/50 calls end up 60/40 in your favour. IMO, they really need to simplify the rulebook massively, so that ambiguous events aren't awarded penalties to either side, and team/player momentum can evolve the result of the match organically. Bad ref calls shouldn't even be a thing..

2021-11-17T05:04:18+00:00

DaveJ

Roar Rookie


Nice article and interesting stats Brett. As for not learning from penalties - good point, but with the five scrum penalties most if not all are because one prop gets forced into an infringement rather than deliberately infringing. If an intelligent visitor from another planet came and watched a few rugby games, especially in the NH, they would conclude that the best way to win lots of games would be to breed two props who could make their opposite numbers fall over or stand up every time, along with a freakish Frans Steyn who could pop penalties from 80-90 metres out. The strategy is then knock the ball on as soon as it comes your way, have a scrum and bingo! Even with the 90 seconds wound down off the clock for every kick at goal plus another 1-2 minutes for repacking the scrums, I reckon you’d have a good shot at 60-0 every game.

AUTHOR

2021-11-17T04:36:57+00:00

Brett McKay

Expert


No, they don't go to that depth, I'm afraid! They're good, but not that good..

2021-11-17T03:45:11+00:00

stillmissit

Roar Guru


Brett, I suspect this is a systemic issue and well worth a few questions in an article? Our club level would not equate to the level of playing pro for Harlequins.

2021-11-17T03:35:53+00:00

Pinetree

Roar Rookie


Didn't have much time to look at those stats before work, but re-looking at this, regardless of why so many tackle breaks didn't turn into points, it is a positive that both centres have 1 line break and 4 defenders beaten, which is a good sign for those young players heading forward in development...Maybe the passing stats could tell a story of why those defenders beaten didn't translate on the board?

2021-11-17T02:27:42+00:00

jameswm

Roar Guru


Sorry Brett - I don't agree you discard someone after 15 mins.

AUTHOR

2021-11-17T01:09:31+00:00

Brett McKay

Expert


That just underlines my point though James, if you need to look at other form. Unless Latu has been absolutely starring week-in, week-out for Stade, then it's immediately questionable that he's going to add more than a couple of guys who've been in the system and running the patterns for several months. And if that's the case, then what's the point?

AUTHOR

2021-11-17T01:06:59+00:00

Brett McKay

Expert


The major issue is simply the lack of development opportunities, isn't it. The fact that Smith has played as many games for Quins of a similar level *per year* that Lolesio has played in a couple of years is illustrative... (And yes, I've sold Lolesio a touch shot by not including 1st Grade club games in his count, it wouldn't even up the count anyway).

2021-11-17T00:38:06+00:00

Hoy

Roar Guru


Maybe I do... I remember a few of the same issues though... or maybe that is my brain tricking me...

2021-11-17T00:06:41+00:00

LuckyPhil

Roar Rookie


I am not sold on Banks either, but out of all the options available he is maybe the best. An alternative, which never seems to get a run at international level is Jock Campbell.

2021-11-16T22:53:51+00:00

Joe King

Roar Rookie


I think he would say that if the Wallabies are to ever be as competitive as they can be, it won’t be because of a particular coach. Coaches are only as good as the systems below them. That’s why really good coaches seemingly often fail to perform, and not so good coaches sometimes look pretty good. Until we understand what really produces winning teams, and re-jig the rugby system in Australia accordingly, the Wallabies are always going to end up back in this place.

2021-11-16T22:16:41+00:00

Joe King

Roar Rookie


Hey Brett, you should do an interview with Ben Darwin. Put all the questions to him.

2021-11-16T21:54:18+00:00

RobC

Roar Guru


Thanks BeeMc. It is as you said: - Just because they are overseas doesnt mean they are better - Also, those chosen last week didnt get much training time - There was minimal continuity - Loss of form players Samu, QC, etc showed again . But as you mentioned, there's more issues in play: - https://youtu.be/m4XfCwss5U4 the squide explains a bit - But I dont agree totally because Rennies tactics against the ABs this year was brainless and bereft of wisdom . Oh well. At least the scrums werent a total failure

2021-11-16T21:35:53+00:00

Backrower

Guest


This just misses the point entirely. Our discipline, now that Cheika has gone, does not appear to have improved. Draw your own conclusions, but there is an obvious one available and it has nothing to do with whether the Wallabies would have won certain matches this year.

2021-11-16T21:34:37+00:00

Sinckler for the rules

Roar Rookie


Brett agree there shouldn't be but in practice there is. From memory this SR trans Tasman there was a red card to Damien Mackenzie that some commentators were saying was wrong and then I can't remember which Barrett it was but it was a pretty clear red card which was only given as a yellow. Whereas in the premiership the players and commentators know exactly what is going to happen because it's consistent.

2021-11-16T21:19:09+00:00

stillmissit

Roar Guru


Just found the U20 game v England and Smith didn't play 10, Vunipula did. We got done 56-33 by England and their forwards looked pretty good we did get a red card near the start of the game. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DNeScjZBrvM

2021-11-16T21:13:29+00:00

jcmasher

Roar Rookie


Exactly. Relying on two players to resolve all the passing and discipline issues that were at the heart of the last two losses seems a bit much too

2021-11-16T21:03:01+00:00

stillmissit

Roar Guru


Brett, that is a surprising difference and I assume we have too little faith in talented youth to play them at SR level as the Kiwis' can undo them early on. Harrison would have played 10 against Smith, might try to drag up any utube showing that.

More Comments on The Roar

Read more at The Roar