The Roar
The Roar

Andrew Logan

Expert

Joined May 2007

644k

Views

154

Published

121

Comments

Published

Comments

Wallabies and the nature of work

François-Marie Arouet was born in 1694 in Paris, France, and died 83 years later in the same city. In those 83 eventful years François-Marie argued with his father, fell in love – once with a French-Protestant refugee, once with a married French noblewoman, and once with his own niece – and was jailed several times.

Well done Onside – I wondered who would get it.

Hayne at sixes and sevens in rugby's short form

Nick, it was a long involved saga involving a couple of trips to North Sydney police station and a bit of a kip on the floor with a pillow I found in a cupboard. But that’s another story!

Snix degrees of separation makes rugby unique

You know me Casho…..an old jersey tugger from way back.

Snix degrees of separation makes rugby unique

Thanks Harry 😉

Snix degrees of separation makes rugby unique

100% nickoldschool……my dad used to wake me up every year for the FA Cup final and we would watch it together with hot chocolate that my mum left out in a thermos. All time!

To: The Wallabies, c/o Twickenham

Sheek….I was tossing up this week about whether to write up the “Pulver/Hawker shouldn’t get too worked up if Wallabies win etc” because clearly Cheika has led the revival, not the board. I decided that it wasn’t the time or the place….but I will be onto it next week or the week after.
If Pulver or Hawker take one iota of credit for the Wallabies performance, I will go postal. The only thing that can be said for them is that they were lucky enough to have Cheika available after the McKenzie trainwreck over which they presided.
Nothing has changed at the top….as you so rightly point out.
Cheers…

To: The Wallabies, c/o Twickenham

Cynic.

To: The Wallabies, c/o Twickenham

“The other thing I would say is that players make dozens of mistakes every game, knock ons, poor passes, poor kicks, not rolling away, crooked throws. Referees make very few mistakes compared to players.”

Bushranger – amen to that.

Rugby care factor? Unreasonably high

Ahhhh Harry…..yes I have that moment sometimes, but I like the comment above about the joy of congratulating friends when their team wins. It is a joy, and we should do more of it.
You have reminded me of a comment from a teammate when we were playing in the Hong Kong Tens prior to the Sevens a few years ago. We were sitting in the rugby club at Happy Valley having a few cold ones, and he leaned back in his chair, stretched luxuriously and said “You know what Loges?….Rugby touring is the highest form of living”. I found it hard to disagree!

Rugby care factor? Unreasonably high

England beat NZ on 19th Nov 1983 at Twickenham by 15-9.
Prior to that they beat them 16-10 in 1973 in Auckland, and before that, only the 13-0 win in 1936.
England won 3 from 13 between 1936 and 1983.

Rugby care factor? Unreasonably high

Thanks Ironawe – appreciate that.

Rugby care factor? Unreasonably high

Thanks Yogi. I was amazed at the time that people took that line – it never entered my head at all. But that is the thing about language, it is interpreted differently by everyone, and different people see different things. Just read the threads above for evidence! Cheers…

All Blacks too complete for flaky France

GeoffBrizvegas…..I can say with absolute certainty that had it been Pocock or Hooper on the end of that same incident, I would have shrugged it off. Read what I said carefully….”the fact is that there was nothing in it on either side”. There was hardly anything from McCaw to warrant a penalty….and nothing from Picamoles to warrant changing it. It just shouldn’t have even come up for discussion. Certainly Picamoles should have known he’d probably get pulled up for it, but at worst the referee should have just said “No more” and then on with the game.
My biggest problem with that sort of thing is that it will happen in the 72nd minute of a close final and will decide a match. It is not a significant event in the course of the game, but a jumpy referee will make it one.

All Blacks too complete for flaky France

ebop….you’ve missed the point. I love the All Blacks and I admire their rugby. I simply think it’s a shame how much of their identity is now driven by marketing imperatives.

All Blacks too complete for flaky France

Jokerman…..tell me which of the following phrases didn’t meet your fancy….I’ll gladly change them.

“All Blacks too complete for flaky France
Every All Black can tackle, can run, can pass, can contest the ball on the ground…
…teams playing the All Blacks have to be at their peak for 80 minutes just to compete…
The All Blacks are masters at the turnover-and-two-quick-passes Sevens play…
Read is the best 8 in the world…
…with their excellent catch and pass skills, the try is usually a formality…
They are undoubtedly the best team in the world…
So how good was this All Blacks performance really? Well, the answer still has to be that they were pretty damn good…
It was an utterly complete performance….
New Zealand are the best prepared side in world rugby and current world champions….
The high scores speak less to the poor quality of other teams, and more to the All Blacks’ ability to meet whatever challenge comes their way….
They will continue to lift and other teams must go with them.”

All Blacks too complete for flaky France

My phrase was “anything approaching regularity”, which means “not regular”, but Howi has it right. Regularity is the wrong word. The point is that France, England and Wales (in the 70’s) are the only northern teams who have actually beaten the All Blacks more than a handful of times. Ireland and Argentina are yet to beat them ever if my memory is right. So the only teams with a realistic chance of beating NZ are SA and Aus.

All Blacks too complete for flaky France

Chooka…..I think this is how Salman Rushdie felt.

Any colour you want, as long as it's All Black

Lordy….loving your work my old Sportsline mate 😉 However, I genuinely believe that Cheika made a smart decision with his Eden Park selections. He had proved the point against the AB’s in Sydney, why give them another look at his best combination at Eden Park? Also, why risk the self-belief that his first team had built up in that win?
Having sent his second-stringers to the slaughter in Auckland, he has achieved two goals. One, his first string still believe they can beat the All Blacks. And two, the All Blacks know that the Wallabies first string can beat them.
I truly believe it is all part of a massive Cheika mind-game and long-term plan. If we make the final against the AB’s (a long way to go I know!), then we are level pegging psychologically.

What is the Cheika way?

nickoldschool……I said many times to anyone who would listen in the leadup that the Cup would be won in the 12 inches immediately over the top of the ball. That England went into the tournament apparently disdainful of that fact when it had been proven several times in the Rugby Championship and the 6 Nations, just amazed me. They paid the price. Armitage would have made a difference.

The harder the Wallabies work, the luckier they get

I think Cheika has shown that he wants form players on the paddock and that he is not afraid to back young guys. McMahon is more hard shouldered than McCalman, but both are equally hard workers and it could go either way. If I was MC, I would start Pocock, aim to get ascendancy and then run McCalman on at 8 around the 45-50 minute mark. But anyone who says they know what Michael Cheika will do is full of it – he is full of surprises!

The harder the Wallabies work, the luckier they get

Sheek…..as always you are my benchmark. If you liked it….I’m happy!

The harder the Wallabies work, the luckier they get

Harry……the unofficial transcript was pure gold….”His girlfriend was the daughter of the former Prime Minister of Australia. She liked him. She never saw him do anything untoward. If he had, she would have told her father.” Just one of the gems.

The harder the Wallabies work, the luckier they get

Paul….I don’t blame the referee….I blame World Rugby for taking away any power the referee might have to make a decision within the context of the match. Clearly the referee in this case made the only decision he was able to make, at least if he wanted to keep his job and have a chance at refereeing the final.

My argument in the case of Warburton, is that the referee should be entitled to make a decision himself, taking into account the context of the situation. Weighing up the fact that it is early in the match, that it is a World Cup semi-final and a highly emotional match, that the player was not injured and continued the game, that Warburton was the captain, that Warburton has a sterling reputation for fairness, that Wales up to that point had played highly disciplined rugby…..and so on.

I believe that the exact skill of a good referee is to make good decisions within the context of the game. Any robot can follow a directive, and more often than not, a sterile directive clashes with the rich context.

I am certain that no referee left to his own judgement would have pulled the red card in that situation.

It was only the right call because it adhered to the World Rugby directive.

Wales can't take a World Cup trick

NOS…..I think the problem was twofold 1) it was a clear IRB (now World Rugby) directive; and 2) it was a semi final.

Every referee wants to ref the final, so no ref would ever go against an IRB directive in the semi when it might cost him a shot at refereeing the final.

This is the problem with modern refereeing, that it is far too heavily influenced by directives and efforts at consistency. This would be fine if it was played in a perfectly consistent environment by two perfectly matched teams of perfectly uniform-size players.

Obviously this is not the case. Weather, pitch conditions, player size and strength, occasion….all these things come into it and the job of the referee should be to make good decisions within the context of a match. Indeed, the skill of a top referee should be precisely this, to make good decisions within the context of a match – not to blindly follow a directive regardless of context.

Wales can't take a World Cup trick

Yes Will you’ve nailed it – I thought the same! What a lemon of a miracle. And as some other wag put it, it’s not like there was a shortage of mountains in that part of Wales anyway…..

Wales can't take a World Cup trick