I noticed the Etzebeth fend in real time and wondered whether they would be going back to check it. It was never mentioned by the commentators and the TMO obviously never went back for it. I was happy that the game was allowed to continue.

My understanding is that the TMO is allowed to go back only 3 phases for anything that isn’t clear and obvious foul play. By my count, 4 phases had passed so the TMO interjecting was overreach, particularly since Barnes had cleared it in the moment.

I think what happened next was an excellent bit of refereeing. I believe Barnes clearly knew his TMO had interjected when he shouldn’t have, but since he did, Barnes could hardly say, “no, I’m going to allow the try to stand despite the clear knock on because is was 4 phases not 3 phases prior”. Therefore, he finds a very technical penalty which would be let go (and was in the moment) to even things up for the ABs. Whilst it didn’t give them back the try, they got possession and a penalty in a fairly handy position on field which was the most just outcome Barnes could have orchestrated.

Just to throw another log on the raging inferno that is Australian rugby, how’s this for a crazy theory….

Maybe Eddie knew that Australian rugby needed a top to bottom clean out and a massive amount of reorganising to even consider being tier 1 again. So he chums up with HM, sells the snake oil of a smash and grab, jettisons established players, continues to make utterly perplexing, contradictory selections, then we get sent packing in the group stage.

Going out in the group stage rightly gets himself fired but he also takes down HM and the rest of the RA board that whistled a happy tune and nodded their heads when they sacked Rennie and hired Eddie.

It would certainly make his actions and selections over the past 2.5 months somewhat understandable. In order to completely renew Australian rugby, someone needed to blow it up from the inside by dragging it down to its lowest point whilst a top to bottom clear out and forced structural realignment is (hopefully) undertaken.

I’m almost certainly wrong…but what if I’m not?

Is it just me or is this a big bag of ‘nothing’?

An “in-principle agreement to work together…to look at things like centralisation. What that entails is yet to be worked out…”.

So there’s no signed agreement or paperwork…just an in-principle meeting of minds. No commitment to centralisation…just looking at things like centralisation. No idea of what it actually entails.

Seems to me to be a classic case of a tactical leak of no real substance to generate some alternate rugby coverage and divert attention from Wallaroos’ stories.

RA needs to be honest and focused on what the third tier is meant to achieve. The NPC and Currie Cup run at a loss to NZ and SA unions. Everyone understands and accepts this because the purpose is clearly understood by all stakeholders as being the development of players, coaches, support staff, and referees for the next step. This results in stronger All Blacks and Springboks.

Yes – the NPC and Currie Cup teams have some ‘connection to community’, but I would argue that the connection is inconsequential. The actual purpose of their third tier is to make better players whether they’re playing in front of empty stands or packed out stadiums. The development of players is all that matters.

Does anyone really think that sending Harry Wilson back to play for Brothers, or Tane Edmed to play for Eastwood against amateurs is going to prepare them for being elite athletes? It’s utterly laughable.

Brett asked Phil Waugh the question of ‘why not a 5 team comp’ in the latest podcast. The equivocation from Waugh was scary. He seems to be a rusted-on, self-interest protector of club rugby ‘because it’s all about connection to community’. His comment that ‘some games of club rugby are really high quality games’ is nonsense of the highest order. It’s not about having the odd high quality game. It’s about providing a structure that prepares the athletes, coaches, SC trainers, physios, and referees for the next step. That can’t possibly happen across disparate state-based club comps. It has to happen in a centralised structure with everyone working to a common goal.

5 Australian SR teams playing in a domestic comp following SRP seems to be such an obvious answer, at least to get things started, that I can’t believe that it isn’t in place already. The teams are already organising tours for their players showing that they want to be playing more games and giving players the development they need. Just give them a domestic competition structure for goodness sake!

The positives coming out of this test and series in general:

1) The White and McDermott should be the incumbent 9s moving forward. Gordon has blown his last chance and offers nothing that White or McDermott don’t already bring to the table. That’s not saying that neither the first 2 are without flaws. But they should be backed in as the incumbents until WC so combinations can be built. I really liked what I saw when McDermontt came on against Wales. The WBs had been struggling at the scrum so he intelligently fed it in and got it out instantly. Very smart to recognise how to manage the situation. Same with the rucks. Gordon was taking an age to clear the ball allowing second and third ruck contests by the Welsh. Tate cleared quickly and (mostly) accurately removing the threat of a turnover. These actions show that at least some in the team are learning to read the situation and the referee and adapt in real time. We need at lot more of this from everyone!

2) Short of QC making a miracle recovery, Donaldson and Lolesio should be the incumbent 10s. Again neither are without flaws, but I strongly agree with Brett McKay in that Foley doesn’t do anything that these to don’t. We should not be wasting an OS pick on Foley for the WC.

3) Samu is devastating off the bench. Those calling for him to start clearly have not ready Nick Bishop’s outstanding analysis of his defensive frailties. Having someone like Samu that can come on to cover any position in the back 3 is where his value lies.

4) Marky Mark – what a debut! This guy has power, intelligence, the ability to muscle outside backs, and finish tries. He needs to work on his defensive reads and tackle technique but the green shoots are very much there.

5) You cannot be competitive in international test rugby with a hooker who can’t throw straight. FF should not see even a hint of a gold jersey until he has cleaned up his technique.

Summary – despite some of the commentary around the Welsh game being somewhat negative (scrappy game, Welsh gifted us victory, etc.), I’m comforted in the knowledge that a few key positions should finally be settled and some players seem to be maturing in their game sense and management. I really hope that the end of season review puts forward an action plan across all 5 Oz SR teams regarding where players should be playing and combinations that should be supported, key work ons for each individual during the SR season, and a coherent selection strategy based on the above.

The inconsistency started in the second minute. The Wallabies kick possession back to the SBs, a ruck forms on halfway, and then Slipper edges offside – penalty to SBs. Wallabies now defending a lineout about 18m out. This put the Wallabies on the backfoot from the outset and we never recovered.

It is these simple acts of indiscipline that we just cannot get away from. They are SO easy to stamp out, yet we continuously get caught doing them. It takes no effort to stay onside for a ruck at halfway. Just do the simple things right!!!!

Rennie seems to favour injured players returning via the bench.

Or does Philip come off and Swain take over line out calling duties? That scenario scares me.

Completely agree. His selection suggests that Philip will be subbbed and Swain giving the line out calling duties – a job at which he has failed miserably.

I agree about Swain being unimpressive. I don’t see what all the fuss is about with him. His maul defence is good but I’d have Philip ahead of him.

Philip’s carrying in tight is a nice counter to Bobby V’s in the wider channel. Swain is just a penalty magnet at the moment. Another season in SR should mature him a bit.

It’s a shame that we don’t have 3 to 4 big ball runners across the forward pack. In each game, it seems like only 1 person stands up and the rest are passengers.

I completely agree about McReight. I don’t see Hooper as an automatic selection after the last 2 tests. In my book, his captaincy has always been at best questionable, and worst horrible but that’s a discussion for another part of this post. His contribution at openside was fine in the first test. It was terrible in the next 2 where he was completely outclassed by England’s 2nd or 3rd choice flanker.

I see the tests against Argentina as an ideal opportunity to give McReight the 7 jumper for a couple of matches and letter Hooper freshen up.

In parallel with this, I think discussion about Hooper as captain must be had. The constant decisions not to take points has cost the Wallabies dearly – in this test series and many others. At 22-17 in the second test and with a kickable penalty 30m out, we go for the posts, throw a crooked lineout and all the momentum the Wallabies have built is lost. Taking the game to 22-20 completely changes the way that England have to play as they can’t risk a penalty. I’m not suggesting that we’d definitely won the game, but we’d be approaching the final 15 mins with an opposition on the back foot, not able to offend, Wallabies pressuring the scoreboard, and England staring down the barrel of blowing another big lead.

Harry Jones made some very good points regarding Hooper’s captaincy in the instant reaction pod after the third test and I definitely agree the discussion must be had.

Thanks. I’d forgotten about Holloway.

So that’s at least 3, and possibly 4 players out with training-related injuries.

What are the Wallabies doing at training? First HJH goes down with a serious Achilles injury, then QC goes down before kick off with a calf (maybe this was a result of accumulated impact at training) and now Kellaway out from a hamstring injury acquired during training.

The strength and conditioning crew might need to run a comb through the program to avoid losing more players.

I was stunned that Swinton’s tackle warranted such detailed examination then almost ended up as a red if not for the TMO talking the ref off the ledge. Yet this one, which looked far worse on both initial viewing and replay, was just a quick yellow. The fact that the game was done an dusted is not an excuse for a slap-dash review process. We have to apply the laws and sanctions consistently and evenly regardless of the time these occur in the game.

This is one of those instances that people will look at and go ‘I’m not letting my kid play rugby’ and it has to be wiped out completely.

This.

Geoff Parkes made the very observation in his Monday wrap up. The Boks were definitely holding the jumper off the ground whilst setting themselves for the push. This should have attracted a penalty against the Boks but they were allowed to keep doing it. I can understand why it slipped through this time as referees probably aren’t that conditioned to look for this type of movement or tactic.

I fully expect DR will very politely bring this up with the referees in the prematch meeting before the next game. Hopefully the referees will keep a closer eye on the ‘over-lifting’ in the next test.

Banks must be counting his lucky stars to still be in the team. His form has been dreadful culminating in the kick into touch from a penalty. That sort of error is simply unacceptable at this level. If I were Rennie, I would have substituted him immediately after that error. I realise that everyone can, and has, made mistakes, but I don’t think its unreasonable to expect a certain ‘base’ level of skill execution when playing a test. The kick had no pressure from oncoming defenders so there is literally zero excuse for that happening.

I haven’t seen much talk of the effectiveness (or lack thereof) of the clean outs by the WBs. It seemed like a French player was first to most rucks with us lucky to secure the ball on many occasions with a couple of penalties won by the French for the tackled player not releasing the ball.

This continues to be a problem for the WBs and Australian SR teams. Speed and accuracy at the breakdown are everything these days. The tacklers/pilferers are so quick to get over the ball, that even a split second delay or minor inaccuracy can result in a turn over.

I would like to see the referees be harsher in forcing players to support their weight and/or actually be playing for the ball (how many times have we seen an opposition player wrap their arms around the torso of the tackled player with no intent to actually reach for the ball and be rewarded with a penalty). But at the end of the day, you can only play to what the referees are willing to call and I always feel like the WBs and Australian sides in general are slow to adapt.

But bring on next Tuesday. Can’t wait for the next test!

I haven’t seen much talk of the effectiveness (or lack thereof) of the clean outs by the WBs. It seemed like a French player was first to most rucks with us lucky to secure the ball on most occasions with a couple of penalties won by the French for the tackled player not releasing the ball.

This continues to be a problem for the WBs and Australian SR teams. Speed and accuracy at the breakdown are everything these days. The tacklers/pilferers are so quick to get over the ball, that even a split second delay or minor inaccuracy can result in a turn over.

I would like to see the referees be harsher in forcing players to support their weight and/or actually be playing for the ball (how many times have we seen an opposition player wrap their arms around the torso of the tackled player with no intent to actually reach for the ball and be rewarded with a penalty). But at the end of the day, you can only play to what the referees are willing to call and I always feel like the WBs and Australian sides in general are slow to adapt.

But bring on next Tuesday. Can’t wait for the next test!

Direct quote from Cheika’s post match press conference:
“Listen, that’s the way we play footy. I am not going to go to a kick and defend game. Call me naive but that’s not the way we do it. I’d rather win it our way. That’s the way Aussies want us to play.”
I’m sorry mate, but I can assure you that not one of the several hundred people I was watching the game with at the pub, walked away from that saying “Jeez, I’m so glad we lost playing ‘our’ way”.
This is one of the very worst aspects of Cheika. He wraps himself in this idea that “its what the fans want”, or “its how Aussies want to see us play rugby”. I’m pretty sure everyone watching that game would have taken a win by any means necessary than that rubbish we were served up and have been given since 2016.
I feel betrayed that he’s using mine, and every fan’s passion and support, as justification for his narrow, myopic way of playing.
One only has to look at Japan to see a style of rugby that is intelligent, passionate, and entertaining. They have clearly and honestly reviewed their strengths and weakness, developed a style of play that suits them and are executing it on a regular basis. Sure, they lost to SA last night but I’m pretty sure that most Japanese fans will hold their head high and be immensely proud of the way their team performed despite the loss.
If only the same could be said for Wallabies fans.

Swap Beale for DHP and Kepu for AAA and that’s the team I’d start to play in the QF.

I may be mistaken, but I recall Cheika, when interviewed on Foxsports just before he went to Japan and Europe, saying something to the effect of:

“…the strength and conditioning guys and the doctors probably didn’t like it, but it’s something that you’ve just got to do. We put a DJ at the top of the dune and had guys blasting up it.”

This was in response to a question from Nick McAdle about the impact the pre-season camp had on a number of players. I believe Pocock, DHP, Phipps and possibly one other sustained injuries that kept them out from the first few games of SR and in Poey’s case, has effectively lead to his retirement from SR.

And I agree with Waxhead – we’ve been robbed of 2-3 years of seeing the world’s best 7 playing 7 for his country. Even for a rusted on fan like me, this is very hard to accept.

Appeal dismissed. Force are out.

Me too.

Replace Mafi, who is ineligible for the Wallabies, with Higgers and that’s the team that should be picked for the upcoming tests. In the longer term I’d have Naisarani at No 8 when he qualifies later this year.