I think I’m not a person who fires up easily and is a one-eyed parochial supporter. But I’ll agree that people who are one-eyed probably say this as well. But I will weigh in on this…

For the decades that I’ve been watching rugby, in the lead up to incidents where two players are competing for a high ball, I’ve both cringed and crept forward in my seat. You’ll hear “that was a courageous take” because there is courage involved – it’s dangerous to leave you feet jumping for the ball. And it’s dangerous to hold your ground and keep your eyes on the ball feeling the rumble of the feet of rampaging lumps of meat charging at you while you do.

To slow these incidents down and analyse which part of which players body contacted which parts of other players and what such contact may have caused seems a bit senseless to me. Watched in real time, two players went courageously for the ball with everything they’ve got and one of them was injured. I don’t think Folau had the time to think “I’ve not caught this, I’m going to pull this other guy over”. And I don’t think he went in premeditated to pull him over. If it happened again and an Irish shoulder caught Folau’s hip and Folau went head-over, I’d be saying the same thing. You take risks, something could go wrong.

For years a lot of the conversations after any article on rugby in Australia has devolved into a debate about who should be playing at 10. It’s fair enough because it’s been a trouble spot for Australia for the past few years (at least). What’s truly bizarre is that most of the suggestions for who should be playing 10 are guys who AREN’T playing 10 for their Super Rugby side!

Why isn’t the most obvious next best candidate for 10 a guy who grew up playing 10, learned the skills and nous/experience of a 10 over a period of many years playing in that position and is used to playing in that position at the highest levels of the game?

Why is it that those coming up through what you’d think would be normal development pathways for a 10 don’t seem to develop enough to make it as a 10 in professional rugby? Why doesn’t the guy who played 10 really well for Joeys (or wherever) then go on to get further experience and skills development all the way up to and including super rugby until he ‘makes it’?

I’ve said before (decades ago) that Larkham was a bit of a curse in Australia. It seemed to instil in us the belief that anyone could be converted into a 10. This isn’t a crack at Maddocks or Hodge or anyone else that COULD be turned into a good 10. They DO seem our best options at the moment. My question is WHY?

“the dunny will get flushed on this match”

Mate, on this side of the Tasman we’ve been flushing for years but it won’t go!

Agreed. I think they must have said to themselves “No – that’s just what they’ll be expecting us to do. Let’s kick it straight to Folau every time!”

And interesting little exchange and I think Sam may have given away a little hint at the difference in the NZ ethos towards what makes a good rugby side. The number 10 is more noticeable – at least for most people – but the forwards more important.

I reckon it’s going to be a bit of a one-two punch thing on the weekend. I think the Irish should have worked out Wallabies are pretty good in the air, pretty good at running it back but aren’t kicking long and have a weak lineout. Ergo people like Sexton will kick long and out – preferably into the stands. And people like Dev Toner will put even more pressure on the Wallabies lineout. Wallabies have to be ready for this.

Scrum in general one of many things to be proud of from the weekend. Wonder how close Tongan Thor is to getting a starting spot.

Alright, I’ll reply!

Yes, I was surprised. Most people were saying before the game that Foley, Beale and Kerevi were going to be good in attack but a relative weakness in defense – even though (or maybe partly because!) they are all shuffled around so much. Maybe I wasn’t watching close enough but I didn’t notice them being attacked too often… except perhaps when Sexton came on.

I was also expecting more of a traditional forcings-back approach from the Irish – for them to have better/smarter kickers than the Wallabies. But that didn’t really seem too evident either. Maybe I just need to watch the game again. For the first time in a long while, that’s a really re-watchable game for me.

Come to think of it, if I had to describe the Irish gameplan in attack, I’m not sure I could. I think perhaps they wanted to go wide but the Wallabies seemed to stifle that and they didn’t really seem to have a good Plan B. Now why does that sound so familiar…?

We got what we wished for – that really was a performance we could all be proud of. I’ll eat humble pie since I certainly didn’t expect it. Irish coach was full of praise for the Wallabies in the post-match presser.

Someone wrote that the Irish were missing an x-factor to unlock the Wallaby defence and I think that’s a good point but Sexton looked to be that missing ingredient. I wouldn’t be surprised if the Irish bounce back setting up an intriguing game 3.

Well done Wallabies!

Haven’t seen Toomua play recently or heard much about his performances but if he is anything like he was, I’d have no qualms with Toomua back in the Wallaby squad. I suspect he’s probably got better than we last saw but always hard to tell.

If he has been playing 12, I’d have him in the starting side at 12 too. A really solid defender so you don’t have to do so much silly shuffling around and, while not as electric as Beale on attack, he’s no slouch there either.

I think Toomua is also a better backup 10 option than Beale. Or anyone else in the Wallaby squad.

All a bit of a moot point though since I think it’s unlikely he will come back to Super Rugby in the near future. No guarantee he’d make the Wallaby starting side. Not ahead of favourites like Foley and Beale.

Great article Harry.

I’m one of many too grind the teeth and pull the hair out at some of the box-kicking from many of the Australian halves in recent years. A lot of us have been saying just not to do it any more. But it’s more that, if you’re not able to do it well, don’t do it at all.

Your article defines precisely what good box-kicking entails.

Digger is channelling Conan here.

“Conan, what is best in life?”
Conan: “To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentations of their women!”

I 100% agree with Brett. Wallabies need to show us something we can be proud of. Doesn’t necessarily mean a win but some gutsy play, no one-dimensional rubbish – some smart and skillful play combined with common sense.

I’ve been very negative about Australian Rugby lately. While the recent wins against NZ sides are great, I’m yet to proclaim (as Brett [I think] jokingly did on the weekend) that we have “one hand on the Bledisloe” just yet.

Indeed one of the most frustrating things watching Australian rugby recently has been the fact that we ARE capable of some dazzling rugby from time to time.

Goes straight through you.

Australia’s problems with the Super Rugby concept are related to poor results by the four franchises, not the tournament itself.

Well, yes, in a way that’s true. But I honestly don’t think I’d mind the results so much if Australia were playing smart rugby. I think quality of rugby is the real issue… which of course leads to poor results. I’m sure the players now are more athletic and fitter and faster than they were 20 years ago but I’m positive that they are also far below the previous generation in terms of rugby nous and smarts. Forget the result – nothing turns a fan off more than finding themselves saying “what they hell did he do that for?” dozens of times per match.

Since 1996, the drift of rugby players to rugby league has been stopped and there has been a steady and important flow of talented players from rugby league to rugby as a consequence of the money and lifestyle that the Super Rugby tournament offers.

For the first 5-10 years after this 1996 date you set, Australian rugby was riding high. Who wouldn’t have wanted to be part of that. Plus we were flush with cash and willing to spend it on NRL players. Another way to look at this change in the direction of flow is to wonder if rugby union is producing the calibre of player that the NRL would be interested in any more!

If we gave RA a theoretical $100 at the moment there’s all sorts of ways they could spend it. They could give find 10 up-and-coming players and give them $10 each. They could spend it on improving the quality and consistency of coaches at lower levels. Or they could blow 90-100% of it on an NRL player. Honestly, which do you think they’d do? Yes, the ex NRL player might improve results but it’s the typical type of short-term thinking that seems to plague these times.

Spiro, you complain that if we adopted some of the things Cully is suggesting then rugby in Australia will end up like hockey. Surely you can see that’s the direction we’re heading right now anyway. If nothing else Cully’s article is a call to take action. Watching our boat slowly sink and taking no action is just madness. Again it’s the madness of our times though – we see the same thing happening in the disastrous falling of the USA, degradation our environment, etc.

Like sheek, I’ve kinda given up at this stage. I’ll just watch and see where those in charge take us. Of course if you have suggestions on how we can improve our results, happy to hear them.

This was a bit unnecessary: “the Tahs are faced with already fickle fans becoming more disengaged”

Makes it seem the fans are at fault. It’s not just Johnny-Come-Lately, part-time fans that are staying away. And not just Waratah fans. It’s taken some long-term, consistent, systemic and monumental mismanagement over the past few years to strip away the hardened, rusted-on fans from every Australian Super rugby team.

It’s very easy to imagine someone at the NRL headquarters swivelling around on his chair, stroking his Persian cat and announcing “Excellent gentlemen! The moles we planted over many years in rugby have done a fine job and our plan is now almost complete. Woo ha ha ha haaa…”.

Agreed. The comments in articles that have nothing (or very little) to do with these guys usually end up being debates around these guys too.

“persecution”

Yes, when I think of that word I think of Blacks, Jews, Nelson Mandela and Israel Folau.

He’s virtually untouchable because RA have virtually put all their eggs in the Folau basket. He is the face of the code. Rather than invest in grass roots and trust the system to deliver good players, they’ve spent masses of money on a very few players at the very top and relied on some sort of trickle down effect.

Reinforces to me what a good example it is for how the rugby here will turn out. We will produce some good players who will earn their main $s overseas and then come back in their later years. And when World Cups come around we will be semi-competitive because when you count the players overseas, there’s a fair amount of Australian talent.

This is assuming the overseas player rules are relaxed… which I think they’re going to have to be because when Super Rugby folds (for Australia) it will end up that all our best players play overseas.

A wide-ranging article covering a lot of important topics. Unfortunately the comments are going to be dominated by talk about Folau and Beale and one particular play/incident on the field… when this is probably the least important topic. I’m reminded of the Monty Python Meaning of Life line: “What was that about hats (read: Folau) again?”

I’ve always said it’s better to focus on the direction your trending in than the results at a given point in time. While we’ve lost 38 in a row to NZ teams, unfortunately the direction is not good – we’re getting worse, not better. And have been for many years now.

I thought Raelene Castle’s appointment could have been a good move for Rugby Australia. I hoped she might be able to offer a different perspective and, coming from outside, see the forest for the trees. Well she’s had about 4-5 months in the chair now and so far I haven’t seen any moves that come close to reversing the sad decline of Australian rugby.

Rugby in Australia is in dire, dire trouble. I am almost positive that in 5-10 years it will be in the same position basketball is in this country now. We will produce a few players who will head overseas to play on the big stage – occasionally an outstanding player. But Super rugby will dissolve and the NRC or something like it will become a bit like the NBL is in Australia now.

The most important thing in Australian rugby at the moment is whether Folau plays on the wing or at fullback. This alone will determine whether the Waratahs have a chance of winning against the Blues. It’s not just NSW fans – all Australian rugby fans can now breathe easier. It’s all down to Folau. He’s that important.

RK, like me, I haven’t seen you on these forums as much as in the past. Losing an old club like Penrith ifrom the Shute Shield s a tragedy. But perhaps more so is losing swathes of the old-time, rusted-on supporters whether it’s in Sydney, Perth, Brisbane or wherever.

Interesting. Not sure the ARU and now RA have proved to be the best at this sort of thing.

We’ve had good players in the past who were in very good form but couldn’t get any sort of ARU top-up because their funds had all gone elsewhere. Liam Gill comes to mind as one example. Ben Mowen another.

We’ve also got players like Quade Cooper. Is he still getting some sort of ARU top-up even though he’s not even playing Super Rugby any more? And Pocock getting paid to while taking a year off.

The interesting part is why RA feel they need to do this sort of thing. Clearly they perceive Hooper as a flight risk. And if Hooper is a flight risk, who isn’t?

So yay we lock in a guy who is currently one of the few playing reasonably well. But boo because we empty our coffers still further and the next few Liam Gills that come along will also be lost to Australian Rugby.

It’s about the quality of the rugby.

At their current ebb, I think all Australian Super Rugby teams would fare very poorly against most English, Celtic and French clubs.

I’m now so tired of watching Aussie sides whose skills levels are so wanting

Me too. I’ve been tired of this for the last few years. Hence I’ve cancelled my Foxtel subscription and stopped watching Super Rugby altogether. Certainly wouldn’t consider forking out good money to go to a game in person any longer. My input into forums like this one is obviously way down as well. I know I’m not the only one like this.

Traitor. Fair weather supporter. Whatever anyone wants to call me – I’ll put my hand up for all of them. I used to love my rugby – I’d go to all sorts of games, watch all the Australian teams, bought the gear, everything – but I’m not going to continue to turn up to what was my favourite restaurant if the food has turned to rubbish, the prices remain high and the service is poor. I’ve given the new owners ample time to improve things but they don’t seem to care for their customers feedback so…

Also Australian Rugby is an interconnected ecosystem. Trouble in one layer won’t be isolated to that layer – it effects EVERY level above and below it.