Wallabies eventually see off Uruguay - Green and Gold Rugby
Wallabies

Wallabies eventually see off Uruguay

Wallabies eventually see off Uruguay

The Wallabies have put away Uruguay, eventually, with 45-10 win in Oita. The final scoreline suggests a comfortable win in the end but it was a real scratchy performance with the first half in particular not likely to please coach Michael Cheika.

There were some pleasing aspects of the game with debutant Jordan Petaia playing a solid 40 minutes with a try and a try assist. Doubles to Dane Haylett-Petty and Tevita Kuridrani combined with a strong performance from Jack Dempsey saw the Wallabies finally pull away in the second half after leading 19-3 at half time.

But there were some glaring problems including high contact in tackles, which has been an ongoing topic throughout the tournament, claiming two more Wallabies with Adam Coleman and Lukhan Salakaia-Loto receiving yellow cards for high shots in the first half.

The Match

It was a fast start for the Wallabies as they scored the opening try within five minutes to Dane Haylett-Petty after an earlier penalty that Uruguay did well to stop initially but Matt Toomua found the space out wide for Haylett-Petty.

On the back of a number of penalties, Uruguay found themselves in the Wallabies 22 and a high shot from Michael Hooper saw Felipe Berchesi with an easy penalty goal.

The high tackle problem continued straight off the restart with Adam Coleman given a yellow card from referee Mathieu Raynal for a high shot that after recent events, shouldn’t have surprised anyone.

Uruguay were doing their best to slow down the ball at the breakdown and frustrate the Wallabies and with a one-man advantage even managed a tighthead from a five-metre scrum after Michael Hooper was earlier held up over the line. The work from the Wallabies forwards was a bit suspect as the Uruguayans managed to get the shove on and get themselves out of trouble.

There was much talk in the leadup about the debut of Jordan Petaia and although it took him 23 minutes to get his hands on the ball for the first time, his second touch resulted in a try after an inside ball from Kurtley Beale after stepping into first receiver.

It seemed the crackdown on high tackle wasn’t being listened to by the Wallabies with Kurtley Beale penalised for a high shot after a Uruguay attacker beat three defenders down the left wing and then Lukhan Salakaia-Loto went high and received a yellow card for his troubles.

The dream debut for Petaia continued on the 30-minute mark with a backline move out to the left wing and he danced through the defenders and setup Tevita Kuridrani for the third Wallabies try of the half.

The Wallabies were let off the hook after TMO Ben Skeen intervened after Uruguay outside centre Tomas Inciarte looked to have scored after swopping on a loose ball at the ruck after a box kick but Skeen ruled that Uruguay number 8 Manuel Diana was never onside to let Australia escape with a 19-3 lead at the break after a below average performance.

Embed from Getty Images

There were two subs at the break with Petaia benched for Adam Ashley-Cooper with Petaia’s recent workload the reason after coming back from a hamstring injury. Taniela Tupou also came on in place of Allan Alaalatoa and made an impact around the fringes with some strong running.

Five minutes into the half the Wallabies claimed their bonus point with Kuridrani scoring his second off a well worked decoy move from a lineout just near halfway.

Similar to the Fiji game, the Wallabies more direct play in the second half started paying dividends with Jack Dempsey getting in on the act with a spin move combined with a strong fend to find Will Genia to score after he only just coming onto the field.

With the game looking more comfortable, the Wallabies tightened the screws on Uruguay as Genia started to control the ruck with smart game management. Kuridrani went close to scoring his hat-trick but was held up but it was left to James Slipper to finally get off the try scoring mark in his 94th Test with Dempsey again heavily involved in the leadup to make it 40-3 after 60 minutes.

Haylett-Petty bagged his double and the Wallabies seventh of the game with 13 minutes to go to stretch the margin to beyond 40. There was one last push from Uruguay and after 18 phases, Manuel Diana was awarded the try for a final margin of 35 points.



The Game Changer

The second half. The first half wasn’t one of the best performances from the Wallabies and it was the change of tactics in the second half that got them back on track.


The G&GR MOTM

Tevita Kuridrani got the official award for his double but Jack Dempsey gets the coveted GAGR award. His work when the Wallabies needed it most in the second half was crucial to getting them back on track and the work in the leadup to Will Genia’s try is an example of that.


The Details

Score & Scorers

WALLABIES 45
Tries: Kuridrani 2, Haylett-Petty 2, Petaia, Genia, Slipper
Conversions: Lealiifano 5
URUGUAY 10
Tries: Diana
Conversions: Berchesi
Penalties: Berchesi

Cards

13 mins – Coleman (Wallabies) – Yellow
28 mins – Salakaia-Loto (Wallabies) – Yellow

  • Patrick

    -10 for Ben Skeen.

    That was bare passing mark for the Wallabies in my book- wtf was with not wanting to keep the ball and build a phase in the first half??

  • Custard Taht

    Pretty Meh performance, we scored more points against the All Blacks.

    Same mistakes, same problems on repeat.

    But the Petaia kid looks alright!

    • Geoffro

      From what I saw tonight my new back three is JP 15 ,MK 14,TK 11.(just thought Id jump on the selection merrygoround while it was in fashion)

      • Custard Taht

        Mate, you might as well, it is a fun thing to do, and the Wallabies don’t necessarily give us much else to talk.
        You would have to think that JP has played himself into at least the 23, if not the 15.
        The talent is there to go a long way in this RWC, unfortunately, it is a case of Lions being led by Donkeys.

        • Geoffro

          Great to see the young bloke take his chances and with such composure.Its early days and really only a glimpse at this level for now but he looks like the real deal

      • Mica

        Not sure if this is a Cheika windup.
        Don’t really want to see players out of position.
        JP is a wing or OC – happy to see him on the wing at international level (pretty typical for young OCs at Super level being used as wings if at international level if they have the wheels, kicking and highball skills).
        TK is an out and out OC not a winger.
        MK is best as a blind side winger, very much in the Digby mould.
        For me DHP at FB, MK at 11, JP at 14.
        Tempted to go with a 10 of CLL, 12 of SK and 13 of TK.
        Toomua on the bench with JOC. Depending on the opposition would think about who should be other potential bench option (KB and Hodge in the mix). Probably makes sense for a 5-3 split more often than not given the speed of the grounds in this RWC.

        • Patrick

          That would work for me.

  • Greg

    Thanks for the very quick write-up.

    I thought there was a lot that the wallabies did well in that game.

    It was a good start to Petaia. Dempsy did well. 10/12/13 were solid. Beale was pretty good I think but just not sure how he will go against a fresh team at the next tier.

    The cards for the tackles are starting to frustrate me.1) Why go pedantic on this for the first time in the WRC? and 2) If those tackles were yellow then so were 2-3 the other way (not to mention 3-4 to Read). We seem to be playing to different laws. A good thing…. the TMO seemed to save his opinions for when they were requested. With the exception of blatant foul play…. I think that tins is the way it should be.

    Congrats to the boys.
    Keep going.

    As a complete aside…. I think the knees to shoulders to the knees (no amrs) taht are very common form everyone in close ruck defence are bloody dangerous. You won’t lose your marbles but you might become a cripple.

    • Patrick

      Taf used to do that and I hated watching. Refs should card, instead of Lavignini’s tackle, anything where the arms don’t try and wrap.

    • Who?

      They didn’t go pedantic on the cards for the first time in the RWC. Kiwis would claim that the RC against Barrett was part of the same crackdown.
      .
      In terms of consistency, that’s a long term issue.

      • Greg

        I think the Barret issue was quite different. He deliberately lined up a players head and drove his shoulder into it. It might not have been his character but it was a deliberate action.

        Quite a few of the cards we have seen have been in the careless category.

        • Who?

          I agree that Barrett’s RC was different – it was a shoulder to the head, as opposed to a high tackle. So there’s no mitigating factors for shoulders (even high shoulders), whereas there is a mitigating factor of falling players for high tackles (the Lavinini tackle).
          .
          But I still believe it’s part of the same crackdown. And I agree a number of the cards are careless/reckless rather than deliberate (like Barrett).

  • Keith Butler

    An underwhelming performance. Total crap first half with very poor discipline. Better second half. Would like to see a backline of Genia, CLL, Koribete, Toomua, Kurandrani, Peatia/JOC and DHP for the Georgia game, just to see how it goes.

    • Patrick

      There’s no-one out of position, that’ll never do.

      • Mica

        LOL :)

    • donktec

      and after that game, is there any more clarity about selection of the best backs? rhetorical question…!

      • Geoffro

        No,Cheika has still got his powder locked up in the dehumidifier.England backline anyones guess (Hodge back too)

        • Patrick

          I’m afraid to

      • numpty

        Yes – White, CLL, DHP, Toomua all certainties along with Kerevi and Korobeite (in the 23). Questions around whether TK or JOC gets 13 and who is on the other wing? Petaia should get another crack against Georgia.

  • Greg

    I know I am a broken record…. red for Argentina…. nothing for Read?

    • Human

      And nothing for Farrel’s No arms hit as second man into a tackle in the first half. The red was soft.

      • Neil Pocock

        Or England’s No2 low chop tackle at the pumas knees with no arms aswell…… Disgraceful refereeing allowing that!

        • Human

          And Tuilagi taking the man in the air…only a penalty. I thought that was a red last year.

        • I think yellow given how he landed, but certainly a card, yes.

        • Nutta

          See we either go after dangerous play or we specifically go after high tackles of we go after head-injury inducing events. If we go for dangerous play then we must cover the full gambit of dangerous play – Sinkler is gone. If we go after high tackles then Reid has packed his bags and gone home and if we are going after head-injury inducing stuff then every forward who picks & drives just became untouchable.

          They are backing themselves into an untenable corner.

        • They seem to regard the pick and drive as a special case. I’m sure if the tackler goes in with a swinging arm or a shoulder to the head something will pop up. But the framework they keep referring back to says if the tackled player starts low that’s mitigation. If it would be just a penalty for “some contact” and then it’s mitigated for their position, it becomes no foul.

          I’m broadly in favour of going after dangerous play. I don’t want to see any player’s career cut short from injury and I don’t want to see players shuffling around with various traumas in the 40’s, 50’s and 60’s – enough of them hobble on broken knees as it is. While I applaud the concept behind the framework – get standards the same – introducing it just before a RWC is a big ask for referees, players and fans. And, a bit like the process around the going for the high kick, I think it’s a decent start but it will evolve. Remember when it was introduced and players got a RC for basically breathing near each other? Now, you see quite bad collisions but if both players are “realistically competing for the ball” no penalty. I appreciate that’s different in some ways, because it’s a contest and not a tackle, but I think as the framework gets referred in practise, over hundreds of matches, thousands of tackles, it will get properly worked and clearly understood by everyone. It won’t be perfect of course, it’s run by humans, but we’ll have a chance of looking at it and saying “well they fucked that up” and a big consensus will be in agreement on that.

          If that means Sinkler should be gone, Read should be gone, and if this framework had been published in 2016 they were out of here, so be it. If it means publishing an addendum about the pick and drive, so be it.

          Ultimately the high kick law and tackling the player in the air has changed that aspect of the game, but mostly stopped players tumbling from 3-4 metres up and landing on their heads and necks and being stretchered off. It’s reduced the contest for the ball if you’re not sure you can make it, but increased the times you hold back and smash the player when their foot grazes the first blade of grass. Still very identifiably rugby but improving players’ health. I hope this framework, in its final form, will do that too, but reckon we won’t get there for probably 3 more years unfortunately.

        • Nutta

          Which is why we bring these things AFTER the Bill is over and it allows the few years necessary for everyone to get past their overexcited hyperbole and settle the fk down again. 3mths after Bill we have the Top10 countries (say) send a 1-vote delegation to have a round-table workshop of suggestions MADE IN ADVANCE, allow 4-6mths to consider outcomes and respond, then 3mths to draft and agree any law changes. Thus by the next November Touring Season – the first serious meet since the previous Bill – the agenda for the next Bill cycle is known. Then leave it da-faq alone until the next workshop. Pretty bloody easy really.

        • You’d think so, wouldn’t you?

          OTOH, WR had to do something. This framework definitely needs rime to bed in and isn’t being completely properly applied. But that “nice boy” Owen Farrell got let off two red card tackles – one is the sample for shoulder yo the head in their videos to accompany the framework last November.

          They’re trying to issue a clear, simple set of guidelines. But the tackle situation in rugby is anything but clear and simple.

        • Nutta

          That was Sinkler – no3. The guy is a gobby germ.

        • Custard Taht

          Maybe the ref is big fan of Miley and I came in like a wrecking ball……..

        • Mica

          Custard – you shouldn’t even know about that disgusting excuse for music…………..(unless you’ve got daughters under the age of 10 of course ;) )

        • Nutta

          I had 3 at the time…

        • Custard Taht

          I am going to own it, no kids, but my partner and I loved watching Hannah Montana!

          And really, what is not to like about a weird woman, swinging on a wrecking ball, licking a sledge hammer!

        • Nutta

          Not that there is anything wrong with that.

        • Mica

          Just mute the sound….. :)

        • Custard Taht

          I should add, don’t get me started on Wizards of Waverley Place!

        • Nutta

          I prefer to call it what it is…

          https://youtu.be/2C7mNr5WMjA

      • Who?

        The red was flat out wrong. It was a high tackle – no question. But under the matrix, they’re supposed to make allowances for an attacker lowering himself into a tackle (i.e. YC rather than RC). Lavinini was bent in half at the waist – he wasn’t aiming high. Farrell ducked into it. So clearly the mitigating factor should’ve been considered.
        .
        That said, if a bloke’s copped a RC hit to the head, shouldn’t he also be sent off for an HIA..?
        .
        And all that’s without considering the multitude of England’s sins which weren’t punished. Nigel’s not a good ref, hasn’t been for a good while.

        • Geoffro

          They did mention

        • Human

          Farrell was basically squatting, trying to cut back inside….had he been upright, Lavanini would have hit him right in the bread basket….yellow at most.

        • Geoffro

          Aaah,so now we be on the lookout for the Farrell squat.Sly bugger

    • Andy

      Just no consistency. How read got off a charge for that is beyond me. And the England guy getting off a suspension for a tackle identical to the Lavanini hit today just shows the whole judicial process is a farce. 1 rule for some another rule for others.

  • Nutta

    Look it was Uruguay but it’s still a World Cup game.

    Great to see some actual football and creativity from the likes of Dempsey and Petaia. It’s interesting that our most creative footballers are the non-regular Wobblies (I’m including JOC). Likewise Sauce continues to impress at least for me.

    And K’drani ability to both run hard & pass makes an interesting counter argument to Kerevi and opens up a L’fano/Toomau/K’drani midfield potential trio. Or even L’fano/K’drani/JOC.

    Some very good scrummage and decent lineout work. And the Finishers certainly did their jobs.

    However we are too fragile in attack. And we are too fragile because we rely too heavily on ferociously fast set-planned plays and sequences. They are too easy to disrupt from a defensive perspective and once they break down or even wobble a bit we have absolutely zero ability to recover. Too much drilling and not enough play makes Wobblies dumb footballers. And it has for years. Compare that to three completely different styles of play shown by the AiB’s against Canada and you can see that when we’re on fire we will be very hard to stop. But throw some spanners in the works from a well organised defence and we show no adaptability to recover.

    Good win. Great to see the dirt-trackers get some minutes. But not convincing when considering the big-boys are coming up.

    • GeorgiaSatellite

      You had to go and mention Spanners…

    • Who?

      How many times – again – did we see our scrumhalf interrupted in the first 30? Uruguay were going straight down and sealing off our ball, not close to supporting their weight, completely unpunished. But they shouldn’t have had that opportunity – we just don’t seem to care about securing our breakdown in the first 30-60 minutes this RWC.
      .
      Was lovely to see Slips get his pie and Tupou driving hard in the scrum and running hard in open play. :-)

      • Mica

        Yep – rucks a problem that will bite us against tier 1 opposition.
        Need to fix this fast!!

        • Nutta

          It’s the 1-3-3-1 structure with sweeping 2nd distributors we keep trying to run that makes it too hard. To make that style of play work we have to play blindingly fast and be 100% accurate with not just targeting the clean-out but also in dropping their Ruckman in such a way as to cut off any other Ruckers (we call it Beavering – you’re creating a dam wall they can’t legally breach). Fatiguing forwards aren’t thinking – they have no time to – they are busting their arse to get to their next pod shape. But the risk is if the 2 pod Cleaners get one thing wrong then our half is under huge pressure straight away.

        • smaller, faster players needed for the structure?

        • Nutta

          No because if it did then Foley and the Pooper would be winning everything.

          We have a really fit squad who are being told to play 1000miles per hour sideways to fatigue the defence into making lateral holes to isolate a fat-boy or that a straight runner or an inside ball or two can exploit. That’s fine in touch footy. But this is a contact sport where the guy with most kenetic energy will win – a little guy will beat a bigger guy only if he is lower and faster to compensate for the lack of mass. But the variables that prevent that equation from completing are too random and too many to be dependable. That is what makes them bust all known balls to score inside 5 phases as the probability of 100% execution under that pressure drops exponentially with every phase. Which basically means one big defending body hitting the ruck late will fk it up for us. It also explains why we slow-up with 10min to go in each half – the lads are buggered. It’s too delicate and relies on a referee really policing the breakdown. It’s just a shite strategy.

          The fix is to stop the 1-3-3-1 idea. Play a simpler ‘next pod 15m wider’ style with the 1st 3 Pigs available and a Piggy or two then turning the corner off the 9 to create some variation. The 2nd ruck-turner will be a ruck-sweeper for the pod (if a 3rd Cleaner is needed to shield the 9). We will still have the pace to create the fatigue on opponents and it’s less risky with safety sweeper built in. Keep playing a tighter short-inside passing 10/12/11 game (either Koribeti or Petauia as the 11/14 ball-blitzer) to beat the rush-defence infatuation so popular at the moment and as soon as they react to that and start sitting back a little then jamb K’drani or Kerevi into them through a No13 on an unders line.

          The bit that really shits me in all this is that I’m a couch-surfing, bush-player who spent his entire meaningful playing career in jerseys carrying 3 or less on the back and who now only takes a passing interest when time allows. Yet even I can see this dumb-arsed shite in technicolour. Now if an uneducated half-wit never-was-so-can’t-be-a-has-been like me can see it then what exactly are the guys who devote their entire fkn professional existence to this looking at?

        • Geez nutta, a keen typist too I see.
          An essay within itself mate.
          1-3-3-1 is sustainable by smaller,fitter players IMO.
          Doesnt mean they will be guaranteed to score. Your “touch rugby” statement says it all.
          I think it has its uses, but only as a small part of the game, changing splits and hence structures to suit what is in front at the time, is far more intelligent (and much harder to train).
          No, I dont think much of it either.(1331)
          Agree with you on that.

          A coach many years ago said to me “You will only understand rugby fully, when your too old to play it”
          Even uneducated half-wits like us

        • Nutta

          Truth is I should be doing my uni study and not wasting time skivving off chatting with you! Sayonara Habitual Offender San.

        • Greg

          Nutta – both are possible…. it is true that one or the other suffers….

        • Nutta

          If I answer you then I’m admitting I’m not doing my study…

        • Sayonara Nutta San, though you wont be reading this of course.
          Any Uni courses available in dribbling about rugby that you know of?

        • Nutta

          Sshhh. I’m studying. I still have 2 chapters of admin law to get through before the mungo GF tonight.

        • Who?

          It’d be an excuse, Nutta, if it was an issue in the second half. But it’s an issue in the first 5 minutes. We see ball carriers going into contact with only the halfback in cooee – how does that happen?! To me, that’s not tired forwards (and I’m on record saying I think some of Cheika’s plans are unrealistic for the forwards’ fitness – not because they’re unfit, they’re just totally unachievable), that’s poor structures and coaching from the get go.

        • Nutta

          Oh I largely agree with you. I should explain myself better. We are playing a structure that demands very high pace. To make the plays guys are being deployed very sparsely and are running to pre-programmed spots at 1000 miles/hr. They are not thinking. They are not expected to by their coaches. They are expected to – and are rewarded with selection – based on athletic ability to ‘get there’. The issue with it is 1) it engineers out footballers (opposed to athletes) and the ability to react as the situation moves/changes and 2) anyone who does think cannot keep up anyway (as they slowed up to look so didn’t make their slot) and 3) it’s simply bloody exhausting so they all run out of steam by the 30min of each half. I agree it’s poor coaching and game-plan development.

      • Nutta

        Slips recovery and re-emergence has been a bit of an unsung success story over the past 12mths. Good example of a guy who made a mess, put his hand up to own it and then cleaned it up. Good for him. Time will tell but hopefully we can say the same of JOC one day.

      • UTG

        We need to adopt the tactic of the second man in sealing off the ball in attacking rucks. The refs don’t police it at all, Itoje was sealing every ruck against the Pumas.

        • Nutta

          We can’t because we can’t make the 1-3-3-1 shape if we do something as sensible as that.

        • UTG

          What annoys me is that we’ll commit numbers to the ruck if we don’t make the gain line, disrupting the 1-3-3-1 structure, but every time we get some good go forward we’ll just stand in our little pods watching one guy disrupt the ruck when there’s a good attacking chance if we can get some quick ball.

        • Who?

          Half the time we don’t even seem to have a second man at the ruck.
          And Itoje or others being cynical doesn’t mean we won’t get penalized if we do it cynically.
          Reality is we just need to turn up and bind securely on the tackled player. We’re not doing that.

        • UTG

          You’ve got to adapt to the way the game is being reffed though. So many opposition players make turnovers by bridging, Pocock doesn’t bridge and often gets cleaned out because of it (and most of the clean outs are dodgy). The result is Pocock is the least effective he has ever been and Hooper, maybe for the first time ever, is the clear first choice 7. If you do get penalised the upshot is that the referee will often start pinging both sides.

        • Who?

          The way games tend to be reffed, though, is that it feels like 90% of the time, the opposition can get away with more dodginess at the breakdown than we can. Probably because we wear bright yellow (no one can call it Gold post CCC) jerseys, whilst they wear something far less obvious.
          .
          It’s funny you say Pocock doesn’t bridge – it’s something that other Aussie franchises formerly directly accused him of doing.
          .
          The real reason Pocock’s getting fewer turnovers is that other teams are more effective in creating rucks more quickly than us. Yes, even Uruguay. Pocock was wrongly penalized a few times in the first game, but last night, when in possession, Uruguay were very disciplined in being over the ball before the tacklers could roll (noting that because the useless Reynal clearly told Pocock, “You can’t contest the ball until the tackler rolls!” That’s written absolutely nowhere).
          .
          You’re half right about needing to adapt to the way the game is being reffed, but some things just make me grumpy. Like refs who don’t know/understand the laws, or communicate the way they view them. Reynal fits in both camps.

        • UTG

          There was a pretty good example in the first half of the Namibia vs NZ game. The Namibian hooker stood there with his hands on ground over the ball then pushed himself up and grabbed the ball and that was deemed fine by the ref. I’d guess 80% of holding on penalties are from players bridging or resting their knees on the tackled player.

        • Who?

          Incompetent refereeing shouldn’t be considered acceptable. Especially given allowing this sort of behaviour does nothing but lowers players’ heads further into the contact zone, making life ever more dangerous. I expect this is something that will be heavily scrutinised and possibly revised by World Rugby immediately following the RWC. Because the Rugby common law is no longer following the written Laws. The solution would be to revert to the Laws, the odds are the fools at WR will change the Laws instead to fix a problem not created by the Laws, but by poor enforcement of the laws. It’s their standard practice.
          .
          This is something I’ve railed against for the past 18 months. I believe about 70% of the turnovers I saw paid in Super Rugby this year were illegal – the ref was wrong. But they pay them because World Rugby have, through their 2016 Law changes, made it too easy for the attacking team to retain possession.
          .
          I’ve no problem saying that refs are (for the most part) following the directives regarding YC’s and RC’s for high tackles. They get the odd one wrong (Lavinini – should’ve been a YC, not a RC – mitigating factor of the falling player wrongly ignored), and miss a good number, but they’re generally following the directives, which aren’t terrible. However, there’s absolutely no excuse for this sort of abysmal refereeing of the breakdown. They changed the laws around the tackle in 2016 to make it easier to referee this – they forced tacklers to enter through the gate. There was never a change that allowed a player to drag their hands on the ground, let alone to go to ground (i.e. hands on the ground) then prop themselves back up. I remember the BILions complaining about BOD getting pinged for doing exactly that in 2013, and it was clearly explained that Pollock had followed the laws in penalizing him.
          .
          These are the basics of the game. If they can’t referee a breakdown accurately, then they shouldn’t be in Japan.
          .
          And credit to Nic White for pointing out the Uruguayan’s illegal sealing tactics at the breakdown as he walked off at half time.

        • UTG

          I completely agree with all this. I’d add that I think the second tier nations are given a lot more leeway around the ruck because the referees want to even up the contest. We definitely shouldn’t accept second rate refereeing but until they do something about my view is we should push the boundaries as every AB team does so well.

    • Mica

      Accuracy and efficiency at the ruck is the biggest problem I see at the moment.
      Then the continued changing of players/positions/players in positions.
      Lastly our hands aren’t great with a number of simple dropped passes and ball lost in contact.

  • Hoss

    Exchanged texts with a few mates during the pathetic shit-show. The only things that are reinforced were:
    – Simmons is the Foley of the forward pack
    – Coleman’s reputation exceeds the reality by some margin
    – Nic White was farking atrocious. His decision making and game management were disgraceful.
    – FKA has no business being in gold at all.
    – the Pooper should be buried
    – That TK should maybe (given it was ‘only’ Uruguay) be there-about a for the pointy end. Perhaps at expense of SK (bench)
    – Petaia is the goods and must be on flanks with Marika. Everything the kid does is quality.
    The Abattoir should be bench option.

    I opined yesterday that it would be the process and efficient display and the score board would look after itself. Kafe said at halftime that it was an ‘insipid’ display by the Wallabies and that was completely succinct.

    What did we learn today – farked if i know, perhaps I learnt that afternoon bourbon still doesn’t dull the pain of following the Cheika lead Wobblies, better have another one. Garson.

    Viva Los Pumas.

    • UTG

      I thought Simmons was far better than Coleman. I’m not sure what he did wrong (maybe I confused some of the knock-ons given they had the same head gear)?

      Also, the Pooper was never in place or is that your point? You think we were better without it? I thought Pocock was pretty ordinary when he came on.

      Pretty accurate with the rest of it.

      • Hoss

        Will lend you my Jack Daniels sponsored ‘virtual sobriety’ goggles. Simon was at fault with the White near intercept in first half. White (who was poo) had to take 2 steps as Simmons ran right back into Whites channel from
        a ruck, leading to white imitating Sanchez with 2 sideways steps to clear him and pass the Gilbert. Simmons was late to nearly every ruck, those he made he hit like wet paper towel and nearly always from the side.

        Whites decision making was bewildering, specially on dominant scrum ball off our feed. Twice he kicked the ball back into the scrum and we got burnt. White needs to spend time at Cessnock where quick pill is not only essential but keeps the population numbers down.

        • UTG

          Yeah, fair enough, I must admit I wasn’t watching the locks too much, was getting more annoyed with White.

        • Hoss

          Seconded.

        • formerflanker

          Yep, he kicked the ball back into a 7-man scrum! Every schoolboys knows that when down a man your scrum must strive for quick ball but noooooo White wants 7 men to force a penalty by driving back an 8 man scrum.
          Make him play hooker next match.

    • Who?

      Gotta defend poor White – once again, our pack didn’t defend our breakdown for the first 30 minutes. This is why each week we look and think, “Man that bench scrumhalf is awesome!” Because by the time they get on, we’ve woken up to the fact that other teams are constantly disrupting our ball. How is it that White ends up in so very many cleanouts? If it were Genia, they’d be straight turnovers (because he’s less effective cleaning out). But why is it on our halfbacks to defend our own attacking ball in the first five minutes when we’re hard on attack in their 22?
      .
      To me, the issues with our starting scrumhalves is a clear failing of game plan and coaching.

      • 100% agree. I looked at the match and, again, wondered how it’s so hard. Some decades ago when I had a working back, two working knees, puberty was a far off non-thought, as opposed to a far-distant hazy memory I remember being taught pithy phrases like “you have to go straight to earn the right to go wide.” Every now and again you hear a commentator trot it out.

        For about 50 minutes the Wallabies go wide to try and earn the right to go straight. Their forwards look like they’re playing at the same standard as the Uruguayan’s – who muster two professional players in the whole squad, the rest are amateurs and played their hearts and lungs out but a fully professional squad should be beating them comfortably. The scrum-half is tiding up dirty ball and looking like shit because he’s got no protection. Then around the 50 minute mark, the forwards suddenly go forward, the scrum half looks like a god because he’s got time, and the play out wide sparks into life.

        It’s not Genia being better than White, last time out it happened the other way round after all. Against, with the greatest of respect to Uruguay, a much better side with a fully pro squad who played to a high level for the full 80.

        How fracking hard is it for someone to look at the match video and say “what’s the difference between that first 30 minutes and that final 30?” Then have a brainwave and say “Why don’t we start off playing like the final 30 and keep it up for the whole 80?” Of course against a tier one nation you won’t, not for 80 minutes, they’ll have their good moments too. But, it’s looking like England in the QF. If the Wallabies play like this: 50 minutes of shite, 30 decent minutes, England could have a 40 point lead on them after 50 minutes.

        • Mica

          Hundred percent Eloise – We have a bad habit of playing down to lower opposition levels (with the greatest respect and noting the number of professional players in the sides).
          Like the BSG reference too… :)

      • Mica

        I also like the fact that CLL has no problem jumping in to join an attacking ruck if required. No hesitation at all. All the other halves should mirror this (and then give a rocket to the forwards)

      • UTG

        The problems for me with White were things like kicking the ball back into the scrum, aimless kicks downfield when we had possession and an overlap, taking two steps when we needed service from the base. None of which is contingent upon the breakdown.

        • Who?

          I get the frustration with White kicking the ball back into the scrum – that was silly stuff when we were a man down.
          The two steps can be contingent on the breakdown – we’re meant to be playing off the 9, the two steps are to hold the first two defenders, but they can only be forward and engaging the defence when the breakdown has been secured. If it’s not, they have to be backwards in order to evade capture, but that doesn’t hold the defensive line still. It’s a problem with game plan and execution. I say game plan, because the complaints about Genia were exactly the same last week.
          Aimless kicks downfield with an overlap? I’m lacking sleep, so I can’t remember them at present.

        • UTG

          White’s two steps worked so perfectly in Perth against the ABs that it’s now become the default. I’m sure the two steps is a major part of the gameplan but we need our halves to play more heads up as well.

    • Geoffro

      Its a bit of a conundrum though,do we now start the only 2 decent locks weve got against Georgia (whose forwards are solid and nothing to lose in their final RWC match) or preserve them.Coud you imagine going into the England match with Coleman or Simmons,reckon LSL is a better lock option then either those two.

      • Mica

        Give Coleman time – maybe lack of game time is hurting him. Agree on LSL at lock, especially if Dempsey comes into form and gives you another 6 option. I quite like the idea of Dempsey at 6 and Isi at 8. I think this has a bit more dynamism and pace than LSL 6 and Isi 8

      • Hoss

        I think you have to start the XV v Georgia that you intend to start against the Poms. Perhaps a 6-2 bench is in order for the QF with Coleman, FKA and Poey from the bench and start Hooper, Naisarani and Dempsey.

        By the way not saying we will beat the Poms, but they will not win the World Cup on current form. They have been average so far.

    • Mica

      You learned that constantly changing a team line-up does nothing for consistency and continuity.
      How many of the other teams are changing as many players in positions as what the Wallabies are?

    • OnTheBurst

      Who’s FKA again?

      • Hoss

        Lukhan Somewhere Over The Rainbow. Formerly Known As (FKA) Lukhan Tui

  • Neil Pocock

    Maybe it’s my imagination but it sure looks like the Wallabies keep playing garbage in their 1st halves……then ignore Cheikas game plan in the 2nd, and revert to a more “simple” “instinctive” game plan that then starts too work!

    • UTG

      A lot of the mistakes are so basic though. Lazy tackles, drop balls, not committing to the breakdown, that’s more on the players for not switching on, imho.

      • Patrick

        Or not having combinations, for some reason

        • Howard

          Or having better finishers

        • UTG

          Combinations didn’t cause Coleman and Dempsey to drop those exits cold nor did the YCs result from personnel issues.

      • Mica

        Lazy and lack of application/intent is how I would describe it too (from what I see).
        God knows how this happens at this level.
        Maybe the roles they have been given conflict. i.e. should I be in the next attacking pod or should I be hitting the ruck?
        Playing teams like Uruguay and Georgia should be the perfect opportunity to practice such accuracy and intensity in preparation for future games. If you can’t do it at this level, how do you expect to do it once the pressure gets dialed up?

        • UTG

          A lot of our players are too big picture and forget about the little things. A good example was Coleman yesterday trying to get a strong carry in our 22 and making decent metres but neglecting ball security and yielding a turnover.

  • Patrick

    10 minutes into Japan Samoa and I’d love to have the Japanese coach for Australia!

    • Mica

      Yes – Jamie Joseph is quality and Tony Brown seems to offer a lot too.
      Love what they did with the Highlanders. Not the flashest of the NZ rosters and took them to the final and then won the final.
      Could do a hell of a lot worse.

      • Nutta

        Yeh but the difference in both NZ and Japan is there is no alternative/competition for the players. They are playing for the top of the tree. You can demand performance or else turf them and get the next guy off the line. In Oz you have to compete with the other codes and it makes man-management so much harder and riskier for the coach – look to both Dingo and Link as evidence. Who da-fuq wants to work in those conditions?

        We have the cattle. We really do. Here’s a good one to consider – in the AFL semi finals of x3wks ago there were 12 fellas playing that weekend in the 22’s of those 4 sides who were all under the age of 26yrs who ALL went to school in Wagga. 12 of them. All 190cm plus, all +90kg naturally, all under 26yrs old. Every single one of them had at some stage been training and playing in the Southern Inland/ACT rugby programmes. FKN ALL OF THEM. And now not even 1 of them still playing rugby. FFS the Gray Brothers who play for Scotland, their MUM lives at Uranquinty not 20km from Wagga.

        Our talent identification and retention programmes are just deplorable. That means there is over-investment in the “Chosen Few” who went to the right schools. That creates over-investment in their continual selection and then they become too politically expensive to drop…

        • Patrick

          I’d change the conditions: I’d keep a selection panel, but I’d have no NSWelshmen on it, and I’d tell the entire player group that any shit like telling team admin to fuck off and they are gone.

        • Nutta

          Like they did how many times with Beale? Who then repaid the faith by making such a scene he had to be physically restrained by a team mate on a sponsors plane, saw the team manager being obscenely maligned in a manner I find head splitting even now and saw our greatest tighthead ever hounded into resignation from the top-job? Fkn… makes me wild even now.

          Dude I well see your point but it would never happen.

        • Patrick

          I feel your pain on every level and point. But it has to happen, one day. The day they appoint a minority of NSWelshmen to the RA board, likely. Something like this:
          1. Andrew Demetreiou – CEO
          2. Josephine Sukkar
          3. John Howard – Chairman
          4. Rod Macqueen – Head of coaching appointments committee
          5. Someone like Clare Harding (https://www2.deloitte.com/au/en/profiles/clare-harding.html)

          Optional:
          Twiggy
          Someone from Australian tech
          Someone from US sport
          Someone from senior management at the NZRU

      • Patrick

        Yep I’d love either frankly.

  • RedAnt

    It was a strange old game, wasn’t it?

    Have to disagree about Dempsey. Don’t think he was bad, but for me a couple of good runs don’t make up for sloppy work at the breakdown, which is where all our problems stemmed from in the first half. Not saying it was just Dempsey, but no fiddling with the back line is going to help us against ‘tier 1′ opposition that’s able to slow down our ball at will and enjoy nice clean ball for themselves.

  • doohanfan

    The Wallabies have the makings of a good side. Too bad it has never been and will never be picked.

  • Who?

    So, we’re now a 20 point poorer side than 2015..?
    .
    When are we going to start a game with sufficient numbers in the breakdown to prevent constant slow pill, disrupted scrumhalves and turnovers?
    .
    Oh, and Reynal was orders of magnitude poorer than the ref we had last week. Blew penalties and scrums where there was no infraction, blew his whistle so much that it stopped working. No complaints about the high tackle calls against Australia (missed a few against Uruguay), but some of the interventions were just pointless and unnecessary.

    • Patrick

      a 20 point poorer side than 2015

      Yes, notwithstanding possibly better cattle.

      • Who?

        And just remember, Quade’s conversions were almost all from the sideline, running in half on astroturf, half on the field. So he missed half of them.
        And I’d agree that, for the most part, it was better cattle……..
        I just don’t get why we seem to consistently fail to secure our breakdown with sufficient numbers. Just bizarre. Cheika says, “We need to start faster,” perhaps instead we need to start more steadily…

        • Patrick

          Or start a new coach who can manage to select a decent backline and keep it for more than one match.

        • Geoffro

          Thats a tough one though.I would say all of Toomua,JOC,TK,DHP,Hodge,JP,Kerevi and even AAC have looked pretty solid in their outings.The halves have been patchy off some not so great forward play and the Foley mis-selection.Im more worried about what Englland are going to do to us at the breakdown than out wide.

        • Patrick

          I agree, they are all more than decent players, but I would have liked them to have time to form some decent combinations, esp White/Genia and Lilo/Toomua but also the rest

    • Bit hard to get continuity with the refs interjecting every phase?
      The reffing across the board has been far too intrusive.

      • Who?

        Agree the reffing’s been far too intrusive, but you don’t need continuity to score points. It wasn’t that long ago that pretty well every try in the Test year was scored within 3 phases of obtaining possession (be it set piece or counterattack). And it’s not like we secure our ruck well enough to attack more than 3 phases in the first 30 minutes of a test…

    • I think the Wallabies are a poorer team than four years ago.

      There’s inconsistency of selection in a lot of positions, so whether you think the players are better individuals or not, the combinations and familiarity with each other is not there.

      There’s a lack of a coherent, cogent attacking and defensive structure. While you can argue that might have been there, or appearing there, in 2015, the old structures were still there to fall back on for a lot of the team. Now, they fall back, where possible, on chaos or at least poor structures rather than good ones.

      Whether all of that 20 point difference is a decline in the Wallabies or some is an improvement from Uruguay is hard to tell. I don’t see them enough to judge but everyone peaks for the RWC, and the tier 2 sides aim to peak against the tier 1 sides. Witness Nambia today – after 30 minutes they were within a point of the AB and while they didn’t deserve to be quite that close (Jordie Barrett missed a both conversions, Cane had uncharacteristically bad hands) they were good value for the 9 points. That’s because they’re just up for playing the AB and played out of their skins.

      But, at least part of the difference, was the AB as they exerted their dominance didn’t fundamentally change their game plan. They just executed with fewer dropped balls. Why do Australia seem to change their plan to suddenly cope and play well?

      • Patrick

        I think we are a better team, just, mainly because I think our pack is better. And Cheika deserves some credit for that, definitely.
        But I think we punch below our collective weight on average when 4 years ago maybe we were still punching above, mainly for the reasons you give.

        • I would agree the pack plays better, at least the set piece functions better.

          Overall that lack of selection consistency, offensive and defensive structure and some niggles that the selection panel have reduced but not removed leave me wondering. One of the lessons from the Wales game surely just be that a settled team that know each other and play for each other with a plan they understand can beat, arguably more talented, individuals? They can do that even if they lose the set piece battle too.

          I think the team of 2015 played for each other, the individuals of 2019 don’t, at least not so much. So while there has been some progress in places, overall I’d say the team has gone backwards.

        • Patrick

          I agree with a lot of that. I think that the continuing selection of players like Hanigan and Foley (and to some degree Beale) really wore down something in the broader player group as well.

        • I think that can swing both ways. With the current Wales squad, the England squad that won in Australia, the previous two AB squads for example there’s a feeling of the core being settled and that gives the squad and team stability and good combinations.

          However, all those squads had a bit of churn – there’s a sense that you’d be ok if you had the odd bad game but two or three and there’s a replacement lined up and ready to go.

          Cheika, if you’re being charitable, leaned too far to squad stability. If you’re less charitable he made bad picks, which every coach does sometimes – they all have their one cap wonders, but Cheika doubles down on his bad picks and keeps on selecting them. He also fails to notice when the competition has outstripped the incumbent.

          While there’s an argument that a chunk of the players in Japan have come home for the RWC and, undoubtedly, some of those are not on Cheika, it is worth wondering just how many have gone because of Cheika’s loyalty to a limited player-base and were tempted home by news of a selection panel rather than just Cheika. At least two sought early release from contracts that I know of…

        • Patrick

          I am very charitable, at least upon reflection. But in Cheika’s case, upon reflection, the time for charity has long gone, sometime after Hanigan’s 10th cap and long before he got to 19, without even mentioning Foley.

          And yes you are right, Fardy and McMahon, to take just two examples, are probably still amongst our best 5 backrows. And Higgers was perhaps one of our best 3 for a long time, etc.

          If Chieka was serious about investing in the future, he’d have given Hanigan a few starts of the bench to give him a taste, worked out that it was too early for him, and dropped him to Super Rugby with a positive message about what he had to work on.

          Same with Foley, even if you take the view that he was ever our best 10, in 2017 you would have already stripped him of kicking duties and told him to concentrate on his running and passing game, and if that didn’t change the trajectory, at the latest after the 2018 July international series you would have dropped him to Super Rugby with a similar positive message…

          It can only have been really tough on the “others”, who only ever got the implicit but very strong message that there was nothing they could do to merit a slot, except perhaps play for the Tahs.

        • Hard to disagree with anything there. He introduces fresh blood poorly, manages senior players in decline poorly and manages the wider pool of potential players poorly too…

  • sambo6

    A real reflection of how far the ‘brand’ of walllaby rugby has fallen is the fact we are all on here moaning about a scratchy win against Uruguay. I imagine that even 5 years ago, let alone 20 years ago!

    Reason why it’s scratchy…it’s 5 percent the fault of the players…it’s 65 percent due to sh-t tactics and unsophisticated game plans, and 30 percent due to the fact that a totally different team gets trotted out by the selectors every week (these stats have been verified by the Australian beaureu of statistics…so no need to question them)…

    If we had decent tactics, with clear consistent instructions ingrained within the squad over the past 4 years, then even the B side would come out (against Uruguay) and look like the A side in terms of shape and patterns, just with slightly lower quality players…..instead every week they all look like they’re playing the first trial match of the season…..

  • Kiwi rugby lover

    Thanks Steve, well I said anything less than 30 was a fail so not a total fail and some good play at times. However, nothing to raise hope that they’ll get past England in the Qtrs. Some I liked
    – TK showed his class and should be the 13
    – I’m not a Hooper fan but I thought he played well at times
    – Petaia showed his skills and should start
    – Dempsey showed how good he could be with more time on the field
    – CLL showed he’s the best 10 option
    – Toomua was good at 12 and opens up a number of options with him, JOC and Kerevi all having different skills. Personally I’d like to see JOC start there.
    However as mentioned elsewhere some crap that detracts from the game.
    My biggest fear is that Cheika will use this game as a reason to keep Beale at 15, Pocock at 6/8, AAC as a starter and Simmons as a starter.
    Far to much uncontrolled aggression that detracts from the game and dumb decisions at crucial times.
    Nothing changed for me, still hanging out for Nov when Cheika and his bunch of crap coaching team are gone.

    • Brumby Runner

      With you all the way on the uncontrolled aggression KRL. It looks to me that Cheika wants them all fired up when the game starts and they lose control, either through inaccuracy or through penalties, and they look quite poor in the first half of their games. They don’t settle down and start playing good rugby until after half time.

    • Nutta

      Hello my fellow countryman.

      I agree with L’fano/JOC as 10/12 with time. But we don’t have it. If it were me and based on what we know right now then it’s White/L’fano/Toos/K’drani with Pets/Koribeti/Sauce at the back.

      My pigs are Slips/Latu/6A’s with Arnold/Rodda and Poet/Dempsey/Nisi. Given I’m wrong and Hooper is 7 then Latu stays as the fetcher.

      That means a bench of Sio/Fingers/Topou/CSL/Poet plus Gins/Kevy/JOC.

      • laurence king

        I’d like to see that side run on next Friday, with JOC having a run at 12 for a while when L’fano comes off and Toomua moves to 10. I think that Kerevi’s non passing is an issue whereas Toomua/JOC inside of Kuridrani seems to have more appeal. Having K’drani outside of Kerevi would still not guarantee a pass from Kerevi.

        • Nutta

          I completely agree Kevy non-passing is a problem. I would like to see White/L’fano/JOC/K’drani but given time constraints and familiarity the best combo for mine would be White/L’fano/Toos/K’drani.

          But all that said, it’s Cheks call. So given it’s Cheks call it will be Gins/Foley/Kevy/JOC for the game vs Filth. I’ll bet you a stein at the Parramatta Belgium Beer Hall it will be.

        • laurence king

          One thing, the sooner that we can write sentences that don’t contain the word ‘Cheika’ in them will be a good thing.

        • Nutta

          Again I’ll say I don’t think the guy is deliberately messing things up. We all need to be careful we don’t ‘Mummify’guys like Cheks and Foley et al like Dean Mumm used to get pasted because it’s not as though they get up in the morning and say “Gee, how can I fk this up today?” I don’t doubt they are all trying hard. But I just don’t accept we can get it sooo wrong sooo consistently.

          Again though this brings us back to John O’Neil post 2003 fiasco and the complete loss of strategic focus on growing the production-line of players via expanding grass-roots common support beyond the blue-blood which currently holds sway. That myopia and short-term silliness brought us the failure of 2007 which led to Dingo and the pandering to the 3-Amigo’s garbage which led to the hounding of Link out of the game and thus ARU had to accept Cheks “all or nothing” contract clauses which is what we are suffering under now.

        • laurence king

          Cheika without doubt is passionate about Australian rugby and the Wallabies and I accept that he’s a nice guy. But there a serious flaws to his coaching that have become evident in the last four years, even to folk like me. We have got a seriously good crop of players just starting their careers and coming through and they have to be well managed. The next step needs to be very well thought out and I don’t believe that Cheika can be a part of it.

        • Nutta

          We have the cattle. We really do. Here’s a good one to consider – in the AFL semi finals of x3wks ago there were 12 fellas playing that weekend in the 22’s of those 4 sides who were all under the age of 26yrs who ALL went to school in Wagga. 12 of them. All 190cm plus, all +90kg naturally, all under 26yrs old. Every single one of them had at some stage been training and playing in the Southern Inland/ACT rugby programmes. FKN ALL OF THEM. And now not even 1 of them still playing rugby. FFS the Gray Brothers who play for Scotland, their MUM lives at Uranquinty not 20km from Wagga.

          Our talent identification and retention programmes are just deplorable. That means there is over-investment in the “Chosen Few” who went to the right schools. That creates over-investment in their continual selection and then they become too politically expensive to drop…

          Ssshhh. I’m studying.

        • laurence king

          Wow, that’s amazing. I guess that the money on offer in AFL is also a big consideration but even so you’d think that some of those guys should be playing SR at the very least. There’s a hell of a lot of good young footballers out in the country and it seems a lot a getting snaffled by League and AFL.

        • Nutta

          Dude if you are under 26yrs old, over 190cm, aerobically fit & athletic enough to be playing AFL semi-finals and still be over 90kg (which means on a protein/creotine heavy diet and weights programme means you would be 100-110kg once your legs thicken and your bone density catches up) then you’re a fkn walk-up-start in any Super franchise in this country at least.

        • Patrick

          I’ve been saying for years that Andrew Demetriou should at least be on the RA board if not the CEO, and we need to work out how we can invest in at least trying to match Auskick and the AFL expansion program.

          We are trying the deadly something program which is great, and we did try the Rebels and the Force. But whereas the AFL doubled down, then forcibly relocated a club, then tripled down, then doubled again, we pulled up sticks at the first cloud on the horizon.

        • Patrick

          The bastards invest almost more in training and developing referees than we do our players FFS. Did you know that a 16yo can get trained, for free, kitted out, for free, and paid to referee U12 and U14s?

        • Nutta

          If we want to see true action on the issues surrounding recruitment and retention it again circles back to centralisation and centrally orchestrating and coordinating our efforts.

          And if I hear one more overpaid, underworked apparatchik from ACT or NSW moan about how hard it is to find talent whilst they shove yet another free pie in their gob followed by the free beer in their sponsored tee shirts, well, just know how completely full of shite they are. Either that or completely disconnected from reality. I’m not sure which is worse.

          To keep repeating the same shite time after time and expecting a different outcome is just repeating the same madness.

        • Patrick

          Agree 100%

        • onlinesideline

          mate that is INCREDIBLE

        • Kiwi rugby lover

          Mate I’d agree with all of that except for the lack of integrity on display from the people you mention. All of them have continually put themselves above the team and the good of rugby here. Cheika will quite rightly have a legacy as the worst coach Australia has ever had and Hooper will quite rightly have the Same legacy. Their leadership took the Wallabies from 2 to 7 then clawed back to 6. None of it deliberate but all of it with a sense of arrogance that was never deserved. I am happy to lay the blame with them as they, and the rest of their leadership group are responsible for this

        • Nutta

          Maybe I’ve been living under the workers socialist utopia that is Oz for too long. Perhaps i should spend some time in the capitalist stronghold of NZ for a while to harden up a wee bit…

          Something like this maybe?

          https://youtu.be/1s3fMaBdWD8

        • laurence king

          Punchy chorus

        • Nutta

          Yeh. It’s a pity they are screaming fascists.

        • laurence king

          I’m married, so I understand. Twice.

        • Kiwi rugby lover

          Absolutely

        • UTG

          I prefer MT at 12. JOC crabs sideways at times, particularly easy to do if TK is running a hard unders line, whereas MT runs straighter.

        • Nutta

          You’re giving me nightmares of Giteau… and fkn Beale…

        • Nutta

          Absolutely. K’drani can’t make Kevy pass.

      • Kiwi rugby lover

        Well said fellow countryman (well once I’ve done the ceremony anyway)
        I’m not sure on White. To me he’s starting to play like he did when Phipps took over his play. He seems to get too caught up in the now and gets very wound up and his game goes to pieces. He needs to step back a bit and look at the bigger picture I think. Toomua is a better finisher than a starter to me but I can accept him, Kerevi or JOC at 12 for part of the game.
        Like the rest of your team

      • Custard Taht

        That is the team I would go with, and it would certainly, on a man to man basis, be good enough to make a deep run……but it doesn’t fix the biggest problem, the coach and his “Game Plan”.

    • adastra32

      The Argentinians looked well pumped-up too…..

  • Brisneyland Local

    Hello GAGR’s, Kafe and Hoss’s mentioning of the word Insipid is what springs to mind. That was lacklustre, to say the least. Just in general a big pile of poo. BL’s points in no particular order:
    – The first half was below par. The attack was soft, and it we are the Soap Dodgers in the first qtr final we are in serious shit. Our attack cant play what is in front of it, it just trots out a number of set piece plays that don’t suit what is happening at the time. There fore are easier to pick than Barbara Streisand’s nose.
    – The only real positives I took from the game was our scrum. It looked dominant but from my memory only gained about 2 penalties.
    – Simmons played the whole game with being un- noticed. Like a limp lettuce leaf. Appalling.
    – 2 Yellow cards. They were deserved, and Beale was Uber lucky not to get one as well. Lazy tackling. And particularly at this world cup where it is fundamentally evident that any contact to the neck or head is going to get you time to reflect. Again just stupid by the wallabies.
    – Beale in my opinion, in contrast to Gordon Bray who seems to think that Beale is the second coming of Christ, did not have a good game. They were moments of good, but again moments of utter shite.
    – Nic White did not have a good game.
    – On the positive, Kurindrani looked good. So did Genia. And Tupou had some sweet runs. Pocock is a fucking legend.
    – All of the issues we saw in this game are coaching issues. Not player issues or skills issues, mind you this ongoing dropping of the ball is shite. Ahhhhh the post Cheika Era is two games away.
    This really was not the performance I wanted to be seeing knowing in less than two weeks we face England. We have serious work to do. Over to you GAGR’s.

  • Arty

    Why bother with the Captain’s interview after the match. Hooper thought all was a fine performance, obviously “taking the piss” out of the jouno.

  • Bernie Chan

    Bloody hell..was On a flight into Asia so missed the game. How many high tackle penalties were there…I saw the 2 YC tackles on replay…
    Cheika wants the team to fire up but we can’t seem to play hard n fast and retain discipline.
    Petaia looked pretty sharp, and Slipper scored a “pie” in his 94th Test!

  • Greg

    Holy smokes batman…. All Black 3 just got a yellow card.

  • Jcr

    Was parked up in the back country , read the results, just tried to watch the game when home , someone far wiser than me said that the Wallabies , within reason play to the level of the opposition, occasional turds polished or flushed , All Blacks play to their capabilities, more or less , irrespective of the opposition . Wallabies need to lift to that level to be consistent’ish , I’m picking the mob that’s running them is not capable of that level . Oh well .

  • Larry Jorgensen

    Watching the mungo gf it occurs to me that this seems a strong influence on how the Wobblies are playing at certain moments in each match. Frenetic, one man out bursts up field with no hope of support at the ensuing ruck, lateral movement with ball in hand and front on, stand up tackles/collisions which woukd all be high or close to it in rugby. And a lot of comment similar to Kerevi’s re these high contact incidents – “all good, it’s what makes the game entertaining”.

    As a rugby playing nation where league has a higher profile than union, is this influence holding us back?

    BTW, I thought the Japan/Samoa match was far more entertaining than the mungo gf.

    • donktec

      most of the games are more entertaining than league gf! eg: France Tonga scrappy but good value

      • Patrick

        France Argentina too was great, I’m hoping for the same from France England. Every Japan game so far, I love watching them play, and also it looks like some cracking finals to come.

  • joy

    19-3 at half time. Eventually?

Wallabies
@steve_l15

Canberra born and bred Rugby fan brought up on Canberra Kookaburra and ACT Brumbies Rugby.

More in Wallabies