2013 IRB Junior World Championship - France

[Inside Shoulder]

Unfortunately, history will record that this year's team didnt get out of pool play.
Based on the second half that will be a harsh mark.
I suspect that a little more preparation would have given these guys a shot.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

I was impressed with the Commentary team.

They had done their homework, and didn't feel the need to tell us what we can see.

If there was nothing needed to be said, they were happy to not say something.

Our callers feel obliged to attack our ears with the sound of their voice for the entire game. No pauses are allowed.

Turning to the game itself. After 20 minutes I thought here we go again. Our kicking game and decision making was poor. We seemed to have been overawed by the "aura" of the Little Darkness in the opening stages.

Slowly but surely the little Wobs seemed to gain confidence in themselves, but still seemed to be kicking too much pill away.

I thought that our rangas performed well when they came on - Wessels and Baldwin, so much so that IMHO they have the skills to be run on players. Mind you it is often easy to look good when you run on fresh legs on with 20 minutes to go against tiring opponents.

Oly Hoskins from WA played a massive game, as appropriate for a massive hulk of a lad that he is. He seems to have a future ahead of him if he can stay injury free.

Overall a much better performance from the Young Wobs.

On a lighter note, it is obvious that none of our boys were on Choral scholarships at their schools, based on the effects mic during the anthems.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

New Zealand v Ireland should be a cracker of a game. Probably won't be televised.

 

[Iluvmyfooty]

I thought that the Oz boys stood up today and more than matched the junior AB's. I thought that our pack was superior to theirs and it was those fkn mistakes in the first 20 minutes that let us down - 3 soft penalties and a try that wasn't so much NZ play but our bad defence.

The whole pack was great today. Browning, especially in the second half, was the best forward on the field. Dempsey worked hard, Sio jumped well and was mobile around the field. The front row was strong and anchored a good scrum against a very good NZ front row. Stain forth showed that he is definitely a player with a future - mobile and aggressive around the park.

It is difficult to talk about the backs as the game plan seemed to want to play a very safe game - keep it in the forwards or shift it to the midfield for a crash ball. I can't remember seeing one phase where the ball went from the half-back to the outside backs in a single play. What I can comment on is their defence which was very good. The centres Taefu and Foketi shut most of the NZ back line plays down.

All in all the boys restored a great deal of pride and respect in their jerseys today. There are some points that need to be fixed but after today's performance we should have nothing but positives to say about all 23 players that took part.

One last comment to the one who praised the commentators. Yes they were well prepared and do good call however I did think they focused on the Blacks for the whole game. I thought I heard a thousand times about how electric and exciting the AB's fullback was and how Savea was just so good. Similar praise for the OZ boys was very few and far between

 

[tranquility]

I found that match a bit frustrating, so I might wait a little bit before I expand on my post.

However I thought Latu and Sio were really good. Maile was good too, but made some silly errors.

Meehan did some good things, but Waldo looks a much more composed and a more complete 9.

Browning was busy, and we generally defended very well.

The baby darkness 15 was threatening and had a good slipper.

Same too, the 10.

As Qwerty said, that was a big opportunity missed.

 

[tomasi15]

Really impressed by the young Aussies today they really showed some ticker in that game. Their forward pack really dominated the Baby Blacks in the set-pieces & rucks in the 2nd half. Their backrow & frontrow getting the better of their opposition for large parts of the game. The OZ back-line while slightly inferior in attack than NZ, were more than equal in defense. The difference in that game for me was NZ fullback & Captain Savea whom popped at the most uncanny of situations to stifle promising OZ attacks. The whole OZ forward deserve credit to the closeness of the game. No.10 Hodge also had a great game both in defense & attack. Well done AUS boys you were simply outstanding today, you should be bloody proud of that effort.

 

[tranquility]

There is absolutely no way the boys are happy with that performance, they would realise they realistically should have won.

 

[Sidbarret]

- wrong thread -

 

[Bruce Ross]

Yet another year of triumph for centralised professionalised administration.

Would it really have been so hard to put a well-tuned match-ready team on the park for our first pool game against Ireland? Let's accept the fact that the ARU has limited funding available and that we face the tyranny of distance in playing warm up matches - although it doesn't seem to affect the Kiwis.

This year our only pre-tournament game was against Papua New Guinea. I have no knowledge of the standard of rugby in PNG - they seem to be totally obsessed with Rugby League - but I think we can take it as a given that their team would have been under-prepared and their players somewhat deficient in basic skills, strategy, game speed and fitness. And somehow that was deemed to be appropriate preparation to come up against a team that had played in the 6 Nations Under-20 tournament.

So what might be an alternative strategy for a cash-starved nation like Australia? I know that Sydney Uni offered to play its First Colts against the national squad. Just ignore the fact that it was Uni. What you had was the possibility of a game against a settled, match-hardened team of the appropriate age group which would tick all the boxes which PNG do not.

Extrapolating from that, would not the national squad have been better to have played four local fixtures: against Sydney Uni Colts; say Manly Colts; and two of the top Colts sides from Brisbane? Not a great deal of cost involved and no semi-opposed training runs.

In order to eliminate any nonsense over bragging rights from the Club teams and to give the national coaches real opportunity to test their combinations, each of these fixtures could have been billed as trials consisting of three halves.
.

 

[I like to watch]

There was a squad of fifty wasn't there?
Surely a game or three between them all would have helped?
That or go with BR's suggestion with SS Colt's teams.

 

[Sidbarret]

Yet another year of triumph for centralised professionalised administration.

Would it really have been so hard to put a well-tuned match-ready team on the park for our first pool game against Ireland? Let's accept the fact that the ARU has limited funding available and that we face the tyranny of distance in playing warm up matches - although it doesn't seem to affect the Kiwis.

This year our only pre-tournament game was against Papua New Guinea. I have no knowledge of the standard of rugby in PNG - they seem to be totally obsessed with Rugby League - but I think we can take it as a given that their team would have been under-prepared and their players somewhat deficient in basic skills, strategy, game speed and fitness. And somehow that was deemed to be appropriate preparation to come up against a team that had played in the 6 Nations Under-20 tournament.

So what might be an alternative strategy for a cash-starved nation like Australia? I know that Sydney Uni offered to play its First Colts against the national squad. Just ignore the fact that it was Uni. What you had was the possibility of a game against a settled, match-hardened team of the appropriate age group which would tick all the boxes which PNG do not.

Extrapolating from that, would not the national squad have been better to have played four local fixtures: against Sydney Uni Colts; say Manly Colts; and two of the top Colts sides from Brisbane? Not a great deal of cost involved and no semi-opposed training runs.

In order to eliminate any nonsense over bragging rights from the Club teams and to give the national coaches real opportunity to test their combinations, each of these fixtures could have been billed as trials consisting of three halves.
.

Don't know what level "colts" represent, I assume u/21's, but to compare it to the South African preparations.

The junior Springboks played three games early this year against three Uni first teams (University of the Western Cape, university of Cape Town and Stellenbosch University) and then had a three match series/trial against the Argie juniors.

I think that is about the right level for prep.


Aside a complete aside, I hope there is never a junior 4 nations tournament. In South Africa at least there are too many points where players are filtered and ordained as the next great hope. I want South Africa to win the Junior world champs every year, but not at cost filtering more talented players out of the system at such a young age.

 

[Lee Grant]

I wrote some time ago that a home and away game between Oz and NZ would be ideal preparation - before the final squad was selected - but failing that to have a game each against the remainder of the Qld Academy, and Sydney Academy, plus Colts to make up the numbers in both places, also before the final squad was selected - and it would be an avenue to pick overlooked Colts.

They should have dropped the third camp and did preparation for these two matches instead.

The marginal cost of that compared with what they did would have been small.

I asked Adrian Thompson about whether the PNG game was an appropriate preparation and he said that they were definitely looking at more robust competition for next year and said he hadn't been on board long enough to arrange anything for this year.

He seems a decent bloke and I would take him at his word.

I have written a blog on the game here:

http://www.greenandgoldrugby.com/?p=49018&preview=true
.

 

[DinoRugby]

Well a much improved performance. On the positive I thought that line speed in defence was much better, scrum improved and some thought given to width. On the coaching side again...did we do any line out work during the week. As against the Irish you just can't give away that much of your own set play.
Thought the new 5/8 did pretty well, solid but not electric, but a couple of aimless kicks marked his rating down for this observer
The 9 should have been hooked earlier he tends to be a selfish player and is too slow in his decision making at the breakdown
Ollie Hoskins has something about that looks good for the future, smashed that tight head over and over.
The outside backs worked well off the ball and in defence but limited opportunties. Would this be why they brought on a new 5/8 ( I do't really know the players on an individual basis). Changing your link man during the game seems a strange decision

 

[Inside Shoulder]

I wrote some time ago that a home and away game between Oz and NZ would be ideal preparation - before the final squad was selected - but failing that to have a game each against the remainder of the Qld Academy, and Sydney Academy, plus Colts to make up the numbers in both places, also before the final squad was selected - and it would be an avenue to pick overlooked Colts.

They should have dropped the third camp and did preparation for these two matches instead.

The marginal cost of that compared with what they did would have been small.

I asked Adrian Thompson about whether the PNG game was an appropriate preparation and he said that they were definitely looking at more robust competition for next year and said he hadn't been on board long enough to arrange anything for this year.

He seems a decent bloke and I would take him at his word.

I have written a blog on the game here:

http://www.greenandgoldrugby.com/?p=49018&preview=true
.

I'm pretty sure that the second game I ever saw Campo play was for Aus 21's v NZ 21s at the SCG as curtain raiser to Bledisloe.
These seemed to be semi regular for a while.

 

[Rassie]

I wrote some time ago that a home and away game between Oz and NZ would be ideal preparation - before the final squad was selected - but failing that to have a game each against the remainder of the Qld Academy, and Sydney Academy, plus Colts to make up the numbers in both places, also before the final squad was selected - and it would be an avenue to pick overlooked Colts.

They should have dropped the third camp and did preparation for these two matches instead.

The marginal cost of that compared with what they did would have been small.

I asked Adrian Thompson about whether the PNG game was an appropriate preparation and he said that they were definitely looking at more robust competition for next year and said he hadn't been on board long enough to arrange anything for this year.

He seems a decent bloke and I would take him at his word.

I have written a blog on the game here:

http://www.greenandgoldrugby.com/?p=49018&preview=true
.

How about a U/20 Tri Nations or TRC every year which also can serve as curtain raisers for the test matches?

 

[qwerty51]

Greg Peters said they have no money for it.

 

[stonecutter]

Yet another year of triumph for centralised professionalised administration.

Would it really have been so hard to put a well-tuned match-ready team on the park for our first pool game against Ireland? Let's accept the fact that the ARU has limited funding available and that we face the tyranny of distance in playing warm up matches - although it doesn't seem to affect the Kiwis.

This year our only pre-tournament game was against Papua New Guinea. I have no knowledge of the standard of rugby in PNG - they seem to be totally obsessed with Rugby League - but I think we can take it as a given that their team would have been under-prepared and their players somewhat deficient in basic skills, strategy, game speed and fitness. And somehow that was deemed to be appropriate preparation to come up against a team that had played in the 6 Nations Under-20 tournament.

So what might be an alternative strategy for a cash-starved nation like Australia? I know that Sydney Uni offered to play its First Colts against the national squad. Just ignore the fact that it was Uni. What you had was the possibility of a game against a settled, match-hardened team of the appropriate age group which would tick all the boxes which PNG do not.
.

Mr Ross,

Perhaps by playing games against a couple of hungry S/S Colts sides would have exposed some of the selections for what they are and is why that option was not explored. Best to arrive in France at least thinking you have a chance after comprehensively dealing with the powerhouse of international rugby that is PNG.

Why not pick a squad of U19's from each of the S/S and Brisbane colts as a stepping stone to seeing if they will be ready the next year? Give them an incentive to think their dream of playing Representative rugby is still alive. Who knows, if you made it mandatory for 2 players from each colts club team to be selected the ARU may even discover there are other players from outside the cocooned world of priviledged Academies that have again not delivered. You may even decentralise the talent pool from 1 or 2 clubs if players know that only 2 players can be nominated towards these sides.

While I respect the efforts of the players and it is an improvement from the first game, the reality is it is still 0 and 2 and no chance of finals competition again. This is a major step on the pathway to professional rugby and this tournament result doesn't look good on any players CV.

Are people out there seriously going to be happy in decades to come with saying "well done boys you got to the quarterfinals" in a senior world cup?

There will be a review of course and bugger all will change in regard to the ridiculous policy of academy centralisation rubbish that is not just seeing Australia stall but going backwards rapidly.

The Scotland and Samoan results of seasons not long past will become more frequent with each passing year if the ARU doesn't recognise that putting all your money into 15 yr olds and backing them no matter the consequence, or the claims of others, is addressed.

 

[twenty seven]

If I recall, the same thing was discussed last year.
Lads who were playing in the Prems squad were overlooked for ones who had only competed in Colts level.
And it showed when it came to hard, nugget rugby.
Perceptions of players do not win games, knowledge does.
Lets pick players on merit and not what state or club they play for, who their family is.
There is so much growth in players bodies and abilities from school boys to Super Rugby that sometimes lads who deserve a call up are overlooked for some lads who excelled when younger but are just not up too it at this time.
There is not enough time spent looking at the players in a game situation on the day. Hard yes, but gives a good insight to a player.
Too much is credited to how they preform at trainings and trials which are no true indicator of a game situation.

 

[Rassie]

We used midgets in the midfield and beat England. Pollard at 12 Meh. Du Preez at 10 looks good. Dries Swanepoel on the bench is a waste. He and Serfontein was class for Grey College. Theron should replace Pollard with him.

 

[Rassie]

Greg Peters said they have no money for it.

You do not need much more money as they travel around with the senior squads playing on the same day as the curtain raiser. So they travel on same plane and use same hotels etc etc as senior team.