RWC QF 4 AUS v SCO (Twickenham) 19th Oct 0200 AEDT

[aeneas]

I haven't seen any highlights but from memory I'm not sure we were even contesting that ruck with any players? If so I don't think there was a ruck to be offside at.

Simmons face as he realised that he should have been in the ruck rather than fanning out to defend was a sight to behold.

 

[Viking]

It was a bit of damned if you do, damned if you don't. Ultimately Cheika decided to leave Foley on the field and it was the right decision at least in terms of the result (of course we may have also won if Cooper came on but that is unknown).

My guess is that Foley's goal kicking finally came together in the second half and Cheika viewed it as risky to change his kicked.

Giteau was playing pretty well so To'omua didn't get on and our back three were all going very well so there was no need to change anything up there.

I reckon if Kuridrani hadn't scored and put us ahead by 8 with 15 minutes to go, Cheika would have made more changes.

We were still ahead by 5 at 73 minutes. By this stage it was raining. I probably wouldn't bring Cooper on then either, to be honest.

I think if we were down by 10+ with 10 to go you might see him.

Yeah makes sense not to sub in the dying stage of the game given the score line. But I guess I expected him on early on the second half. Especially given we seemed to be scoring tries at ease out wide. Cooper is fantastic at the wide ball game.

I can see why it's still risky, but then why put some-one so risky on the bench then? I can't see the logic. It's a wasted bench spot.

 

[Braveheart81]

I think Cooper was there for the same role Beale has been. A utility back who can create something. None of those players (particularly Beale) needed to come off.

Cheika has generally had his 10 playing 80 minutes. I don't think that plan changed just because Cooper was on the bench.

 

[daz]

I'm following RWC tournament rules, which state that once a game is won or lost, it becomes history and therefore a waste of time commenting; we move onto next week.

However, in this case, I will simply say: Thank fuck we are moving onto next week, but my heart just lost 5 years of life-span this morning.

 

[mudskipper]

As a SIDELINE issue... Out of interest since Cooper didn't take to the field and then get a another cap he may not make 60 caps now before the 2015 RWC is over and not be inline for a future call up under Giteau's law if he levels Australia...

Could be the last we see him in Gold...

 

[KOB1987]

It seems strange that Cooper wasn't injected for Foley, given Foley's bad night. What the hell was the plan for him then? If he was only injury cover then we would have been better served with Speight or Tomane as outside back cover.

If Cheika didn't have faith in Cooper to replace a poor performing Foley, then he shouldn't have been picked on the bench.

Unless he only planned to give him game-time if we were well ahead, but then isn't it worse to sub players who are performing well? What the hell?

I think the plan was to inject the bench when we had a bit of a lead

 

[daz]

Could be the last we see him in Gold.

I'm ok with that.

 

[mxyzptlk]

You know he dies in the film and has to be resurrected by a magic old man, right?

What's next, a victory speech from the first Rocky movie? (Rocky lost.)

 

[KOB1987]

I'm following RWC tournament rules, which state that once a game is won or lost, it becomes history and therefore a waste of time commenting; we move onto next week.

However, in this case, I will simply say: Thank fuck we are moving onto next week, but my heart just lost 5 years of life-span this morning.

In a similar vein I was always taught that the correct way to settle any disputes about who should have won was to look at the scoreboard. In any sport you have to take the bad with the good

 

[KOB1987]

I'm following RWC tournament rules, which state that once a game is won or lost, it becomes history and therefore a waste of time commenting; we move onto next week.

However, in this case, I will simply say: Thank fuck we are moving onto next week, but my heart just lost 5 years of life-span this morning.

In a similar vein I was always taught that the correct way to settle any disputes about who should have won was to look at the scoreboard. In any sport you have to take the bad with the good

 

[mudskipper]

the BIG question is... What on earth was James Slipper thinking standing at flyhalf, dumbing to TPN and throwing such an gifted intercept pass to the Scottish center,,,,, in the bloody rain when we had the lead by 8 late in the match !!!
Honestly it was a Dunning drop goal moment.... nearly threw the cup away...

 

[Braveheart81]

the BIG question is. What on earth was James Slipper thinking standing at flyhalf, dumbing to TPN and throwing such an gifted intercept pass to the Scottish center,,,,, in the bloody rain when we had the lead by 8 late in the match !!!
Honestly it was a Dunning drop goal moment.. nearly threw the cup away.

Absolutely. It was awful.

It's a set play where we have a forward runner there a couple of players wide who either trucks it up or sends it wide. Clearly Slipper just needed to truck it up in that situation. The idea being that we either get in a better position inside our 22 for the clearing kick or it goes wide if there is an opportunity.

Generally we've had Fardy being that player making the decision and he's done it really well. Most of the time this morning he took the option to truck it up because the defence were rushing up too fast outside him. Once he made a really good run breaking a few tackles.

Just terrible decision making from Slipper. We were so lucky to get out of the match after that. When the ball was kicked out at the end, you could see Slipper collapse to the ground. You can only imagine how he felt after that mistake, how he felt after Foley got us back in front and the relief when we won and he hadn't cost us the game.

If we'd lost I reckon you'd have seen a combination of tears and vomiting from Slipper. The feeling of guilt would have been all too much to handle.

 

[CatchnPass]

Good point BH. Slipper has done a lot of very good things in the Gold jersey, more recently whilst injured, and I don't think anyone could accuse him of lacking heart or commitment. He would have been mortified at making that mistake and will have learnt from it.

Slipper, Foley and the others are all professional athletes and so maybe the brickbats come with the territory, but they are also young men who wear the jersey with pride and, I'm sure, give their best every time they pull it on. Let's not overdo the criticism and all get behind our team to win this fucking thing.

 

[vidiot]

Yep Slipper's decision making was ordinary. There was space behind the rapidly advancing Scottish line and I thought he should have chipped and chased.

Glory!!!!

 

[fatprop]

I have only seen the highlights so far, but it appears that the Wobs weren't mentally up for this game.

The complacency fairy nearly provided a very harsh lesson

 

[mudskipper]

Slipper's era was park rugby... not international, I know he has been a good player in the past... He looked like a bench player who come on and wasn't assessing the game around him just playing by the numbers... they was no reason to case a 60 meter try with 5 minutes to go... just play the clock... Who was the captain at the time? perhaps there wasn't enough focussed direction as Moore was off the field...

 

[Inside Shoulder]

No Australian was contesting the breakdown so there was no ruck.

On that basis, I think the Scottish 12, Horne was fine picking up the ball and running with it.

This is murky: Law 16.6 defines a successful end to a ruck, none of which include opposing players ceasing to contest the breakdown.

 

[Braveheart81]

This is murky: Law 16.6 defines a successful end to a ruck, none of which include opposing players ceasing to contest the breakdown.

I don't think there was a ruck to begin with. Only a tackle.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

I don't think there was a ruck to begin with. Only a tackle.

Oh - in that case we deserved to be scored against: players over reading the play and not committing because "we're here to defend".

 

[BRIKZ]

Laidlaw was a touch salty at the post match interview.

Just a touch salty?

Absolutely had the rub. Don't know what else to say.

Well done to the Wallabies anyway. It's not like they didn't "deserve it", the teams just play whats in front of them, so credit. Sure as shit won't be happy with that performance though.

As mentioned previously, Laidlaw knocked on at the base of the scrum against Manu Samoa 74' minutes to score and take the lead - unlike the offside call against OZ, that was a decision that can & should have been referred to the TMO given the outcome of the call. Lets not forget that Ford & Gray shouldn't have even been playing. Luck & good fortune in sport goes both ways, and Scotland had both in spades even before a whistle was even blown.

Despite how badly we played the final score read 35-34, 5 tries to 3 (intercept/charge down & uncontested pick from the ruck base.


We won, and rightly deserved to.