Sure we lost, but if we were to improve as much between this Test and the next Test as we did in the last week, we’re in with a show. It was a big step forward in a short space of time.
Certainly one of the major components that is needed for a quality display is to have numbers of players at the tackle contest with commitment, body height and leg drive. The Wallabies achieved this to a large extent.
The biggest problem for me is our lack of finesse in most things we do. I said last week that the Wallabies’ attack wasn’t as good as the All Black defence and once again that was the case. Indeed commentators and casual observers will say “we can’t break their defence”.
What do I think of the All Black defence? Hard to say, because I’ve yet to see some quality Wallaby attack.
A wise man once said “You have to risk defeat in order to achieve success.” You have to push your performance to its failure point if you’re going to break down this NZ defence, which only happened in the last 15 minutes – when we achieved the level of ball movement and support that’s required.
People often say of an average team performance “we took some poor options”. I actually think that’s more a reflection of the team mates not giving the ball carrier enough alternatives so that he could choose one of them. If good options aren’t available, often players take a poor choice by default – which pretty much sums up our attack. There are not enough choices available to the ball carrier, which in turn aren’t asking enough questions of the defender. If when the attacker approaches the defender with a number of options, the defender senses this subconsciously and confusion can arise. Poor defensive decisions are then made.
A perfect example happened in the 51st minute when Ben Mowen ran from the back of the scrum and offloaded the ball to Michael Hooper, who had Will Genia in support. They made good yardage and at the tackle contest, seven carried the ball, eight had been tackled, six and nine entered the contest to clear out – but there was no-one else. The ball therefore just sat out the back of the ruck, awaiting an All Blacks pick up.
How can that happen? When the two locks broke from the scrum, where did they go? They broke soon after the flankers leave, but they didn’t chase the ball. Had they arrived then they could immediately have picked up the ball and keep the play going.
This to me is a sure indication that we’re thinking of the “next thing” that’s supposed to happen. There is no next thing, only the current thing. I talked last week how defence coaches say the threat is the ball. Well here is a case where the opportunity was where the ball was, and we weren’t there!
In the 56th minute Israel Folau made a break down the right wing, but there was no support anywhere near him. Genia picked and ran and again there was no close support, so he threw a looping pass to Scott Fardy who got hammered by Julian Savea.
In each of these cases it looked to me that we were playing a structure and the locks were playing step two of that structure, when we were in step one.
In the 66th minute, Christian Leali’ifano made a break and passed to Tevita Kuridrani who couldn’t hold on to the ball. What Tevita didn’t understand was that he needed to be closer to Christian. His role wasn’t to continue a wide line, but to be closer in terms of width so that Leali’ifano could find him with the ball.
The accuracy of the Wallabies technique in these subtle areas really needs to be addressed.
We run across the field a lot – losing the ball into touch or running out of room. Sometimes running across the field can work – see what Ma’a Nonu does. But what our players don’t understand is what the man outside the ball carrier, and the man outside him needs to do in support and it happened several times in this Test.
There are simple adjustments that need to be made. The man outside needs to keep his line but slow his pace so he stays behind the ball carrier. The man two outside the ball carrier then becomes the prime support player.
One of the options to that first man is then to drive in on the ball carrier and help him stay out of touch. He also has the option to come inside, but only come inside on the pass as the ball carrier pivots. He can’t run inside the ball carrier and then expect the player to find him (even in that famous Campo over the shoulder pass, Tim ran late so that Campo knew where he was).
These tiny subtleties make enormous differences, and it’s what our coaches need to help our players execute. Our performance improved because we were urgent, aggressive and committed – we got off the line in defence, used leg drive, more numbers to the tackle contest.
The next level we need is the polish, which at the moment is pretty much missing.
As positives, Scott Fardy showed he is definitely up to standard by being our best player and Matt Toomua played better by attacking the line more.
On the minus side our scrum got dusted. Can Ben Alexander stay at tighthead? The problem is who’s his replacement would be. The scrum didn’t really improve with Sekope Kepu, who doesn’t offer the same amount of work around the park.
Our lineout wasn’t up to standard, especially when Mowen came off – at that point it fell apart completely.
Genia was marginally better, but still not up to standard in terms of his clearance. There are very few occasions when the scrum half should delay action at the tackle: they have to pass, run or kick, but it needs to happen immediately. A delay in decision making on the part of the halfback can only serve to help the defence.
If the halfback thinks he needs to wait for the players to be ready, then this is a failure of the attack. It’s almost like the Wallabies run out of urgency.
This is what Fardy did so well – he just kept offering himself.
Yet again we sped up when Nic White came on. Genia can be the right man, but we need to fix his game.
Sadly (because I really thought he deserved selection), we surely can’t continue to select Jesse Mogg at fullback. The ball in the air was a lottery that it looked like we hadn’t even bought a ticket in! Most of Mogg’s kicking was woeful – too short or too long, and his defence is diabolical.
Sooner rather than later we need to pick another winger and get Folau at fullback. He’s at least as good a kicker, great under the high ball and on the counter-attack.
I can understand why Ewen’s given him a shot, but that’s three bad games in a row, and three in a row is enough.
It would seem though that some things never change, including the performance of the ref.
Do yellow cards not exist anymore? In the 23rd minute Aaron Smith should definitely have had one. The ref said to McCaw that “we’re getting close to a situation where I’ll need to take action”. What other situation do you need than the blatant spoiling of a try on the tryline?
As for the Moore no try – refs go upstairs for any reason these days – why wouldn’t you go upstairs for that? In the 20th minute, how did he miss Nonu’s shoulder charge when it was near the ball? At least it’s a penalty, probably a yellow.
I had to go with the commentary team who remarked on how much he’d missed, yet he pinged Mowen for holding onto Brodie Retallick’s leg for too long in a ruck and Hooper for running a blocking line. Has he not seen any of Richie McCaw’s game?
Surely we can expect more from a ref than this. He also seems totally incapable of figuring out what’s happening at the scrum.
The good news for the ref is that the team that played better and deserved the win got the right result. Having said that a yellow card to Aaron Smith would definitely have made things more interesting.
In summary, this was a big step forward for Australia. The attitude of the team was right, but it needs to stay like this from all the players and the staff, all the time. On top of that we need the polish, and we need it urgently.
