Firstly the posts of Redshappy and a few other discussing the dearth of quality coaching at elite levels is spot on IMO. Why is it that so many players at elite level in Australian rugby have glaring skill weaknesses that have been present throughout their careers? For example, I see why AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) is selected, he is consistent and offers one of the only real threats against a structured defence. That said his game and skill set has not developed in his entire career. Go back 5 years and you will see Brumbies fans discussing how quick he was, such a great fend, defence etc, but then note how he cannot pass effectively out of his right hand (left to right). Look at how oppositions defend against him and you will see that they are aware of this. Why is this skill deficit still so significant in his play after all these years at elite level.
- the scrum. So much comment and all focussed on individual players such as Kepu. I would invite people to go back and have a look at the scrum from the very start. That is from when the 8 start to bind on each other. The Australian scrum is fatally flawed from the set up, before the opposition is even thought of. The Tight five is not tight and is not even setting up correctly. The easiest way to see it is look at the angles of the middle 4 in relation to the front 3 and points of contact the locks are making with the props.
1) The angles - the backs of the front and second rows are not parallel, with the props horizontal and the locks head down bum up. High school physics tells you that force moves in straight lines so the locks force is not being transferred efficiently to the props and hooker and could in fact be destabilising.
2) The point of contact. The locks especially are not getting low enough on the bind and consequently are contacting the props and hooker on the cheek of the bum instead of under it. Last night was a great example because you can see in the one shot of the Bok locks and flankers on their knees to bind on the front row and then standing up in preparation for the engage. The Wallabies never get down low enough to bind and hence start high. When the drive comes on the locks slide up the back of the prop offering no thrust, and in more than one example they detach completely.
3)The binding - Simmons at TH lock is of concern to me, Kepu was under massive pressure all night from the DuPlesis/Beast combo driving on him and splitting him from Moore. To counter this he appeared to me to shift his angle onto DuPlesis when he should have perhaps shifted out onto Beast? The biggest issue came here where DuPlesis was able to time and again split Kepu from Moore with Kepu's hips moving away from the hooker. If Simmons' bind was effective this should have been difficult to achieve.
4)The new laws - in many ways I think that a return to true competition at the scrum instead of it all being about the hit is showing up Australia's deficiencies to a greater extent. Players like Alexander, Kepu Moore and perhaps even Robinson and Palmer were reasonable and sometimes dominant at the hit. Apart from Robinson however they have also had plenty of issues technically. Now that the hit is gone and it is about pure technique and TEAMWORK, I think the true weaknesses in Australian scrummaging are becoming apparent. Changing individuals will not alter the outcomes because as I outlined above the basic skills are missing or not being applied.
IMO until the basic skills of the players are raised these sorts of failures will continue to occur regardless of who is picked. Individually I believe that the players are perhaps the best or equal to the best Australia has available. They do not even look remotely like a team and no game plan will be effective whilst this remains the case. I do hope they read this and take the critique on board, but I doubt that will be the case, because in many cases I think the attitude is one of the Matt Burke mould, we the arm chair critics, the part time journalists and amateur coaches and players have not experienced the game at the level they are at and hence have nothing of relevance to add.
