Deans Wallabies are such a puzzle. They lose to Samoa , Scotland & always just scrape past Italy & probably should have lost that game in 2009 when Quade saved us. Have a horrible record against the All Blacks 2 from 12 & only one of those games wasn't a dead rubber. Yet for some reason under Deans we have won 3 games in S.A, 2 wins in Paris, 2 from 3 at Cardiff & Twickers which were all test venues we had poor records at under MacQueen & Eddie Jones.
I think if you look at the trend carefully and. hopefully, objectively, what you see is this: the Wallabies are getting better at consistently beating teams that are, on the day, poor or 'OK', but they are not greatly improving in putting away teams that play
consistently very well (all of 80 performance) to excellently on the given day.
Take vs England 2010. England were their rusty, stodgy worst in Perth. Wallaby win. They improved considerably for Sydney, especially in their backs: Wallaby loss. Twickers, they played v well for 80 (again notable England backs improvements), Wallaby loss. ABs HKG 2010, Carter only on for 50 mins (or was it 40?), The Duck makes some real, not-AB-typical bloopers late the game, close Wallaby win. Virtually every other time v ABs since 2007, we lose. France 2010: France plays OK for say 20-25 mins max, then totally fall away to a truly sorry state, Wallaby win. Samoa 2011: Samoa played very well on the day for all of 80, Wallaby loss (with excuses for the loss quickly bolted on, as usual). Scotland 2009: we may laugh at them, but on _that day_ they played well in their conditions, on their soil, and read the multiple Wallaby weak spots well: Wallaby loss.
SA: the Deans fans will be up in arms at me saying it, but Blind Freddy can see that since late 2009 the Boks have been in a spiralling decline: their coaching calibre is collapsing, they are making a number of poor selection decisions, they are under-promoting good young players and over-relying upon ageing stars whose fine wine maturation is over and we now see bottle oxidation instead (a la Wallabies 2003-2007?). They did not play well for 80 in Durban, almost grabbed a win, Wallaby ball handling was appalling (as was SA's) after weeks of prep, training camps etc, narrow Wallaby win. The ABs and Wallabies are going to get a much freer ride with the Saffers now until some kind of crisis over poor performance blows the current SARU up and real change begins anew. Of course, let's take the increasing win-rate v SA, but let's also be honest about the core trends in the opposition, as we mark ourselves with objectivity.
For me, the above analysis is why genuine, consistent improvement vs the ABs is so much more a meaningful measure of Wallaby excellence and deeper, well-rooted improvement in all facets of Wallaby play (or otherwise). It's solely because this AB team, this AB system, that AB culture generates an excellence of elite rugby that can be relied upon as a marker of
consistent national rugby quality in almost all facets of play. Sure, if you can beat teams that have many 'down' days and can't put it on the field for all of 80, let's take those wins. But that, by the ARU's own stated goals, is never going to be enough to regenerate larger fan motivation and bigger commercial gains for the Wallabies as a successful sporting brand or as a business. (I know, I know, the mad passionates on GAGR etc will, God bless them, always be here and cheering on every victory and rightly awaiting glory, but we are also obliged to look at the bigger picture of rugby's regularly declining sports code share in Australia, and declining Wallaby match game gate and TV viewing figures as these KPIs ultimately drive the long-term viability of the code here, that is an inescapable fact.)
