I agree.
The biggest problem we had when Pocock got injured was not because we didn't have a specialist 7 to replace him, it was because it meant we were missing the best player in our team.
Jim Williams BONED
- Thread starter Gagger
- Start date
- Status
I agree.
The biggest problem we had when Pocock got injured was not because we didn't have a specialist 7 to replace him, it was because it meant we were missing the best player in our team.
Scotty
David Codey (61)
I'd say the loss of Moore was also almost as big an issue.
So how many of the current Aus side would have started for the ABs? (especially the forwards)
This current side has nothing to do with what we have done in the past, we were more innovative and professional for a while, but the ABs in particular have caught up and have more talent to develop
Langthorne
Phil Hardcastle (33)
How many of the 2011 Reds would you put into the Crusaders team of 2011? I'd say maybe two or three - so does that mean the Reds have no chance against them? As we already know, they beat the Crusaders in the Super final, but it wasn't because they had the greater depth or better players - it was because the Reds were the better coached TEAM. The same could apply to the Wallabies now, as it has at times in the past (assuming an almost complete overhaul of most facets of the coaching).
Slash
Bill Watson (15)
Let's not forget that the number 6 jersey for the entire RWC was an empty jersey................
waratahjesus
Greg Davis (50)
This is the issue for me. Wo cares if none of the Aus line up would make the All Blacks team. Then your second paragraph seems to suggest utter defeat, we were more innovative and professional for a while? Shouldn't it be the goal to always be more innovative and professional. Honestly, were trying to be like the All Blacks instead of looking at the strengths and talents we have in this country and building to it.
I look forward to super rugby these days more Than I do internationals as I feel at least there we are trying rather than the imposter act we have going on at international level.
Gnostic
Mark Ella (57)
Before the 91 RWC how many of the Wallabies would have made the ABs? Campo for Timu maybe. That would be it. No way most would have chosen Horan/Litle over Little/Bunce or Lynagh over Fox (though that one could be down to personal choice for many punters). The whole forward pack from the ABs would have been picked before the Wallabies going into the RWC. What Dwyer did was coach a very good TEAM and developed some great tactics to match the strengths of that side.
As for Williams no getting renewed this move was called as the scape goat move by some here before the RWC started. I do think he has failed in his role just as I think Noriega has. But in both cases they have been given a flawed crew to work with and at test level the margins of difference are so slight those flaws can and have been fatal. Does anybody truly believe that either of the two coaches mentioned would have picked the players that they have been given to work with if they had their way to build an effective unit in each of their realms of responsibility. Deans has a blueprint of player he wants and they will be selected above any others, and in some cases individuals will be selected regardless of form or injury status.
Let us not forget that Deans changed his tactics at the RWC, not before and still continued to select players for a fast paced counter attacking game (because there was rarely any first phase set move attack) whilst playing a purely defensive game. The one change he did make was to put McAbe at 12.
The "cattle" argument (and I hate that term) is a smoke screen, there are options in Australia that have not been tried or even considered.
Finally the arguments regarding the lack of a "fetcher" 7 as backup to Pocock are misleading. The argument isn't about the lack of a back-up fetcher as there are only 3 or 4 top fetchers left in the world now, with the retirement of Smith and the decline of Waugh. Every other side who lack a fetcher 7 play a traditional 7 type with massive effectiveness. Putting the king of ineffectiveness at 7 compounded the loss of Pocock IMO, People will point to the work rate of McCalman but the fact is that for all his work rate it is largely ineffective. Tackles are made but momentum isn't halted and the tacklee continues past the gain line, rucks are hit but ball is not pressured, disrupted or won. Involvements in Wallabies rucks too often lead to successful counter rucks or disrupted ball. I know that this is not just McCalman's problem but he just does not have the presence or possibly the strength to fill that traditional 7 role. IMHO Higginbotham would have been better at the role, Robinson better again. Yet if a fetcher was wanted Hodgeson was the only real choice. McCalman was poorly selected for the role.
Done that
Ron Walden (29)
Some of you guys are pretty hard markers.
Australia had a good year overall IMO .
If you take out the AB's , then , arguably , based on performances , Australia are the best side in the world.
The world cup results were disappointing , certainly , but every team who didn't win would probably say that they could have done better.
Australia had a good year overall IMO .
If you take out the AB's , then , arguably , based on performances , Australia are the best side in the world.
The world cup results were disappointing , certainly , but every team who didn't win would probably say that they could have done better.
If you compare the way the All Blacks played in the '91 semi to the '11 semi they are chalk and cheese. The ABs were scintillating in the first half against the Wallabies in the 2011 and were fairly lacklustre against in 1991.
Dagg and Jane played arguably the best games of their career in that match.
I think it is a fairly cheap and simplistic analysis to say that we won in 1991 because of good coaching and lost in 2011 because of bad coaching.
Hawko
Tony Shaw (54)
I feel the same way. Following the Waratahs is now more important and interesting for me than following the Wallabies. Coaching a team is all about making the whole team the very best it can be, as the Reds were last year. You wouldn't rate the Wallabies in the top ten if the criterion was "making the team the very best it can be". On that criterion England would be worse but in my view that's not saying very much. Abandoning a pattern of play you've been developing for two or three years because a different strategy worked in a couple of games, especially when the old pattern at its best produced stellar results, just left me utterly disheartened.
Love the "imposter act" line, its right on the money.
Gnostic
Mark Ella (57)
Where did I say it was all to do with poor coaching? I have said all along the team selected is made of good to great individuals, that form a very unbalanced whole (and some times don't form a whole unit and we get big blow outs) that have been provided with poor and incomplete game plans. So no it isn't just poor coaching, it is the whole gambit, poor selection being the start.
My statement regarding the 91 Wallabies was in response to the comments that how many of this years Wallabies would make this years ABs. The answer is the same as in '91 or maybe even a bit better as I think Genia, Ioane and JOC (James O'Connor) would all be in with a solid chance. The ABs in 91 were subjected to perhaps the best 40 minute display a Wallaby side has produced, but the second half was very close 3-3 all from memory. But you are correct in saying '91 and '11 are chalk and cheese, in '91 a the Wallabies played well and executed well. In '11 the game was over inside 15 minutes with a flurry in the last 10 minutes of the game that left many of my fellow fans asking where was that effort from the opening whistle.
Done that
Ron Walden (29)
You're obviously a glass half empty man.
wamberal
Phil Kearns (64)
England was unlucky not to win the 1991 RWC. If they had managed to snaffle that last minute try (only saved by a miraculous piece of defence by John Eales), what would our history look like?
The margin between victory and defeat can be tantalisingly small. The coach gets a bit of the credit when the team succeeds, and most of the blame when the team loses.
As for Link being a great coach, does anybody remember the turgid performances by the Tahs under his reign? He is responsible for the single worst coaching decision ever made, selecting Morgan Turinui to mark Bryan Habana - while Lachie Turner languished on the bench.
The margin between victory and defeat can be tantalisingly small. The coach gets a bit of the credit when the team succeeds, and most of the blame when the team loses.
As for Link being a great coach, does anybody remember the turgid performances by the Tahs under his reign? He is responsible for the single worst coaching decision ever made, selecting Morgan Turinui to mark Bryan Habana - while Lachie Turner languished on the bench.
Schadenfreude
John Solomon (38)
Worse than taking Phipps to a world cup?
Worse than Wendell Sailor?
Worse than Wendell Sailor?
DPK
Peter Sullivan (51)
Slim 293
Stirling Mortlock (74)
The only real highlight was the 3 Nations win against the All Blacks...
Otherwise, what else was there to celebrate?
Beating South Africa is nothing new...
antimony
Herbert Moran (7)
This is what really gets me. Its like we have just become All Black Lite, really similar but not quite as good.
I think the 'its deans coaching' and the 'we don't have the cattle' agruments are actually one and the same. We don't have the deveopment pathways that produce enough good players to be the All Blacks and Deans is not being canny enough in using what we do have. He just keeps trying replicate the only game plan he knows, It works really well if you can develop players through lower grades to be the players you want but it takes time.
So my proposal is that we promote Deans to a position of National Coaching Director get him start running scrum camps and play whats in front of you drills at schools all over the country. If he sticks at it for another 5 -8 years he'll have the robots he needs and then he can be the nationl coach again (hopefully not). In the meantime he has nothing to do with the wallabies and the super teams can have him at their disgression.
Then we can get get a coach that better understands the Australian rugby landscape.
- Status