Springboks vs Wallabies @ Newlands 27/9/2014

[Braveheart81]

Plus our expectations are to do better then the previous year. I don't see why that should be an unfair expectation.

But the fact is we won 4/5 on the EOYT and have lost 1 game all year. How can anybody say we are performing poorly?

There's very little room for improvement in terms of absolute results. We have improved on last year by beating the Springboks at home. We won four out of five on the EOYT which is an excellent result for any point in the history of Australian rugby.

It's almost like we're stuck in a situation where the only way for a lot of people to deem the Wallabies successful is if we beat the All Blacks. That's a very small margin between success and failure.

 

[daz]

Try the Socceroos.

I don't have a masochistic streak in me big enough for that.

 

[qwerty51]

The Socceroos are ranked over 50 aren't they? They didn't win a game at the World Cup yet there seems to be more acceptance about their world standing. Why? Obviously no one expects them to by top 10 or anything but given the popularity of rugby here I don't see how it's reasonable to expect us to be close to #1. The fact that we're constantly top 3 and have been #2 and close now is a great achievement. I think 1998-2002 when we were the best clouds people's expectations.

The ABs is an issue but people still follow the Kiwi league team heavily despite them having a worse record vs the Kangaroos than the Wallabies vs the ABs.

 

[Tomikin]

Ok. I've been keeping this quiet but the time has come to out myself.

Am I the only one, right now, who feels completely apathetic with the Wallabies?

I can barely scrape together any interest in our national team.

Has the NRC spoiled me for "have a red hot go" rugby? Or am I sick of hearing the constant beat ups around the Wallabies, only to find they have bigger mouths than ability?

Or have I realised that after the last 10 years or so, this is really as good as the Wallabies can be, and there is no hope of cracking #1, or winning Old Bill again; let alone touching the Bledisloe.

Am I alone in this pit of despair?

We can get you back Daz, a selection of Mitch and you will be frapping away at the Wallabies and forget your beloved Rising.

We will never win shit till we decide to play rugby as a whole balanced game and not 'running' or 'kicking' rugby

 

[daz]

It's almost like we're stuck in a situation where the only way for a lot of people to deem the Wallabies successful is if we beat the All Blacks. That's a very small margin between success and failure.

Not almost, BH. We ARE.

Do you not hear the old dogs on RugbyHQ? It's all they care about. It's all any of us that have followed rugby from days gone by to now care about.

We care about it so much, that our new Rugby CEO, in his acceptance speech, pretty much said the same thing the first time he opened his mouth.

And the guy before him, old whats-his-name, even put it as a KPI for Robbie.

Yeah, we ALMOST care about the Bled result.

Whether we can win it or not is completely beside the point; it's what most of us would deem success.

 

[qwerty51]

Think of yourself as a supporter of the Kangaroos, if the Kiwi league fans kept telling you they're going to beat the Kangaroos this year and be #1 you'd laugh at them wouldn't you? Apart from a couple games they're not even close. It's the same gap ABs vs Wallabies.

 

[Viking]

There's very little room for improvement in terms of absolute results. We have improved on last year by beating the Springboks at home. We won four out of five on the EOYT which is an excellent result for any point in the history of Australian rugby.

It's almost like we're stuck in a situation where the only way for a lot of people to deem the Wallabies successful is if we beat the All Blacks. That's a very small margin between success and failure.

Spot on. and I'm guilty of this. I expect us to come close to beating the All Blacks almost every game but the gap between us and them is further then ever.

 

[daz]

Think of yourself as a supporter of the Kangaroos, if the Kiwi league fans kept telling you they're going to beat the Kangaroos this year and be #1 you'd laugh at them wouldn't you? Apart from a couple games they're not even close. It's the same gap ABs vs Wallabies.

And yet the Kiwi's beat the 'Roos in a World Cup final a few years ago.

I realise that was just a friendly game that had no real meaning, but still.

So maybe hoping for a Bled win every generation is not out of the question?

 

[BDA]

Agree with Querty -

If you look at our record over the last ten months:-

v Ireland - Win
v Italy - Win
v Scotland - Win
v Wales - Win
v France - Win
v France - Win
v France - Win
v All Blacks - Draw
v All Blacks - Loss
v Boks - Win
v Argentina - Win

Any other country in world rugby (apart from SA and NZ) who had that record would be over the moon. Other than the Eden Park shambles I'm happy with the results. I went to the Pumas game at CBUS Stadium with my old man and my brother and whilst there was a lot left to be desired about the wallabies performance, I came ut thinking it was a good tough win. I was perhaps not surprised though when the media panned the team the next day about their dreadful performance. People's expectations are too high if they are not impressed with the team's win loss record. Unlike the northern hemisphere teams who appreciate a win for what it is, Oz fans aren't happy unless we play like the Harlem Globetrotters. We are not SA or NZ, in that we don't have anywhere near the talent pool that these countries have in rugby. Against England we should really never win. But actually we have a great record against England despite being so convincingly outnumbered in terms of talent pool.

In my view most of the best aussie footy players of our generation are playing League. Guys like Cam Smith, Thurston, Cronk, Scott, Thaiday, Gallen, Hayne, Slater, Inglis would make the wallabies in a heart beat had they grown up in our game. The list goes on. The reason the wallabies struggle to compete against the all blacks is the same reason the Kiwi's struggle to compete with us in league. too much talent vs slim pickings.

Truth be told, for the wallabies to ever be number no.1 in the world again will require an amazing alignment of the stars in terms of an abnormally high proportion of high quality talents playing rugby in Super rugby. We are currently punching well above our weight in this regard, and at full strength we arguably have enough talent to compete. A big problem is that we are very rarely at full strength (compounded by an inability to pick overseas talent) and lack the depth in some areas that would allow the team to reach the next level.

I look at this weekend's team and wonder how the hell are we expected to beat the Boks in SA with our 4/5 choice hooker, 3/4 choice wings etc. yet still the general public will expect a win this weekend. Honestly I cant see it and I would think a close loss would be a good result looking at the team sheet and lack of experience among many of our players.

For the WC next year, if all our players are fit and firing we certainly have a chance. but the reality is that we will more than likely have a handful of our best players unavailable and unlike the likes of England, NZ and SA, we just don't have the quality depth to cover those losses.

 

[qwerty51]

And yet the Kiwi's beat the 'Roos in a World Cup final a few years ago.

I realise that was just a friendly game that had no real meaning, but still.

So maybe hoping for a Bled win every generation is not out of the question?

Yes and like them we have the odds one-off victories too. Since that victory the Kiwis have only won once. Overall the Kangaroos record is 93-29-3 (74.4%) whilst the ABs is 103-41-7 (68.2%) so it's better than the ABs.

And whilst we're comparing our talent drain with league let us not forget about the biggest drain in AFL which no other country except Ireland with GAA has to compete with. Imagine if the AFL didn't exist. Australia by 30+ every game and I'm serious.

 

[daz]

People's expectations are too high if they are not impressed with the team's win loss record. .

Sorry, I do have to take issue with that. A win is a win, yes, and that's great. Many people would say that is all that matters.

In a RWC final, or game 3 of the Bled, when there is no tomorrow, I would also agree with that sentiment. Just get the win and raise the trophy. Happy days.

But when there are plenty of tomorrow's on the path to the final game, HOW we play from game to game is pretty important. How do I know that? Because if you look at 40% of the threads on this forum, there is repeated use of words like "Game-plan" and "strategy", often in a negative context, whether we won the game or not.

And there is not a single person here who has not vented after a Wallaby game about one thing or another, even if we won.

 

[wamberal]

But the fact is we won 4/5 on the EOYT and have lost 1 game all year. How can anybody say we are performing poorly?

I do not think it is the win/loss record that is the main problem.

There's something missing, buggered if I know what it is. We seem to lack on-field leadership, we do not seem to be evolving a coherent winning style of play.

Also we make far too many unforced errors.

 

[Bobby Sands]

When David Pocock first came to Australia, and found out about this funny game called "league" he was flummoxed and said in as many words, that Australia would make a mockery of international rugby if we all played the same code.

 

[Train Without a Station]

we do not seem to be evolving a coherent winning style of play.

I'd argue our results seem to indicate otherwise.

 

[Ash]

When David Pocock first came to Australia, and found out about this funny game called "league" he was flummoxed and said in as many words, that Australia would make a mockery of international rugby if we all played the same code.

He was also 14 when he moved to Australia.

 

[Scrubber2050]

He was also 14 when he moved to Australia.

mature young chap, wasn't he ?

 

[Wilson]

Sometimes I think it could be better for a player to join the national squad even if a player does not play. Clubs and unions are known to hastily return players which often causes injury all over again.

At least that's the impression I got from my own local team until they had a change of policy that started this season.

Generally yes, but Genia took his time coming back and has spoken about how he is right physically for the first time in something like 2 years. Aside from the physical his issues have been form, the solution to that is usually game time or a complete break from the game, training without playing rarely helps a player get his on field head space right.

 

[Bobby Sands]

He was also 14 when he moved to Australia.

It was in the school halls that he said it.

 

[Bobby Sands]

mature young chap, wasn't he ?

Incredibly.

 

[I like to watch]

i Agree. I guess the debate should be "Should McKenzie be coaching Hooper to play closer to the rucks and attack rucks more often or should he continue with his current role". IMO it should depend on the opposition and how the game is playing out.

One argument I'd like to make it, when we are getting muscled at the breakdown Hooper should be the first to acknowledge this and adjust his game accordingly. Not sure this has been the case so far.

Funnily enough,I remember Cheika was critical of him earlier,when Cheika said he was doing other peoples jobs.
Maybe if we are being out muscled at the breakdown we should be critical of those players being out muscled.
Just quietly I wouldn't take two Simmons for one fucking crazy Potgeiter.
Cheika wants players that make an impact,the Wobblies tight five as a whole,seem to be trundlers.