• Welcome to the forums of Green & Gold Rugby.
    We have recently made some changes to the amount of discussions boards on the forum.
    Over the coming months we will continue to make more changes to make the forum more user friendly for all to use.
    Thanks, Admin.

Tri-Nations wrap up

Status
Not open for further replies.

Gagger

Nick Farr-Jones (63)
Staff member
Something to wang on about until squad announced......

Today we'll be finding out who makes the Wallabies European tour squad. But before we start talking about what's to come, let's put a wrap where the Wallabies under Aussie Robbie have got to at the end of the Tri-Nations.

Ultimately Australia didn't take the Cup and so it was a failure. Beneath that though it's been hard to judge this campaign. One week they belt the Blacks in Sydney, the next week the ABs destroy them in Auckland. Another week they break an 8 year drought in Durban, the next they get a record breaking hiding from the Boks.

So what do you say? "Good teams are consistent and never get thrashed", or "we got ourselves to where we needed to be and only lost it by a try"? I believe both are true.

The thrashings and see-sawing in performance came from 3 faults:

1. Lack of fitness - 20 minutes into the the final game and the Wallabies were heaving, the ABs just getting a sweat up. You can't defend rucks with no bodies there.
2. Weakening defence - You're making it very hard on yourself when you give away 4 tries a match. This has been a very worrying development
3. Poor depth - One injury and you've got a backline full of outside centres

On the other hand, at times this young side under a new coach played some irresistible rugby against the top two sides in the world. Despite the make-do backline I'd argue they played by far the better attacking rugby in Brisbane and showed flashes of genius throughout the tournament.

Perhaps more satisfying though was the some of the work done at the foundations. When not experimenting, the line-out, scrum and restarts had parity and gave a base that we haven't seen for five years or more. The big test on this will be in Europe.

Player wise, just as on the markets last week, some stocks have soared while others plummeted. Some deservedly, others not.
On the up: Horwill, Cross, Hynes, Baxter, Moore, Smith, Brown, Barnes, Burgess
In a slump: Cordingly, Waugh, Polota-Nau, Dunning, Sharpe, Tahu

The Euro tour will give another chance to some of these guys, and for the sake of squad depth they'll need to take it.
 
F

formeropenside

Guest
Gagger -

1. Agreed that fitness was an issue: in the game that could be won or lost in the last 20 we showed we did not have it. But our work at the rucks was always (with rare isolated exceptions) not what it should be: we were simply too static on attack or defence. How often did we counter ruck and how often did we let the ball get tied up in the ruck causing slow ball?

We need to counter ruck better - aggressive defence to cause the opposition to play with poor ball rather than concentrate on setting a static defence with minimal commitment to ruck and maul. Which leads nicely into 2:

2. Defence: was it the ELV's, or the departure of Muggleton, or both, or something else? Too often we were split simply through the middle of the lineout: was there cleaning out going or bad play? In either case, how to fix it?

3. To some extent the lack of depth is due to the long reign of Gregan and Larkham at the Brumbies (causing Gits to play 12 and then move), the Tahs unwillingness to treat anyone save Mark Ella as a satisfactory 10, and Flatley's head knock a few years ago making Barnes step up in an inexperienced backline rather than with an old head beside him. I'm a bit sceptical about the praise for Deans new strategies etc with the Wallabies: even assuming Connolly had stayed on as coach after winning RWC 07, he would have faced a future with no Gregan or Larkham. A new 9 and 10 combo is the axis around which play revolves, and that was always going to change.

But yes, all season I was worried by the tactic of using Barnes as cover for Gits and vice versa at 10 and 12: it may have made the difference in Brisbane had Barnes been fit.

Lastly - Sharpe's stocks may be in a slump, and rightly so, but this season is the best I have seen him play in a long time. I'd still have Horwill over him though.
 

Gagger

Nick Farr-Jones (63)
Staff member
formeropenside said:
2. Defence: was it the ELV's, or the departure of Muggleton, or both, or something else? Too often we were split simply through the middle of the lineout: was there cleaning out going or bad play? In either case, how to fix it?

A question I've been asking myself. I struggle though with how, with all these players that we know can defend heroicly, it slowly goes to shit over a season.

My first reaction was that we needed an SOS to Muggo or Les Kiss. What confounds you though is that the Saders had the stingiest defence in the S14.

So where I've got to is that there is only so much that you can punch into an international rugby team over a few weeks, and at the same time take care of the games at hand.

What I'm guessing has happened is that Aussie Robbie has started with his job 1: crusaderfy the attacking skills and instincts languishing within the Wallabies; get some offload/support play going and learn how to kick. If you're focussing on this, trying to re-programme, then you're not focussing as much on defence and if you don't practice a skill........well, look at Muliaina's try in Brisbane.

Overall, if he didn't take the Tri-Nations and we played boring defensive rugby: bad press (see Connolly). If we lose but play some exciting stuff: see current reaction. Also, he probably took a punt that they'd remember how to defend just enough to see it through - almost worked.
 

PaarlBok

Rod McCall (65)
From the other side myself think you lot missed out on the passion and urgent stake between the two weeks. Also think you were pretty lucky to get the Boks after 2 crunch tests we had against the All Blacks in NZ and also a down the dumps one after we lost on Newlands. You had the best fixture list of the three teams plus you had the ELV rulings favouring your lot.
 

naza

Alan Cameron (40)
Gagger said:
Ultimately Australia didn't take the Cup and so it was a failure.

I take issue with your assessment. We don't have the cattle. We did Ok for the cattle we have save for a pretty poor effort in SA. The Kiwis lost a bunch of guys overseas and still had superior talent.

Get used to it.
 

Gagger

Nick Farr-Jones (63)
Staff member
naza said:
Gagger said:
Ultimately Australia didn't take the Cup and so it was a failure.

I take issue with your assessment. We don't have the cattle. We did Ok for the cattle we have save for a pretty poor effort in SA. The Kiwis lost a bunch of guys overseas and still had superior talent.

Get used to it.

The Tri-Nations is a competition with one prize. If you don't win it you've failed in the competition by definition.

The rest of my post talks about the ups and downs beneath that.

We probably will never have the depth of cattle, but it hasn't stopped us winning 2 RWCs and won't stop me being pissed off when we lose.

You can get used to being a loser if you want.
 

Virgil

Larry Dwyer (12)
Nice summation.
I think it will take time for Deans to completely take over the reins of the Wallabies. He is only still getting to know the players personally, building up trust etc.
Im sure by next year things are bound to step up a couple of notches.

3. Poor depth - One injury and you've got a backline full of outside centres
Did you see how many centers we have in our team?
Kahui on the wing, Nonu at 12, Toeava on the bench. Mils at 15 ( ok thats where he belongs) Tuitavake, Plus Smith who was the best of the bunch.
 
S

Spook

Guest
PaarlBok said:
You had the best fixture list of the three teams .

Mate, you are begrudging as usual. ::) How how did the Aussie have the easiest draw? :nta: We played 3 games in a row at one stage unlike the Kiwis who also only had to play one game away from Australasia. The second game for the Boks at home was also a crunch game which you lost.

I don't think the draw made much difference this year in any event (the best side won, the side the played the second best rugby came second and so on)and I fail to see how Australia was luckier than any of the other sides. ::)
 

Virgil

Larry Dwyer (12)
Think this years draw was poor for all the teams. Was too long and drawn out.
If we hadnt played Samoa we would have faced a 4 week break.

Needs to go back to the old format, which of course it wont
 

Aussie D

Desmond Connor (43)
Virgil said:
Think this years draw was poor for all the teams. Was too long and drawn out.
If we hadnt played Samoa we would have faced a 4 week break.

Needs to go back to the old format, which of course it wont

I'll climb back up on my high horse and sing the old tune that rather than Oz playing NZ twice over there and once here next year, make it 3 games over there, SA can play 3 games here and NZ can play 3 in SA. Play each of these games over a four week perios with a few "mid-week" games thrown in and hey presto you have a tour! Think it would be a ratings winner and is what the fans want. For the 3N table carry the "away" game results (i.e. those that are playing at home this time, the points from the last 3 games away against same opposition carry) over and award the trophy on 2 years worth of results, that way all games will have double value.
 

disco

Chilla Wilson (44)
The 3 game format doesn't work go back to a two game format with one extra played between Oz & Nz at the end of the Tri-nations which is purely a Bledisloe decider if it hasn't already been wrapped up in the 1st two games.

Or even better let Argentina into Sanzar & call it Sanzaar have a super 16 or 17 with two or three Argie teams & then make it a Four nations.

All the best Argie players will come home from Europe to be involved & it's win win for the IRB.
 

Cutter

Nicholas Shehadie (39)
disco said:
The 3 game format doesn't work go back to a two game format with one extra played between Oz & Nz at the end of the Tri-nations which is purely a Bledisloe decider if it hasn't already been wrapped up in the 1st two games.

Or even better let Argentina into Sanzar & call it Sanzaar have a super 16 or 17 with two or three Argie teams & then make it a Four nations.

All the best Argie players will come home from Europe to be involved & it's win win for the IRB.

There arent 2 or 3 Argie teams ready to step into Super rugby. Club rugby in Arg is amateur and, as I recall, there was only one Arg based player in their world cup squad.

The Arg players wont come home from Europe because Sanzar cant even keep the likes of Dan Carter, Victor Matfield and Chris Latham in Super Rugby let alone a bunch of Argentinians which the television audience will be, largely, ignorant of.
 

disco

Chilla Wilson (44)
There arent 2 or 3 Argie teams ready to step into Super rugby. Club rugby in Arg is amateur and, as I recall, there was only one Arg based player in their world cup squad.

That's another reason to let super 14 teams go private might even be a better Idea to place 25 players out of a 30 man squad under a salary cap & then have 5 players per squad able to earn whatever they'll pay them to stay.
 

Cutter

Nicholas Shehadie (39)
disco said:
There arent 2 or 3 Argie teams ready to step into Super rugby. Club rugby in Arg is amateur and, as I recall, there was only one Arg based player in their world cup squad.

That's another reason to let super 14 teams go private might even be a better Idea to place 25 players out of a 30 man squad under a salary cap & then have 5 players per squad able to earn whatever they'll pay them to stay.

Not sure this works for squad management/balance purposes. If there was a very rich Argentinian bloke who wanted to start an Argie Super Rugby team that would be ideal I reckon. So the Buenos Aries Gauchos are conceived. Next stop, a super rich Chinaman to base a team in Honk Kong - The Hong Kong King Kongs - a team of PI stars who get homesick in Europe. Bam, Super 16.

Now, does anyone know these two super rich guys who want to start rugby teams with naff names?
 

cyclopath

George Smith (75)
Staff member
Cutter said:
disco said:
There arent 2 or 3 Argie teams ready to step into Super rugby. Club rugby in Arg is amateur and, as I recall, there was only one Arg based player in their world cup squad.

That's another reason to let super 14 teams go private might even be a better Idea to place 25 players out of a 30 man squad under a salary cap & then have 5 players per squad able to earn whatever they'll pay them to stay.

Not sure this works for squad management/balance purposes. If there was a very rich Argentinian bloke who wanted to start an Argie Super Rugby team that would be ideal I reckon. So the Buenos Aries Gauchos are conceived. Next stop, a super rich Chinaman to base a team in Honk Kong - The Hong Kong King Kongs - a team of PI stars who get homesick in Europe. Bam, Super 16.

Now, does anyone know these two super rich guys who want to start rugby teams with naff names?
So we have the BAGs and the HKKKs? Hmmm, may need an acronym committee to sort those ones out. I for one want to see the Shanghai Surprise franchise! ;D Argie-Bargies?
 

disco

Chilla Wilson (44)
Well SH rugby needs to do something as we are slowly starting to lose young stars to the NH just like the NRL has.

Sanzar needs to get the Argies on board & don't worry there are plenty of billionaires world wide that are keen to but sporting teams just look at the soccer & NH rugby.

Sport is big business these days.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top