Well played England. They showed remarkable intensity in all areas of the game and seized their opportunities. When I woke up this morning and saw the score my guts clenched and I had to steel myself for a good hour before having the fortitude to watch the game. After watching, however, I'm not as disappointed as I expected to be.
The Wallabies will have learned a LOT from this game. Cooper and Rocky in particular will have learned a lot about game management. This was the crux for me. It seemed the Wallabies were using this game as a test run for the World Cup, hence the field position and conservative approach to penalties. However it's now obvious this strategy cancelled out the one true advantage they have over England - their wide passing game (and to a certain extent, attacking off their lineout). Not profiting from this strategy on the scoreboard, and conceding points early, they were then lured into an uncomfortable position, pushing too hard for scoring opportunities, and making high risk plays (Quade, please put away that cross field kick pass to JOC (James O'Connor)!)
In their last few games the Wallabies have started sharp against all opposition. They must capitalise on this ability to start fast (they looked the better team in the opening 10 mins again today) and put the pressure on, before attempting the field position game. The problems, apart from this, are not new. Nothing that went wrong today has not gone wrong before, and recently. The difference in previous games was that the Wallabies were able to get themselves in front early and ask questions of the opposition's defence. This either paid off immediately or put questions that paid off later.
They have learned that their wide game is more profitable against England than slippery backs against their big midfield. They have learned that it's no use having weapons in their pocket if they don't use them. They have learned that under the new rule interpretations, attack is the best form of defence. And they have learned that they must work harder to overcome their deficiencies in defence, in the scrum, in their kicking game, in their goal kicking, and in their option-taking.
If the Wallabies had a second crack next week at England, I'd back them to learn enough lessons to win. I think they are good enough. And I don't really buy into the mental advantage bit with regards to England. England were, and remain, a threat. A win would not have changed that much. The Wallabies left a lot in their pockets today. If they had used all of it and lost we should feel a lot more concerned. The Wallabies have the nucleus of a very good team. This was the case after Bloem, after Sydney, after HK, and it is still true today. If they keep their feet on the ground (and a loss certainly does that much), learn their lessons and continue improving at the rate they have been they'll be right.
As an aside, professionalism was always going to ensure skill and talent levels right around the world caught up to one another. World domination by any one team is rapidly becoming a thing of the past. Expecting the Wallabies to never lose a game is unrealistic. Most of the matches this year have been dogfights between equally talented teams and this is the way of the future. I for one am celebrating this and suggest we do not dismiss the Wallabies as a high quality team, because they lost a game to another high quality team.
I am interested in England's rush defence. What do others think of it's advantages and disadvantages. Are there other ways to counter it than the short kick or the inside ball? Is it the way forward for other teams do you think? England weren't penalised for off side much - how did they manage to avoid that?
