Wallaby Backline Highlights: Part 4 - 2002 to 2005

[Scott Allen]

Here's part 4 of the series.

http://www.greenandgoldrugby.com/history-of-the-wallaby-back-line-part-4-2002-to-2005/

Part 5 will cover 2006 to 2007 and Part 6 will bring us up to date covering 2008 to 2009.

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

A couple of points:

1, What the hell did we ever see in Dell and Rogers? Tuqiri I can totally understand, he was a devastating runner when he got going. I still can't believe that Latham battled to get a game at FB when Rogers was playing.

2, How good was Morty in his prime. I would have hated to defend against him.

 

[DPK]

A couple of points:

1, What the hell did we ever see in Dell and Rogers? Tuqiri I can totally understand, he was a devastating runner when he got going. I still can't believe that Latham battled to get a game at FB when Rogers was playing.

2, How good was Morty in his prime. I would have hated to defend against him.

You're joking! I never rated Rogers, but looking at his play in this video now I can see how good he actually was at his peak.

As for Tuqiri; he was great under the high ball, and there's at least three tries in that video that come from bombs to his wing. Why not give this a go with AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper)?

 

[Reddy!]

I thought the video shows that Rogers was friggin awesome! haha

Man, the backline was so much bigger than it is today. So damaging, I miss those years.

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

I'm not joking mate. Latham was a better player and got shafted by the selectors IMHO.

 

[barbarian]

I'm not joking mate. Latham was a better player and got shafted by the selectors IMHO.

I think 2007 Latham was better than 2003 Rogers. But 2003 Latham vs 2003 Rogers? I don't know, Latham's defence was awfully flaky.

 

[TheRiddler]

As I mentioned on the home page, check out the footage at 4:15. Good to see McCaw entering the tackle area illegally and going off his feet even in those early days. :fishing

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

Reasonable people can disagree: I think Rogers was overrated, you guys don't. It's cool.

One other thing that I think this vid demonstrates is that the 2002-2005 period was the inflection point in the way we played our backline footy. From that point onwards, we were much more crash and bash and less about angles and ball movement. We were basically reliant on Morty to get us over the gain line or the league boys at the back to work some individual magic from broken play. A bit one-dimensional if you ask me.

 

[Newb]

One other thing that I think this vid demonstrates is that the 2002-2005 period was the inflection point in the way we played our backline footy. From that point onwards, we were much more crash and bash and less about angles and ball movement. We were basically reliant on Morty to get us over the gain line or the league boys at the back to work some individual magic from broken play. A bit one-dimensional if you ask me.

right on the money with that one. bernie was still flinging it around a bit, but it was all about hitting holes at speed (and actually creating holes). but did you see the little gem at about 2:05 in? what a sweet move that was. too bad it was dropped cold.

seems to me that the current backline are still in this more "direct" mode. but failing horribly at it. the guys don't have the size, fend, or body angle in contact that morty showed all through that clip to bust through against quality opposition. even gits put a few fends on after shooting a gap in that clip. where are those days?

the fact that the current squad isn't running hardly any set moves show that they're even further removed from the era before 2002. the creativity and skill are gone but there isn't the gusto for crash and bash. which gets you a whole lot of nothing.

 

[dobduff11]

The league boys were a mixed bag, tuqiri was awesome, rogers was really good but a bit inconsistent and big dell didn't do that much.

Morty's passing technique makes me chuckle, makes you wonder how he became a pro with passing like that. But the i remembered he makes line breaks often and never misses tackles, oh and he can goal kick too.

Flately looked useful in those clips, also no giteau crabbing in 2003-2005 he just passed it when he got the ball. 06-07 seem to be where he becomes a line breaker

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

Morts was never a distributing kind of centre like a Slack, Little, O'Connor et al, much more of a block busting guy. Nevertheless he was mighty good in his day and frankly we could use some of that right now. My hope is that AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) develops in a similar.

Flats was very useful indeed and it's a shame that he got concussion too many times and quit for the sake of his health. He was the latest in the long line of play making inside centres we've produced (i.e. guys who had the hands and skill to play 10 or 12).

 

[jason]

Mortlock: what a hero. I remember getting some physio work on my achilles around 2001/2002 at the same place that Morty went to. Even to me, some random 11 year old, he was always such a nice bloke. That went a long way to making him my favourite Wallaby, well, that and the kind of runs he made in the video.

What a legend, I really hope he makes a full recovery and leaves the Wallabies on a high note next year.

 

[dobduff11]

morty was a great player but i honestly dont think he will make the wallabies next year, this year he looked really slow and laboured due to age and injury

Was really impressed with flately in the final 03 he really showed some nerve with his kicks, he also showed some gas sprinting away from jason robinson in the 2002 autumn internationals

 

[Scotty]

I think 2007 Latham was better than 2003 Rogers. But 2003 Latham vs 2003 Rogers? I don't know, Latham's defence was awfully flaky.

Latham's defense was much improved by 2003 to be easily the equal of Rogers. He improved considerably after 2001.

The supposed reason that he didn't get picked in the main RWC 03 games was due to fitness issues as he had a virus leading up to the start of the RWC where he wasn't able to train. However his fitness wasn't really tested after about 3 weeks prior to the RWC commencement, at which time he struggled a little in a beep test. He rated himself at that time able to go 60 in a top flight game. Strange he wasn't given a further chance to prove his fitness, but Eddie seems to have decided on his team early and didn't have the flexibility to change it, despite Latham proving fitness during the campaign and having better form than Rogers. Ultimately it was Rogers poor kicking that helped England get into position for the final drop goal, not that Australia deserved to win the game anyway.

 

[Reddy!]

In Gregan's bio there is a part where he explains how he approached Jones to start Roff at fullback for the final (or maybe it was the semi) because he was a big game player, with a proven record - but as history shows this advice was ignored and Jones selected Rogers.