My Write-Up On Where Aus Went Wrong

[Jer1cho]

I think the main problem is that they don't function as a unit. The Australian team is the following:

Forwards: David Pocock

Backs: The Backs.

New Zealand, in my opinion, have some outstanding players. Individuals like McCaw, DC, Dagg and Corey Jane. The thing is though, they know that they need to play as a team in order for every facett of their game to work. The forwards know their roles, and the backs know what kind of ball they will be getting as a result. New Zealand have many holes in key positions in my honest opinion, but they make up for it by playing as a single unit better than anyone else.

The Australians, play as David Pockock, with the backline. In the Wallacheat set-up, there are too many individuals trying to play the game in their own individual way.

When South Africa lost to Australia, this was very evident. They were like rabbits in headlights. They had no idea how to all just calm down, and start getting first phase ball from set pieces. They were already picturing what Cooper would do with the ball before they even won the line-outs. Then they lose the ball, and all of a sudden look clueless. They did show lots of character by defending like they did, but the fact remains that when they are met with structured, phase play (which they were against Ireland, NZ and SA) Then they struggle. Against Ireland, they were hard done by regarding Bryce Lawless, but ultimately, were strangled. Against SA they won purely because they defended gallantly, had Pocock, and had Bryce Lawless trying to make up for his Irish mistakes by ignoring the breakdown and not having the balls to give a penalty in the danger zone. Against New Zealand, they were outplayed, plain and simple.

The only way you can truly appreciate the All Blacks playing style is to see them play live. There is so much structure, and organisation that you don't see on camera. The way they organise both their defensive, and offensive lines is incredible. No other team can match that.

Even the Springboks play with a certain structure, and stick to it, regardless of what the retards call 'boring rugby'.

The best way to look at Australia, is to say that "A team of champions does not make a champion team"

 

[ranger]

I think the main problem is that they don't function as a unit. The Australian team is the following:

Forwards: David Pocock

Backs: The Backs.

New Zealand, in my opinion, have some outstanding players. Individuals like McCaw, DC, Dagg and Corey Jane. The thing is though, they know that they need to play as a team in order for every facett of their game to work. The forwards know their roles, and the backs know what kind of ball they will be getting as a result. New Zealand have many holes in key positions in my honest opinion, but they make up for it by playing as a single unit better than anyone else.

The Australians, play as David Pockock, with the backline. In the Wallacheat set-up, there are too many individuals trying to play the game in their own individual way.

When South Africa lost to Australia, this was very evident. They were like rabbits in headlights. They had no idea how to all just calm down, and start getting first phase ball from set pieces. They were already picturing what Cooper would do with the ball before they even won the line-outs. Then they lose the ball, and all of a sudden look clueless. They did show lots of character by defending like they did, but the fact remains that when they are met with structured, phase play (which they were against Ireland, NZ and SA) Then they struggle. Against Ireland, they were hard done by regarding Bryce Lawless, but ultimately, were strangled. Against SA they won purely because they defended gallantly, had Pocock, and had Bryce Lawless trying to make up for his Irish mistakes by ignoring the breakdown and not having the balls to give a penalty in the danger zone. Against New Zealand, they were outplayed, plain and simple.

The only way you can truly appreciate the All Blacks playing style is to see them play live. There is so much structure, and organisation that you don't see on camera. The way they organise both their defensive, and offensive lines is incredible. No other team can match that.

Even the Springboks play with a certain structure, and stick to it, regardless of what the retards call 'boring rugby'.

The best way to look at Australia, is to say that "A team of champions does not make a champion team"

Care to share?

 

[Jer1cho]

Care to share?

Sure. I don't rate any New Zealand scrum-halves, and attribute their success purely to the dominant pack they play behind. In the Super 15, this is very evident in my opinion.

I don't rate Sam Whitelock at all, actually, apart from Thorn, who is probably the hardest man in world rugby, I don't rate any New Zealand locks either.

Smith, well, sure, he is decent enough, but in my opinion, is far too anonymous for a 13.

They are all decent players, and you must understand it's rather hard finding a few ****les in a team as good as NZ, but Those 3 players I just don't rate as highly as the rest of the team. Initially, all of Mils, Sivivatu, Thompson and Hore i saw as average players at best. They have all either stepped up, or have been replaced by players that are incredibly good.

Israel Dagg is the best rugby player I have seen play since Christian Cullen. Richie McCaw is the best 7 to have ever played. Dan Carter is also probably the best 10 I have seen (Although my all time best 10 is still Jonny Wilkinson in his 2002-2003 form. After that he got SHITE).

 

[lucky number 7]

Okay but then what do you reccomend they do? You can't just tell the forwards "Hey! Stop being useless!" and then expect them to suddenly be dominant. The strength of Australia is their class backline, and they need to play to that strength. Guys like Ioane, JOC, Quade, Beale and co are more then capable of sucking in defenders themselves

Like they were against an inept Irish team?

 

[dan-the-man]

Well I've read this whole thread and I think that you, dan-the-man, have a very limited and shallow tactical knowledge of the game. You can decide whether you want to take that as an insult or the truth as I see it.
The old rugby cliche is the game is won up front first. There is a reason why it is a cliche. Because its one of the fundamental truths of the sport. Choose to ignore it at your own peril.

Rugby is a dynamic game. Having an "awesome backline" can be a strength but a very vulnerable thing to rely on. Rugby is not just an offensive game! It has defence, lineouts, scrums, rucks, rolling mauls and kicking. All of these you have be good at or you will be overridden by your opponents team.

Its the ultimate team sport, with a whole bunch of players with completely different, yet interdependent roles. Players rely on the other players to do their bit, so they can do their own.

Just giving it to "Quadey" is not a tactic! Neither is just swinging to Digby.
You need a good forward pack to secure that right to swing it and have a go, otherwise you'll just be squeezed out the game whether that's at the set piece or congested defensive lines. Oz's problem is that they can't contest upfront consistently. They therefore rely on other high risk tactics like turnover ball and counter attacking.

I've haven't backed them as threat this WC for that reason. They've got too many holes in their game. Had if they had to adapt to the style you're preaching they wouldn't make it out the pool stage.

I am in no way saying that the forwards part is unimportant. I completely agree that line-outs, scrums etc are vital. What I’m saying is, on far too many occasions, Genia gets the ball from the ruck, his backs are fanned out and ready to rock & roll, and then he box-kicks or gives it to a retarded forward to run straight into the tackler.
I realise the Wallabies forwards pack are not functioning well, and go-forward ball is essential to a fluid backline. However, having a weak forward pack is not an excuse for taking the flyhalf out of the game and kicking away your possession or giving it to a forward (which is basically conceding a scrum).

So, to sum up, my point is that I realise that the Wallabies don’t get as much quality ball as one would want. However, there are still many instances of a backline being set and ready to go, and Genia simply chooses the “Springbok-esque†approach. A glaring example is how he just let the forwards do their own thing when they were on the All Black try line with a few minutes to go. This is where my problem lies.

 

[Darwin]

Sure. I don't rate any New Zealand scrum-halves, and attribute their success purely to the dominant pack they play behind. In the Super 15, this is very evident in my opinion.

I don't rate Sam Whitelock at all, actually, apart from Thorn, who is probably the hardest man in world rugby, I don't rate any New Zealand locks either.

Smith, well, sure, he is decent enough, but in my opinion, is far too anonymous for a 13.

They are all decent players, and you must understand it's rather hard finding a few ****les in a team as good as NZ, but Those 3 players I just don't rate as highly as the rest of the team. Initially, all of Mils, Sivivatu, Thompson and Hore i saw as average players at best. They have all either stepped up, or have been replaced by players that are incredibly good.

Israel Dagg is the best rugby player I have seen play since Christian Cullen. Richie McCaw is the best 7 to have ever played. Dan Carter is also probably the best 10 I have seen (Although my all time best 10 is still Jonny Wilkinson in his 2002-2003 form. After that he got SHITE).

I think that statement is the key - they are all decent players. The thing about this AB's team is that they don't actually have any glaring weaknesses - they have obvious areas of strength, but their 'weaker' areas aren't really weaknesses at all. Players such as Whitelock may not be world class (yet...), but they are certainly good international players (Whitelock is not too far off that world class bracket though). I think that is the major strength of the current AB's team. I personally don't rate that many of the AB's halfbacks that highly either, but Piri Weepu has been very impressive in recent weeks. Incidentally Conrad Smith is undoubtedly major strength for the AB's - over the last couple of years he has probably been the best centre in the world, and his combination with Nonu is invaluable for the AB's.

The main problem for Australia was not coaching, team selection, or tactics. It was simply that their team is not that good (yet). They are a very young team, and lack experience at international level. No matter who they picked, and how well they played, they would have struggled to beat the AB's at Eden Park last Sunday as the AB's are a team on top of their game, while Australia are still a team on the rise. In a couple of years time I expect things will be very different: the AB's will be rebuilding, while Australia will be on top off their game - I expect Australia may win a couple of 4 Nations trophies in the next few years.

 

[UilamOsa]

I am in no way saying that the forwards part is unimportant. I completely agree that line-outs, scrums etc are vital. What I'm saying is, on far too many occasions, Genia gets the ball from the ruck, his backs are fanned out and ready to rock & roll, and then he box-kicks or gives it to a retarded forward to run straight into the tackler.
I realise the Wallabies forwards pack are not functioning well, and go-forward ball is essential to a fluid backline. However, having a weak forward pack is not an excuse for taking the flyhalf out of the game and kicking away your possession or giving it to a forward (which is basically conceding a scrum).

So, to sum up, my point is that I realise that the Wallabies don't get as much quality ball as one would want. However, there are still many instances of a backline being set and ready to go, and Genia simply chooses the "Springbok-esque" approach. A glaring example is how he just let the forwards do their own thing when they were on the All Black try line with a few minutes to go. This is where my problem lies.

It's called inexperience. His own inexperience, those around him. For alot of those players this is their first RWC Semi Final.

Essentially you don't back Genia's decision making. Which means - you didn't deserve to win in Brisbane both the S15 final and the final Tri-Nations. As it was his decision making that won those games.

Perhaps then the most relevant question you should be asking is - WHY is he Box Kicking?

 

[InsaneAsylum]

the thing that worries me is that it's not really a box kick, but more of a box chip. he needs to pump it high in the air and ensure there are players pressuring the opposition into making mistakes.

 

[dan-the-man]

Notice how well Aus are playing? Think maybe it has anything to do with the fact that Genia's been passing to Cooper and not kicking?

 

[TRF_heineken]

Notice how well Aus are playing? Think maybe it has anything to do with the fact that Genia's been passing to Cooper and not kicking?

Nope, it's because the backs get front ball from the forwards... Genia has had a poor tournament... Full Stop! whether he kicked or passed doesn't really matter he was poor...