By David Beniuk
August 29th 2010 @ 2:48am (3 days ago)

View The Roar's top rugby union writers.
Get Australia's best Rugby opinion emailed daily.
Get the Roar iPhone application now.

Wallabies implode again at altitude

The Wallabies have failed again at altitude in South Africa, throwing away a blistering start to the Tri-Nations Test in Pretoria to go down to the Springboks 44-31.

Australia had scored three tries within the opening 10 minutes to lead 21-7 and led 28-24 at the break after seven five-pointers were scored in a madcap opening 40 minutes few had expected.

But the Wallabies continually cruelled their second half opportunities with poor handling and lineout work, allowing the desperate Springboks to notch their first win of the series in Victor Matfield’s 100th Test in front of 43,152 at his home ground of Loftus Versfeld.

The result means Australia are yet to win in Pretoria after five Tests and they haven’t won on the South African highveld since 1963.

The Nelson Mandela Challenge Plate and second place behind New Zealand in the Tri-Nations will now depend on the result of next weekend’s Test in Bloemfontein.

“We didn’t hold onto the ball so we didn’t spend long enough in possession, we turned over more ball than South Africa did, that was a big part of it,” Wallabies coach Robbie Deans said.

“And obviously critically at the end, when we had built some pressure and had opportunities, our set piece came up short, and our finishing wasn’t as effective.”

South Africa scored five tries to four, with Australia’s all coming in the first half.

The Loftus crowd were silenced when Will Genia dummied and scored in just the third minute and James O’Connor bagged the first of a double after after a scintillating 60m run by Kurtley Beale in the fifth.

Springboks flanker Juan Smith powered through some threadbare defence in the ninth minute but O’Connor was there to pounce when Bryan Habana dropped the kick-off and Australia led 21-7.

The Boks narrowed the lead to seven when prop Gurthro Steenkamp burrowed over in the 14th minute and an altitude-powered 59m penalty goal from Morne Steyn made it 21-17 after 20 minutes.

The Wallabies’ determination to spread the ball paid off again, though, six minutes later with a Dean Mumm five-pointer and it was 28-17 before Springboks No.8 Pierre Spies completed the first half madness with a 32nd minute try.

But the Wallabies began imploding after the break with a succession of errors.

Steyn and Matt Giteau exchanged penalty goals in the 47th and 49th minutes before the Springboks took the lead – 34-31- for the first time in the match through a Francois Steyn try a minute after Mumm had spilled a kick-off.

Boks fullback Francois Steyn increased the lead to 37-31 with a 68th minute penalty goal and a JP Pietersen try a minute from time rubbed salt into Australia’s wounds.

The Roar 2010 Book is a piece of Aussie sports history featuring the best expert columns and roar of the crowd articles, and a short exclusive essay reflecting on the year in Aussie sport. Pre-order now.

Free Email updates:

Our daily emails are only sent if there is content for the sport or that author. You can subscribe to multiple daily emails; or get the daily Roar email with all our content in it. We value privacy. More...

© 2010 AAP


Crowd Says (201)

  • JonnyP said  | August 29th 2010 @ 3:10am (3 days ago) | Report comment

    I’ll admit I haven’t seen the game yet but going by your general description “implode” seems a bit harsh.

    • Peter said  | August 29th 2010 @ 10:13am (3 days ago) | Report comment

      The Wallabies immediate future looks like this:

      Australia to get killed off in the next game.

      Beale and Cooper to go to rugby league.

      Deans sacked.

      Rugby’s brand further diminished!!!!!

    • andrew said  | August 29th 2010 @ 12:13pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

      Implode is a bit generous. They completely, totally and inexcusably fell to pieces. The second half was as bad as I can ever remember the Wallabies playing.

    • Mark M said  | August 30th 2010 @ 11:36am (2 days ago) | Report comment

      From the 12th minute onwards the Sprinboks scored 37-10. I think implode is the appropriate word in a sporting sense.

  • View pothale's Roar profile

    pothale said  | August 29th 2010 @ 3:18am (3 days ago) | Report comment

    Well at 15 minutes, Australia were leading 21-7
    At 26 minutes, Australia were leading 28-17.
    They then conceded 27-3 for the remainder of the match.

    If implode is a bit harsh – what word would you prefer?

    • JonnyP said  | August 29th 2010 @ 5:07am (3 days ago) | Report comment

      I’d prefer either messed it up, buggered it up or stuffed it up.

      • M.O.C. said  | August 29th 2010 @ 6:42am (3 days ago) | Report comment

        how about choked – or do you only get that label if you wear black

      • View pothale's Roar profile

        pothale said  | August 29th 2010 @ 8:01am (3 days ago) | Report comment

        In denial – might be even better.

        • Moaman said  | August 29th 2010 @ 8:16am (3 days ago) | Report comment

          Up die Nile wizzout a paddle? ;-)

    • johno said  | August 29th 2010 @ 6:31am (3 days ago) | Report comment

      The highveld got hold of them.

      You can’t play that tempo for 60 minutes, nevermind 80, not up here at least.

  • Seiran said  | August 29th 2010 @ 3:19am (3 days ago) | Report comment

    Another Wallaby test lost and another win thrown away. Absolutely shocking ball handling and lineout skills on display in the second half.

    The Wallabies had this game in the bag, but they just kept on letting the Boks back into the game.

    Why didn’t Deans use Burgess and Barnes? Surely their attacking skills were sorely missed in the second half? Genia wasn’t making an impact in the final 30 minutes and Burgess should have been given a go.

    • David said  | August 29th 2010 @ 5:19pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

      Barnes…attacking skills??? You got to be kidding right :) All he does is kick the ball away and in the new game, I cannot think of anything more disastrous.

  • Hayden said  | August 29th 2010 @ 3:22am (3 days ago) | Report comment

    A great game, hats off to both teams. Exciting end to end stuff, but you have to agree that the Wallabies failed to hold on and ran out of gas at the end. As mentioned on another thread, what the hell was Deans thinking regarding use of the bench? Tired players made mistakes and took poor options, while the bench warmers sat on their hands looking on.

  • Suzy Poison said  | August 29th 2010 @ 4:09am (3 days ago) | Report comment

    Game could have gone either way. There is minimal difference between all three teams. The kiwis won on the bell last weekend thanks to ref not picking up a dodgy forward pass. It could have just as easily been the same again. Funny this was the same ref that P Divvy complained about in NZ, but he also reffed the 2007 World Cup final and no Saffas complained then? I thought the Wallas were right in it until the death. Hougaard is a find. Looked far more dangerous than Genia with the ball. Cooper not that great this test, perhaps thinking of Parramatta? Having Steyn there to kick 60metres penalties helps. It’s a 50/50 game next weekend. Matfield does nothing all day, but you got to have him in team, just for that Walla penalty steal in the dying stages when the pressure is on. He earned his 100th cap right there. legend. Wallas can win next weekend. It’s going to be a another nail-biter. Walla fans don’t be harsh on Deans, it’s a tough place to win on the highveld. Even the Kiwis struggle here. As a Saffa fan, I would far rather have Deans as our coach, than P Divvy?

    • MOTHER TERESA said  | August 29th 2010 @ 4:15am (3 days ago) | Report comment

      SUZY,no cos one is certified and deans is in denial and harder to eliminate

      • sheek said  | August 29th 2010 @ 8:48am (3 days ago) | Report comment


        So who is the new ‘messiah’ waiting in the ante-room?

        Let’s get him into the head Wallaby coaching gig immediately.

        And then the “wonderful” Wallabies & “wonderful” domestic national structures we have can stuff up his coaching credentials as well.

        Bring forward the poison chalice…..

        • MOTHER TERESA said  | August 29th 2010 @ 9:11am (3 days ago) | Report comment

          sheek,your man deans has let you down.i tell you what mate ill select to fit a flexible strategy keep the same players to foster the culture and allow you to do the hands on coaching as long as you understand one basic tenet,judicious use of bench.

          sack the village idiot and take over sheek at least you can string a fluent set of words together.

          • sheek said  | August 29th 2010 @ 2:39pm (3 days ago) | Report comment


            And did you read the wisdom of John Connolly in the Sun-Herald?

            Added absolutely nothing new of any substance to the debate & even chose almost exactly the same starting XV.

            So does that mean we don’t have any other players to choose from apart from the current lot???

            Besides, I’m unavailable to coach the Wallabies – I’m not yet ready to die by ‘poisoned chalice’…..!

            • Red Rooster said  | August 29th 2010 @ 2:44pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

              Sheek – note Connelly choose a different bench that had experience and maturity, one that might have been able to close out a game – Small difference can have big impacts – all goes to selection, then again if you don’t use your bench then it does not matter who is sitting on it does it?

            • sheek said  | August 29th 2010 @ 2:57pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

              Red Rooster,

              Understand your logic. Yes, Deans doesn’t appear to be using his bench to maximum effect. I would like to know why, like everyone else. And yes, sometimes it’s the small things that can make a difference.

              However, with so many things about/in Australian rugby being responsible for our ongoing demise, it’s hardly about one or two little things.

            • Ben S said  | August 30th 2010 @ 8:13am (2 days ago) | Report comment

              ‘However, with so many things about/in Australian rugby being responsible for our ongoing demise, it’s hardly about one or two little things.’

              But it is though, sheek. Australia did not lose that Test because the country has no strong domestic competition.

    • Hayden said  | August 29th 2010 @ 4:37am (3 days ago) | Report comment

      Agreed that there is not much between the teams. That’s what makes knock out comps so interesting and unpredictable. With the 3N, and to a lesser degree the 6N, the cream usually rises to the top. ( I say lesser in the 6N because there is no home and away component.) Everyone is raving about the ABs, but id=f you look at the games they have played against 15 men, the results have been close.

      Hougaard is a find – saved the game with his tackle on Two-Dads. I’ll wait until teams are selected before calling next weekend’s game.

      • cinematic said  | August 29th 2010 @ 7:44am (3 days ago) | Report comment

        Suggest you refer to the competition points standing before suggesting the teams are close. There is daylight between the AB’s and the other two.

        • Hayden said  | August 29th 2010 @ 8:51am (3 days ago) | Report comment

          There is. My point was that two of the games have actually been pretty close, with the ABs only winning last week thanks to a forward pass that wasn’t called.

          • bayboy said  | August 29th 2010 @ 8:57am (3 days ago) | Report comment

            So would it be fair to say they only lost the WC semi final due to a forward pass using your logic?

            • Magic Rat said  | August 29th 2010 @ 9:30am (3 days ago) | Report comment

              Maybe if they got to the final and were put out by a forward pass but as it was the quarter then no.

            • Hayden said  | August 29th 2010 @ 9:32am (3 days ago) | Report comment

              Not at all. The best example of how a points table doesn’t alway tell the full story is a hockey playoff series I watched a few years back. Colorado were playing Vancouver, and won the best of seven series 4 – 0. On the surface, a thrashing, but each game went into overtime, and obviously could have gone either way. That’s all I’m trying to say.

  • Wayne said  | August 29th 2010 @ 4:36am (3 days ago) | Report comment

    I have decided that I love rugby too much to like it. I was watching the game from my home in Stellenbosch and after 10 minutes I was thinking of the cheapest, easiest way to kill myself. My daughter sat next to me while I was watching and she asked what was wrong with my muscles. I am continually moving my legs either left or right depending on what is going on in the game. The second half saw me standing the whole way through in an attempt to ease the tension. After all is said and done, there cannot be a rugby tournament anywhere in the world that comes close to the Trinations.

  • CizzyRascal said  | August 29th 2010 @ 4:47am (3 days ago) | Report comment

    Brilliant game to watch as a neutral. First half was a freak, but the second half was just as good a watch. The period where the Wallabies defended stoutly on their own line phase after phase, then turned over, ran from behind their own line, and then South Africa brought out a big defensive play. That was the best part of the game in my opinion.

    The way Australia played, they needed to go into the last 20 minutes with a decent lead to have a chance of winning.

  • darwin stubby said  | August 29th 2010 @ 7:16am (3 days ago) | Report comment

    Didn’t bother watching – but certainly not surprised by the result … the scoreline however is a surprise and is a pointer to how poor these 2 teams actually are .. how often do bok teams concede 30+ points at altitude ..

    Do have a question though for those that got up – how did that lopsided bench work for Robbie ? … did he use them all or was it case of yet again leaving guys on their to cool their heels … sooner rather than later someone needs to put both Deans and Wallabies out of their collective misery and send the bloke back to Canterbury as 1/5 record for the 2nd year in a row is looking a distinct prospect

    • Moaman said  | August 29th 2010 @ 8:27am (3 days ago) | Report comment

      DS;questions WILL be raised about Dean’s( lack of) use of the bench;I strongly urge you to catch a replay-an incredible number of soft tries scored in the first half by both sides.The Boks were again caught with their pants down whenever a quick restart was instigated.The Wallabies then guilty of lack of focus when the Boks came back at them.Australia seemed bereft of ideas in the last 20-reminiscent of CHCH and eventually ran out of puff.Did any saffa note the infringement at the ruck that led directly to JPP’s match-sealing try? ps.To the Author;Mitchell’s disallowed try early on(which was good IMHO-resulted in a scrum that led to Genia’s try-so how did Aus miss out?

  • Sandgroper said  | August 29th 2010 @ 7:24am (3 days ago) | Report comment

    I couldn’t watch the game because of work commitments. It sounds to me like the Wallabies lost direction. Was there any evidence of leadership/captincy from any Wallaby or were we celebrating victory before we achived it again?

    • View Howi's Roar profile

      Howi said  | August 29th 2010 @ 12:23pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

      I think it’s difficult to assess captaincy unless you’re very close to the game, if not on the field itself. But it always seems that Smit has a tremendously positive influence on his team, even when he’s not playing especially well himself. Elsom seems to be visibly the leader he is supposed to be only when trying to pull up the ref.

      In terms of leadership-by-example I thought two players in particular stood very tall. From the Wallabies Kurtley Beale took the reins on a few occasions, and as stated above, that run that lead to O’Connor’s try was scintillating. From the Boks, their halfback, Hougaard, was a revelation. His tackle on Ashley-Cooper was possibly a match winner as much as any other play I thought.

  • Kumul said  | August 29th 2010 @ 7:38am (3 days ago) | Report comment

    i dont really follow rugby union but…yeah i thought the South Africans had an extra player in the field…The REF!!. Most of the sprinkboks early points came from wrongfully awarded penalties, and critical times when australia had the momentum.

    • Ivan Nel said  | August 29th 2010 @ 5:15pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

      Kumul, The fact that you dont follow union, is displayed here by your apparent lack of knowledge. Boks were better than he wallas and it showed in the end. All 3 teams are still close in my opinion. Had P.Div selected the right team in NZ, it may have been another story. Had SA not lost out in the final minutes against NZ @ home, the points would have ben far closer than they seem. NZ played many a game against 14, and were lucky no to receive yellow themslves at various times in each game they played. These factors taken into account, NZ were th best… but it was marginal.

  • Short-Blind. said  | August 29th 2010 @ 7:39am (3 days ago) | Report comment

    Another anit-Deans anti everything AB rant posted without even watching the game. DS most of the above posters including Saffers say there is a ‘struck match’ between the 3 sides but in your opinion both of them are extremely ‘poor’. Teams put on 30 against the Boks because their attack ‘clicked’. Yes it sounds like the Wallys fell in a hole and made crucial errors at crucial times but that is what a young developing team does. Yes it sounds like Deans again under used his bench and if so the hard questions needs to be asked. However I will hold my powder dry and i’ve watched the reply this arvo. I suggest you do the same.

    • darwin stubby said  | August 29th 2010 @ 8:34am (3 days ago) | Report comment

      Er I think that those supporters suggesting the closeness of the TN teams are wallaby and boks fans trying to hold onto an alternative realty – as cinematic says above “suggest you refer to the competition points standing before suggesting the teams are close”

      • kingplaymaker said  | August 29th 2010 @ 8:46am (3 days ago) | Report comment

        darwin give Deans the South African team and De Villiers the Wallabies and you can imagine what the result would be.

  • Face the Facts said  | August 29th 2010 @ 8:01am (3 days ago) | Report comment

    How does a NZ supporter get to call himself Darwin Stubby??

    • CraigB said  | August 29th 2010 @ 11:29am (3 days ago) | Report comment

      maybe he’s big and full of s**t

      • Spencer said  | August 29th 2010 @ 11:50pm (3 days ago) | Report comment


  • allblackfan said  | August 29th 2010 @ 8:24am (3 days ago) | Report comment

    Ref was lenient on both sides at the breakdown and with the high tackles.
    Maafu is a serial flopper. He makes no effort to stay on his feet and help Pocock who was contained pretty handily by the Boks.

  • mampara said  | August 29th 2010 @ 8:32am (3 days ago) | Report comment

    Hope you are having a good morning Spiro, you baboon.
    Fact of the matter is Matfield had your lineout at 6s and 7s in the 2nd half, Hougaard outplayed Genia and everytime pocock went into a ruck Juan Smith blew him away.
    Oz didn’t implode they were beaten.
    Kumul…blaming the ref…loving it.
    Welcome back Juan Smith, best bok on the field last 2 tests (with hougaard a close 2nd), hopefully Bismark will be back next week then barney can hopefully get taken off at 20 mins, at least he was gone at 60 so he wasn’t there to miss another tackle at the back end of the game.

    • Rockin Rod said  | August 29th 2010 @ 12:20pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

      Our lineout is rubbish, why on earth is Van Humphries not in the side. He would start all day in a reds first xv over simmons. We lost the game when Sharpe went off as we had no one that could run the lineout, disgrace.

      • taylorbridge said  | August 30th 2010 @ 8:48am (2 days ago) | Report comment

        Van Humphries would have done better than Dean Mumm re lineouts. is it not better to have a player like VH who can win the lineouts but maybe( ??) not not a s quick around the field but is 100% effective at the task he is selected for? When the lineouts went awry why wasnt Steve Moore put on. Fainga was falling away in the 2 nd half.

    • Seiran said  | August 29th 2010 @ 6:38pm (3 days ago) | Report comment


  • jeremy said  | August 29th 2010 @ 8:35am (3 days ago) | Report comment

    I have no emotional investment in either side so thought it was a cracker of a game!

    Positives in there for the Wallabies esp in backing themselves to chance . But hats off truly to the Springboks who clawed their way back into the match and built the intensity up to ultimately get there in the last 20 of the game. The Wallabies didn’t lose it, the Springboks won it.

    • kingplaymaker said  | August 29th 2010 @ 8:45am (3 days ago) | Report comment

      jeremy I disagree: some of the Wallabies mistakes in the second half were ridiculous: Mumm’s dropped ball from a retart with no pressure, Ashley-Cooper’s dropped ball with the line at his mercy, and endless, crazy knock-ons! How many were there? If only a couple of these basic mistakes hadn’t occurred, I can’t imagine the Wallabies would have lost. What’s worse, these mistakes hardly came from South African pressure (as is often the case), but who knows where they came from! A very odd psychological collapse indeed.

      • Hayden said  | August 29th 2010 @ 8:48am (3 days ago) | Report comment

        I thought Two Dads dropped the ball as a result of a crunching tackle by Hougaard.

        • kingplaymaker said  | August 29th 2010 @ 8:53am (3 days ago) | Report comment

          Should have protected it as every other player would normally and he himself would normally.

        • Moaman said  | August 29th 2010 @ 11:06am (3 days ago) | Report comment

          had the ball in the wrong hand

      • mampara said  | August 29th 2010 @ 8:57am (3 days ago) | Report comment

        mmmKingplaymaker….nonsense there…what about Habana’s shocking drop, gifting O.connors try, which was 7 points, and yes AAC got hit in a good tackle…your lot got beaten, take it on the chin.

        • kingplaymaker said  | August 29th 2010 @ 9:03am (3 days ago) | Report comment

          mampara I didn’t get beaten by the way. South Africa also made a basic mistake there of course, but that Ashley-Cooper’s error was only one of a list of many in the second half, basic mistakes under no pressure, which gifted the match to the Springboks who really had it presented to them on a silver platter by the nervous, bumbling Wallabies.

          • mampara said  | August 29th 2010 @ 9:08am (3 days ago) | Report comment

            Have you ever laced up a pair of rugby boots?

        • View Mick Gold Coast QLD's Roar profile

          Mick Gold Coast QLD said  | August 29th 2010 @ 12:47pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

          “what about Habana’s shocking drop”

          I said to the missus at the time “Hopeless that Habana, I’ve seen him do that before about 5 years back. That’s twice now he’s made a blue, in his ineffective career – oughta be dropped!”.

          Didn’t his old home crowd give Brian Habana some stick from there on!

      • Rockin Rod said  | August 29th 2010 @ 12:41pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

        I agree kingplaymaker, the wallabies lost that test, it was their to be one and they choked, totally lost their composure. They started to kick away possesion and defend their lead, you just cant do that. Simple mistakes like losing lineout throws and knock ons, bread and butter stuff

  • kingplaymaker said  | August 29th 2010 @ 8:36am (3 days ago) | Report comment

    The negative side for the Wallabies and why they will continue losing:

    NO STRIKE RUNNERS. FOUR playmakers fielded (Cooper, Giteau, Beale, O’Connor), continually making plays for each other, with no real runners to work up those plays and tear the opposition line in shreds. When will you learn?

    The positive side for the Wallabies:

    With the return of Palu, Polota-Nau and eventually Vickerman their pack will be a match for both South Africa and New Zealand. This was, remember, a severely depleted pack.

    • Hayden said  | August 29th 2010 @ 8:46am (3 days ago) | Report comment

      Jeez king, I was waiting for this old chestnut to come out, and it took 23 comments. Palu is almost as big a cream puff as Spies, and if you are pinning your hopes on a geriatric like Vickerman, who hasn’t played serious rugby in two years, then things are looking grim indeed. Polota-Nau? What’s he done, apart from getting injured, and being a part of this team’s abysmal record?

      • kingplaymaker said  | August 29th 2010 @ 8:50am (3 days ago) | Report comment

        Hayden didn’t you see the last spring tour? Palu WAS a cream puff but had CHANGED and become the OUTSTANDING player on that tour. He and Polota-Nau are two fiercely effective players in the loose and add massive physicality and go-forward to the Wallabies pack. I said ‘eventually’ Vickerman if you look carefully.

        But like most Wallabies fans you are predictably missing the main point. The OUTSIDE BACKS are the problems and the reason the Wallabies lose, not the forwards or the inside backs!

        • Hayden said  | August 29th 2010 @ 8:53am (3 days ago) | Report comment

          Which spring tour? The GS attempt? I admit I don’t recall details of specific player’s performances, but the team didn’t cover itself in glory on that tour. And Vickerman is so old, he can’t afford eventually.

          • kingplaymaker said  | August 29th 2010 @ 8:55am (3 days ago) | Report comment

            Hayden he was dominant and ferocious, and in fact got the players’ own award for best player. In fact often he was superior to the rest of the Wallabies pack combined. That’s why everyone talks of missing him now, when they didn’t once upon a time.

            • Jerry said  | August 29th 2010 @ 3:00pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

              Rubbish, everyone talks about him being unavailable cause you Wallaby supporters love to use all those missing players as a reason why you’re losing. They also use the likes of Vickerman who’s not played in years and TPN who’s been a bench player for about 85% of the tests he’s played in.

        • mampara said  | August 29th 2010 @ 9:05am (3 days ago) | Report comment

          Most laughable comment I have ever read involving the Wallabies….Kingplaymaker……..when you lot loose IT IS ALWAYS THE FORWARDS…that Oz backline has got so many points in it its not funny, if YOUR FORWARDS were the real deal you would be the best team in the world. The fact that you are the number 3 team in the world is because of your backline, certainly not your forwards. If it was up to them you would be well behind England and France.

          • kingplaymaker said  | August 29th 2010 @ 9:15am (3 days ago) | Report comment

            I never said it was because of the forwards, I said that with the return of certain key players the forwards would a force.

            I also said that the problem was not the inside backs, but the outside backs, a distinction you seem unable to recognise.

            • mampara said  | August 29th 2010 @ 9:30am (3 days ago) | Report comment

              heavens above, if you think you loose because of your wingers and outside centre I shall withdraw from the debate, I’ll get more from my 3 year old son.

    • David said  | August 29th 2010 @ 5:33pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

      King, Giteau is only a playmaker in the media! When did anyone last see Giteau beat a first tackle let alone 2 or 3??? Giteau and Adam Ashley-Cooper are the two major weak links in the backs and in this modern running version of the game, they are being completely shown up even more. Just think Ma’a Nonu and Giteau as inside centres in the same breath – chalk and cheese! The Wallabies have got some great backs penned in such as Kirtley, Quade, Genia, O’Connor & Mitchell but need to go back to the drawing board fast for the center pairing of Giteau & AAC. We got rid of one media generated great in Berrick Barnes and need to do the same with Giteau & AAC.

  • Good Game Pathetic Commentary said  | August 29th 2010 @ 8:44am (3 days ago) | Report comment

    Here we go blame the ref and bring out the young developing side comments. I haven’t read the building to the world cup yet. The crowd numbers tell me a story. Seems that even the SA supporters did not turn up in force. 43,000 versus 94,000 for the All Blacks match. Speaks volume of the interest to watch the wallabies. For the record I enjoyed the game, it was competitive even though both sides making errors at crucial times. It was physical and running rugby at times. The commentators spoil the game being armchair refs. The so called stars did not shine thank goodness because I could not stand here about the positives and brilliant individual play in a team sport. Deans has lost me but I remain a supporter of good rugby. I can’t help but feel that in this series the AB have softened up the SA before we get to play them. The AB are the standout team, a close/competitive hard fought match is good for both supporters of the teams but consistently winning is what remains in the record book. Please stop with we gave them a run for their money and bring out all the positives that we can just to come second again.

    • Jetta said  | August 29th 2010 @ 7:32pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

      GGPC, I think you’ll find that both the wallabies an the allblacks games were capacity crowds, the AB’s just played at a larger stadium

  • View stillmissit's Roar profile

    stillmissit said  | August 29th 2010 @ 8:45am (3 days ago) | Report comment

    I dropped my tea at the start of the second half when Genia stood over, a la Gregan, with the ball available at the first breakdown, then we took it in short 5x and kicked it up field. I thought oh! Christ we are going back to one off craaap. Sure enough we did with a couple of exceptions.

    Beale played very well and if I was Parramatta I would have been talking to Beale rather than Cooper. AAC was stragely quiet and this is the sort of game he enjoys.

    I never thought I would say that losing Sharpe would be a game changer but I thought this when he went off and so it was. Mumm is nobody’s idea of a forward. He tried hard but he just doesn’t have it.

    Agree with Suzy Poison Burgess should have been on for the last 30mins Genia is still not fully fit and it showed. If we are going to play tight in the second half what does Cooper give us? Not much, and we would have been better off with Barnes particularly in defence. Having said that I thought Cooper played well, some of his long passes were pin point BUT watch out for Habana looking for intercepts in Bloemfontein off Coopers passes.

    Robbie Deans – what are his half time talks about? The boys seem to come out flat after almost every half time talk. Use of the bench – I think it has all been said but he has been doing this for a while and it smells of ‘I only have 15 players’.

    • kingplaymaker said  | August 29th 2010 @ 9:44am (3 days ago) | Report comment

      Yes as the outside backs are 11, 13, 14, 15 that is almost a third of the team, I think it’s perfectly easy to lose because of them.

      If the Wallabies outside backs had been for example: Israel Dagg, Conrad Smith, Cory Jane and Mils Muliaina they would have won. So, not having good enough outside backs, who as a result couldn’t do the mass of damage FOUR powerful strike runners are capable of, they lost. So they lost because of the outside backs.

    • Oakie said  | August 29th 2010 @ 10:06am (3 days ago) | Report comment

      Yeah I’ve often wondered what he might say at half time, I just can’t see he’s got it in him to fire a team up for the second half, if you watch him in interviews the words seem to get stuck somewhere before they fall out, I sometimes imagine their should be someone standing behind him to to give him a tap on the back of the head so it flows a bit faster, I know its mean to pick on the coach but if he does not get us win soon I am going to garotte myself.

      • kingplaymaker said  | August 29th 2010 @ 10:17am (3 days ago) | Report comment

        Oakie blame the players, or the lack of enough top players, not the coach. As I say above give Deans the Springbok team and De Villiers the Wallabies and it would be an obvious result.

        What Deans says incidentally is far more useful and intelligent than any other coach in the world. That he has a less than fluid spoken manner is another point altogether.

        • Oakie said  | August 29th 2010 @ 10:54am (3 days ago) | Report comment

          Don’t worry I do blame the players, I actually like Deans a lot but I find it hard to see him being very inspirational at half time as Stillmissit said the boys seem to come out flat after almost every half time break.

          • kingplaymaker said  | August 29th 2010 @ 11:11am (3 days ago) | Report comment

            Oakie who knows what goes on there. I think the problem in the second half was not how the Wallabies played or their intensity, but the bizarre series of mistakes they started making! Maybe they were afraid to win/lose?

            • Hayden said  | August 29th 2010 @ 11:21am (3 days ago) | Report comment

              Maybe they were tired also, which goes back to Dean’s achilles heel imho, his selection and management of his bench. He seems reluctant to pull players off when they start to fade. That accidental offside that ruined a good attacking opportunity was a classic example of tired players making mistakes. The line out went to pieces toward the end also. I thought Sharpe had one of his better games, but he gets pulled so there is no lineout leader and Matfield steals a vital one, and another chance goes missing. Who knows why Moore wasn’t on the field. Even Marto and Kearnsy agreed with me.

      • View Mick Gold Coast QLD's Roar profile

        Mick Gold Coast QLD said  | August 29th 2010 @ 1:07pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

        Robbie Deans speaks sense, just about all the time.

        Where he comes from they do not subscribe to the sports commentator view of the world that 15 words are always preferable when just 3 will do. His captains Reuben Thorne, Todd Blackadder and Richie McCaw are similarly afflicted.

        Conversely, Matt Giteau talks a lot on the field but very little comes from it.

        The Wallabies are not especially good listeners, demonstrably, and they have not been for quite some time.

    • taylorbridge said  | August 30th 2010 @ 9:04am (2 days ago) | Report comment

      100% agree. I love Genia’s work but Burgess would have provided fresh legs. Did you see the total coldness that Moore and Fainga exchanged they passed each other after Fainga had to be blood binned in the 1st half . Compare it to how Matfield acknowledged his opposition after the game.

  • Justin said  | August 29th 2010 @ 9:19am (3 days ago) | Report comment

    From a Wallaby perspective the game was lost at the lineout. SImple. Saia had a shocker and Mumm was useless. Matfield take a bow. So again why wasnt Steven Moore used when it was obvious SF was struggling with his throws? He had a poor game all round and should have been dragged early in the second half.

    Moore could have easily been the difference in the last 30mins with his experience and fresh legs bt no we dont see him at all after the blood bin. Unbelievable.

    Ihope Sharpe was injured. I know he went down with an ankle but then seemed to play more and didnt look to be struggling when he walked off.

    Deans in a post match interview moaned about another injury to Higginbotham. What would have happened without Simmons on the bench? He should have been there the whole time. Dean Mumm and Maafu continue to start when they are not up to Test match football.

    No point having a bench if you dont use it Robbie! How daft can you be? WHy choose 2 inside centres on the bench and no cover for the back 3? WHy not use either of them?

    As someone mentioned earlier AUS have 5 play makers in the backline and not nearly enough strike runners. Who’s fault is that?

    • kingplaymaker said  | August 29th 2010 @ 9:21am (3 days ago) | Report comment

      ‘As someone mentioned earlier AUS have 5 play makers in the backline and not nearly enough strike runners. Who’s fault is that?’

      John O’Neill.

      • Suzy Poison said  | August 29th 2010 @ 1:53pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

        Someone said, the wallabies, have 5 play-makers and not one strike runner. Well, the Boks have 5 strike-runners and not one play-maker. I think you guys are better off. That’s probably not fair, I thought Hougaard had a fantastic game. It’s funny how the Boks tend to produce 9′s that are play-makers as opposed to 10′s? I have to say that is the best game I have seen Kurtley Beale play ever. This year has been his coming of age. I would have him in Tri-Nations composite team ahead of Mils even. Mils has better defence, but Kurtley is getting there, he is a fast learner. I thought the main difference between the teams was, in the second half the Boks really stepped up their defence. A lot of their tackles were knocking guys back.
        Perhaps the altitude did take it out of the Wallas, at the end. They will be better this weekend. Both teams were desperate to win, perhaps the Boks were a little more desperate. A seriously think the Wallas could end their highveld hoodoo next weekend. Three tough games games in a row, is going to take it out of the Boks. What a great competition, the Tri-Nations, there is no place to hide. 5% off your game and the team is exposed.

        • ohtani's jacket said  | August 29th 2010 @ 2:01pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

          Morne Steyn had a strong game, I thought. He was one of the better backs on the field.

          • Suzy Poison said  | August 29th 2010 @ 6:19pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

            Well even P Divvy recognises how many play-makers the Wallas have. Here is his latest quote, when asked about the Wallaby backline:

            “They’ve got some good dancers in the team, guys who can dance without hearing music.”

            I am starting to warm to the guy, will there ever be another nutter like him?

            • View Nathan's Roar profile

              Nathan said  | August 29th 2010 @ 8:23pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

              Too many playmakers in the Wallaby backline. Apreciate there are injuries but having Quade Cooper, Kurtley Beale and James O’Connor in the same backline is 1 too many. James O’Connor’s best position is FB and Kurtley Beale’s is 10. Wouldn’t necessarily drop Cooper but wouldn’t have all 3 in the same backline.

            • Suzy Poison said  | August 29th 2010 @ 9:30pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

              You are right Nathan. Wallas are missing a “Mortlock” A guy that can occupy three defenders. What was that Queensland State of origin league player that Roy and HG used to call “Three knees”, a complete niggle merchant, I can still see him wriggling on the turf? Well that was Mortlock, he would always break through three tackles because of his leg strength. Wallas are missing those big guys like Latham or Matt Burke. What has happened to the Wallabies, have they all shrunk in the tumble drier? Look at the last two world cup winners. 2003, England had two big centres. Now the Saffas have won their first game when the have the partnership of Jean De Villiers and Jacque Fourie re-united for the first time. Co-incidence, I think not?

    • kingplaymaker said  | August 29th 2010 @ 11:29am (3 days ago) | Report comment

      Hayden I’ve thought about why he didn’t use the bench because it did seem odd.

      I think the reason are the following:

      Barnes and Faiingaa not used because what was needed were game-breakers with pace at that stage, and however they had played before you would have to say Giteau and AAC were more likely to provide that in that final part of the match.

      Sharpe the injury he got early on? If not then it would seem crazy to take him and not Mumm off.

      Burgess could have won but equally lost the match! Genia was solid at least.

      Remember it did seem as if the Wallabies were on the way to winning and all they had to do was keep doing the same thing, until AAC dropped that ball!

      • Cliff (Bishkek) said  | August 29th 2010 @ 11:56am (3 days ago) | Report comment

        KPM – I like your last sentence and I agree – they were behind but appeared to be doing the right thing.

        I only watched through the web – and for anyone interested “IRAQGOALS.COM”. Reasonable bit jumpy and breaky but reasonable.

        As I see it as KPM – the Wallabies went missing in “brain power” in the last 20 to 30. They were running it and making breask or moving. Then mistakes. Also when Sharpe went off the lineouts did not function.

        But when you consider that the Wallabies were leading by some 20 points – what happened.

        I am convinced that this team is leaderless on the field – Elsom is not a captian – never has been. Maybe he leads by example but even professional rugby players need to be DRIVEN TO STRIVE. He should have been on his case again and again.

        Sheek you might be a Deans Fan – but serious questions need to be asked. I am not saying SACK HIM – BUT ASK THE BLOODY QUESTIONS. Teams should not lose with that many points in front.

        Congrats to the Saffas – and this is not an excuse – based on the points in front – and what should have been a DRIVEN TEAM – THE WALLABIES LOST IT – many tiems as has been stated mistakes when there was not pressure.

        AAC’s lost ball was a very good tackle.

        But with Deans I ask the questions:

        We speak of the altitude – so why do we train as sea level for a week?
        Mumm and Browen are not up to the standard – Mumm and Brown never have been
        I agree – Cooper, Beale and JOC and Giteua in the same 15 is not an answer – Beale and Fullback and Cooper at 10
        Giteau I still question – but why JOC when Lachie Turner was available and others
        I understand that at altitude putting on McCalam (or is it McCalman) and Higgenbottom from the start – fitness is a point. But Deans bought McCalam on too late
        Simmons was injured and not in the original so what happened – did Higgenbottom get injured – I was surprised by Simmons coming on?
        Deans use of the bench was useless – Genia ran out of ideas – Burgess should have been on


        • ohtani's jacket said  | August 29th 2010 @ 12:05pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

          Iraqgoals uses the Project Vanilla stream at Ustream, which is a better quality stream.

          • Just a Fan said  | August 29th 2010 @ 4:18pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

            Stupid! How long do you think it is gonna be before they shut that link down now! Rather PM that info dont out it oin the open.

        • kingplaymaker said  | August 29th 2010 @ 12:14pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

          Cliff I would say it was probably fear of losing after such a good start.

          When teams win consistently or are doing only as well as expected, they build up an inner beilef that takes them through tough periods in a match.

          As the Wallabies have been underperforming for over a year now, they have lost the inner belief that comes from doing even reasonably well, and so in pressurized situations like this they get nervous and make mistakes.

      • MOTHER TERESA said  | August 29th 2010 @ 1:35pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

        KING,simply ask deans the reasons dont speculate when deans has told us its decision making;
        many studies state that decisions at critical times speak of experience ,culture and dare i say coaching ability

  • damo said  | August 29th 2010 @ 9:55am (3 days ago) | Report comment

    I thought the Wallabies did really well. Skill guts, courage and tries! If we still had a mainstream audience they would have enjoyed that one. But the “smarts” let them down.
    And “smarts” most importantly includes being able to prioritise “doing the basics right”. Missed tackles, those 2 lineouts thrown away and AAC’s dropped ball near the end took a big toll on OZ hopes. Faingaa’s accidental off-side another one. Fatigue will always test intelligence at the end of a game.
    The biggest thing is that the Wallabies THOUGHT they were DESTINED to win after their blistering 1st quarter. I thought the same while watching. But as good as they played they were outplayed in the end by a team that did more basics right at the right end of the game. Wallabies need more of an on field brain. Don’t mean to write them off. Basic mistakes aside the team played well – but their weakness at this top level of the game is smart skills, choices and selections.(ie replacements).

  • ohtani's jacket said  | August 29th 2010 @ 10:03am (3 days ago) | Report comment

    The Wallabies lost because of Deans. You couldn’t have had 150 Australian rugby players running around playing domestic and Deans would’ve still made a hash of things at Loftus.

    Discounting Faingaa’s blood bin in the first half, here are Deans’ substitutions:

    54 mins — Ma’afu – sub off Slipper – sub on
    57 mins — McCalman – sub on Brown – sub off
    64 mins — Simmons – sub on Sharpe – sub off

    (The last one was injury related, btw)

    Here’s Henry’s substitutions from the week before:

    42 mins — Weepu – sub on Cowan – sub off
    49 mins — Donnelly – sub off Whitelock – sub on
    57 mins — Dagg – sub on Rokocoko – sub off
    62 mins — Afoa – sub on Franks – sub off
    70 mins — Vito – sub on Kaino – sub off

    • kingplaymaker said  | August 29th 2010 @ 12:16pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

      The Wallabies didn’t lose because of Deans, they lost because of the players.

      Looking at that list of substitutions, it occurred to me that almost every one of those New Zealand players would be starting for the Wallabies now. That’s how superior New Zealand are in player quality and why the Wallabies struggle to win matches! That’s not Deans! Again, South Africa would have the Lions share in a joint team.

      • ohtani's jacket said  | August 29th 2010 @ 12:39pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

        If the players were as bad as you say the game wouldn’t have been close. Deans simply doesn’t know how to manage a side. He can’t get his bench right for starters and he doesn’t know who to take off or put on during the game. He should’ve been putting on a fresh pair of legs every 10 minutes in the second half. Even P Divvy and crew had the grapefruits to take off Morne Steyn when he was playing better than he had all Tri-Nations.

        Why didn’t Deans keep Moore on when all SF contributed after his knock was head high tackles and dodgy lineout throws? Why did Barnes spend so long warming up only to get no game time?

      • View Mick Gold Coast QLD's Roar profile

        Mick Gold Coast QLD said  | August 29th 2010 @ 1:15pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

        I agree, kingplaymaker.

        • View Nathan's Roar profile

          Nathan said  | August 29th 2010 @ 8:17pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

          Deans made a serious ‘blunder’ by not using his bench effectively. He actually looked out of depth himself in the coaching box and appeared too stressed to make rational decisions toward the end of the game.

      • jeremy said  | August 30th 2010 @ 7:48am (2 days ago) | Report comment

        Half of NZ Maori would be slotted straight into the Wallabies, like Luke McAllister, Hosea Gear, Liam Messam, Corey Flynn, Isaac Ross, Tanerau Latimer, Stephen Brett….the list goes on.

        Depth is truly a luxury.

        • View Mick Gold Coast QLD's Roar profile

          Mick Gold Coast QLD said  | August 30th 2010 @ 1:51pm (2 days ago) | Report comment

          With ease, jeremy, without question.

    • Who Needs Melon said  | August 29th 2010 @ 12:54pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

      Interesting comparison OJ. I replied to one of your posts yesterday (I think) that surely, SURELY with a game at altitude like this Deans would realise that he HAS to use his bench this game – and not just for the last 5 minutes – but he didn’t. I think you said it would be a first if he did and, hats off, you were right. So I agree with you.

    • sheek said  | August 29th 2010 @ 2:44pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

      Yep, it’s all Deans fault. Sack the imposter!

      Bring on the next VICTIM, errr, I mean, bring on the next Wallaby coach…..

      Bring forward the poison chalice…..!!

  • Harry said  | August 29th 2010 @ 10:08am (3 days ago) | Report comment

    Suggest watching the last 15 minutes of both last weeks test and this weeks test, it clearly demonstrates the difference in teamwork, professionalism, , composure, injecting subs at the right time and smart, committed rugby. NZ has it, Australian doesn’t.
    Aus had their chances but just ran out of go forward and made clumsy mistakes, the classic examples being the lost lineout throws in their 22 and then the bumping into each other orchestrated by Pocock, Genia and S. Faingaa.
    Another very winnable game lost – whats that in recent years? Off the top of my head – Brisbane 08, Auckland 09, Sydney 09 v All Blacks, Edinburgh 09 v Scotland, draw with Ireland on the same tour, Sydney 10 v England. Coulda/shoulda won them all.
    Sigh, another round of blabble coming up about “moving in the right direction, blooding young players, close to putting it together, just wait till next year/the RWC’s the only thing that matters, just need to execute better, promising newcomers, building depth, young team needs time”… been the same old stuff for 7 years now.
    Ah well I’ll still support them and will be optimistic, one again, that ethey can put it together one of these days. Still lots to play for in next weeks game (Mandela Plate) so lets see how they go.

    • kingplaymaker said  | August 29th 2010 @ 10:18am (3 days ago) | Report comment

      ‘Suggest watching the last 15 minutes of both last weeks test and this weeks test, it clearly demonstrates the difference in teamwork, professionalism, , composure, injecting subs at the right time and smart, committed rugby. NZ has it, Australian doesn’t.’ No, the difference is the quality of the players in the All Blacks is higher and that quality finally comes to the fore in the last 15 minutes, while the Wallabies lack of quality comes to the fore with the opposite result.

  • TrueblueOzzie said  | August 29th 2010 @ 10:09am (3 days ago) | Report comment

    I say send all those bloody kiwis home. Great start but disappointing game. We demonstrated plenty of guts but ran out of puff in the last 20 minutes. This resulted in too many errors. Between this and the poor use of the bench we were doomed to failure. As to the many comments to come that this is a close race and there is not much between the three teams. One word, rubbish. On another note. I am tired of hearing about how our young inexperienced team which will grow into world beaters. Again rubbish. Many of our younger players have as much international exposure as the newer players in both the SA and NZ camps. Difference is we are forced to pick our players at a younger age resulting in not allowing them to develop fully before hitting the international stage. This results in them thinking they know everything. Listen to their comments in the media to confirm this attitude. Which leads to the coach. Deans has a rep as a “Master Developer Of Young Talent”. When do we see this side of his resume?

    • kingplaymaker said  | August 29th 2010 @ 10:20am (3 days ago) | Report comment

      ‘Deans has a rep as a “Master Developer Of Young Talent”. When there is some young talent to develop, specifically on the wings, at 13 and 15 (Beale and O’Connor are out of position there).

      • Cliff (Bishkek) said  | August 29th 2010 @ 12:03pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

        KPM – we have the wingers – we have injuries – but Deans did not use (possibly did not consider – gave them a holiday ot SA) – Hybes and Turner – WHY?

        • andrew said  | August 29th 2010 @ 12:26pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

          Hynes is injured and Turner can’t play. But if Turner can tackle he will get Mitchell’s jumper next week. That attempt on Smith was a flashback to his shocker against NZ. Gone.

    • jeremy said  | August 30th 2010 @ 7:50am (2 days ago) | Report comment


      ‘Send the Kiwis home’ – the kiwis include Robbie Deans, Dean Mumm, Quade Cooper and Digby Ione – you sure you want to do without the last two?

      • bayboy said  | August 30th 2010 @ 8:14am (2 days ago) | Report comment

        Maybe just maybe QC and Genia are not the world beaters we like to think they are……

        Internationals are a completely different level to Super 14.

  • GT75 said  | August 29th 2010 @ 10:18am (3 days ago) | Report comment

    Mother Teresa get some new material!!!! Deans Deans Deans. Honestly did you even watch the game. They were awesome up to 60 mins and then made stupid mistakes.

    As simple as that.

    Comment left via The Roar’s iPhone app. Download The Roar’s iPhone App in the App Store here.

    • ohtani's jacket said  | August 29th 2010 @ 10:26am (3 days ago) | Report comment

      Mother Teresa is right. I would have Williams as an intrim coach in Bloemfontein and Sydney and hire someone else for the end of year tour.

    • Red Rooster said  | August 29th 2010 @ 1:12pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

      GT – listen to yourself – “they were awesome… then made some stupid mistakes” What people are trying to say is this has been the standard match review for two seasons. I think the success rate for the last two years was 38% before the game so it is even less now. If we keep coming up with the same problems and don’t address the causes then who are the real dummies? The people making the mistakes or the people that accept them.

    • MOTHER TERESA said  | August 29th 2010 @ 1:22pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

      GT;SORRY MATE IF IM BORING YOU but new material means i havent been right or consistent and RESULTS would suggest im a tad more objective than a change of non de plume.
      consistently supporting a loser is not admirable nor is pleading superior knowledge when you are the dope.

  • dunc said  | August 29th 2010 @ 10:38am (3 days ago) | Report comment

    I only caught the second half live. My brother saw the first half and said defence was woeful from both sides.

    As an AB fan I was yelling come on Aussies rip into it. And there were some great moments, followed by dropped ball, most tellingly AAC failing to protect the ball and cross the line. Poor technique. Some Wallabies fans said they blew yet another winnable game.

    You had enough backline ball in the second half to create tries. Not enough strike runners and hopeful passes out wide. I couldn’t see any set backline moves. If I was a true Wallaby fan I would just be severely disappointed. When Gits kicked for the four point lead, I thought, come on Australia just knuckle down and defend like you did against us in Christchurch.

    Why didnt Deans sub on more fresh legs – you know why – he is too scared of making mistakes – I really believe that – he is too conservative.

    Hope I havent upset any Aussies… should have gutsed it out and hung on for a win!

  • jameswm said  | August 29th 2010 @ 10:50am (3 days ago) | Report comment

    I thought the Wallas lost their composure at crucial times. They had the game there for the winning in the last 10 but even their more experienced players made errors (AAC).I could not believe the non-try decision after the first 1-2 mins, but it didn’t matter, because Genia scored straight afterwards.

    Then the ref gave a wrong forward pass against the Wallabies in thier own quarter, and the Boks scored (poor deensive alignment). THe Wallabies got caught out by inside balls close to the ruck a few times, which is usually a sign of laziness from the inside guys covering across.

    I agree with whoever said the Wallabies came out flat in the 2nd half. I was waiting for the same intensive running onslaught at the start of the 2nd half, but it never came. I didn’t think of Burgess at the time but he’d have ben a good option after 10-15 of that half.

    Giteau just had very little impact, and I’m afraid to say Cooper and Beale make him look 2nd rate. I think I’d prefer JOC at 12.

    Mumm tried hard but he just isn’t up to it physically. Slipper was great when he came on, in the scrums and around the field.

    They badly need a fit Palu back – Brown is not a factor. S Faingaa went well and just needs a couple years more of experience and fitness/strength training to be very good. I didn’t expect to ever be saying that. He’ll be a god backup for TPN when he comes back (Hayden you have no idea criticising that bloke – he’s a champion, tough, hard as nails, strong, fearless, mobile and highly skilled). They need TPN, Pocock, Palu, Robbo and BA working together. And find us some locks.

    The Wallabies kicked too much and too aimlessly in the 2nd half. I couldn’t believe the lack of leadership there. They reverted back to old ways, instead of the dymamic attack and clear-out that is needed these days.

    Maybe they need a running 12 but I don’t think A Faingaa is the answer, or not yet anyway.

    • kingplaymaker said  | August 29th 2010 @ 11:17am (3 days ago) | Report comment

      James what would you think of Cooper and Beale at 10 and 12? Obviously the problem with that would be defence, although Beale seems to have improved in that area.

      Agree Slipper looked good, but Maafu to be fair to him was everywhere as far as I could see, and the scrums held up ok with him. There must be a reason Deans chooses him above Slipper.

      • Spencer said  | August 29th 2010 @ 11:41am (3 days ago) | Report comment

        There is….Slipper is 15 years old. Maafu is a beanbag!

        • kingplaymaker said  | August 29th 2010 @ 11:46am (3 days ago) | Report comment

          Spencer now it’s all clear..

          • Spencer said  | August 29th 2010 @ 11:48am (3 days ago) | Report comment

            Cheers….thought that might help.

    • Hayden said  | August 29th 2010 @ 11:28am (3 days ago) | Report comment

      Regarding Palu, maybe he has turned a corner, but it has always struck me that for a guy of his size and looks, he should stand astride the No 8 world like a collosus. Instead, he blows hot and cold, follows up one dominating performance with a couple of anonymous ones. That said, he is a better player than Brown by a long shot.

      • kingplaymaker said  | August 29th 2010 @ 11:32am (3 days ago) | Report comment

        Hayden that was true until last spring from the last Bleidsloe against the All Blacks and the entire euopean phase, where he was a totally transformed player, omnipresent, completely consistent, and far from blowing hot and cold for a whole series of matches he was outstanding, and dominated the opposition.

        In fact it was certainly the best series of performances by a number 8 in the world last year.

        • View Mick Gold Coast QLD's Roar profile

          Mick Gold Coast QLD said  | August 29th 2010 @ 1:32pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

          I don’t remember that specifically, kingplaymaker, but I will go with your recollection.

          I always regarded Palu as a lazy one, a bit like Willie Ofenhague who would bludge for a good part of most matches. Fili Finau was similar – a real nice bloke, talented, who just didn’t bother at times.

          You just don’t have the luxury of having part timer blokes competing against a Keiran Reid or, going back in time, a Jerry Collins going at it all day long.

          • Peter K said  | August 29th 2010 @ 6:18pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

            Mick and Others. A lot of people claim Palu is a bludger but perceptions deceive. Sure he is not seen doing big runs and big hits all game. However stats game after game showed he had the highest or second highest workrate of all the forwards in almost every game.

            He normally had the most runs, most tackles and good particpation in rucks and mauls.

            Also this was not just last year but over the last few years. The difference was last year he was more effective and had a bigger impact.

        • Ben S said  | August 29th 2010 @ 10:14pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

          ‘Hayden that was true until last spring from the last Bleidsloe against the All Blacks and the entire euopean phase, where he was a totally transformed player, omnipresent, completely consistent, and far from blowing hot and cold for a whole series of matches he was outstanding, and dominated the opposition.

          In fact it was certainly the best series of performances by a number 8 in the world last year.’

          Come now, there’s poetic licence and then there’s delusion. Palu put in improved performances on the Grand Slam tour, and that’s about it really. On the previous discussion regarding Palu you stated that his carrying game was awesome etc, kpm, and yet I provided statistics showing that in metres made on the tour he was below numerous players: Haskell, Heaslip Fernandez-Lobbe and Picamoles. Palu is a big man who is a good carrier and will occasionally put in a big hit. He doesn’t have an especially prevalent work ethic, he isn’t a significant lineout fixture, and he doesn’t do much at the breakdown. In short he is a limited player and I doubt he would have made a difference versus SA just as he didn’t versus Scotland and Ireland. Australia lost because they are badly coached and badly captained and because the players lack key skills.

      • View stillmissit's Roar profile

        stillmissit said  | August 29th 2010 @ 11:41am (3 days ago) | Report comment

        Hayden – I always thought he had a classic Islander lack of confidence particularly against the AB’s. He should be the #1 #8 in the world and has shown it from time to time. With our #8 stakes as they are can’t wait to have him back as he gives us go forward.

        • kingplaymaker said  | August 29th 2010 @ 11:45am (3 days ago) | Report comment

          Stillmissit read the point I just made about the spring tour.

          • MOTHER TERESA said  | August 29th 2010 @ 7:51pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

            38% losers and spiralling downwards out of control
            the trouble guys is youre struggling in quicksand and getting deeper in the pooh

            • sheek said  | August 29th 2010 @ 8:04pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

              Actually MT,

              I’m not in any quicksand, & I really don’t care anymore.

              I have no emotional investment in the Wallabies at present, & I post to because I probably have too much loose time on my hands.

              Go ahead & sack Deans, I couldn’t care any less, other than to point out it won’t significantly change anything in the short term to medium term.

            • ThelmaWrites said  | August 30th 2010 @ 4:40pm (2 days ago) | Report comment


              Calm down.

  • alan said  | August 29th 2010 @ 10:51am (3 days ago) | Report comment

    I figuired the Wannabies had lost even before I checked online; there was no merciless self promotion, and when I finally did read the reviews on the home grown rugby pages, well it was a squeak home win for the home side.

    Get real, a squeak home win is by one or two points… not thirteen.

    The fact is this team may have a few talented players and Deans has rightly used them; but as a team they are presently not.

    Don’t blame the messenger; their coach is respected world wide, so a string of Australian mishaps
    (we was robbed) speaks volumes for the ability of the players to form a cohesive unit.
    Rugby is a second tier sport in Australia, and only reaches the dizzy heights when the national team wins. The team has always survived as an opportunistic unit; but perhaps a change of coach will be the magic wand the Aussies still believe in; next year’s World Cup is a million miles away at present, and it may well be a long term strategy is effective in building a team capable of reaching higher ground in that all important Australian ethos.. win at al costs.
    Time will surely tell.

    One thing is certain, every other rugby nation never discounts the Springbok; throughout their history they have shown enormous determination and it has resulted in many a turnaround win.
    Congratulations to them this time are well meant, and well worthy of their undeniable reputation as a formidable team.

    ps: I am not South African

    • andrew said  | August 29th 2010 @ 12:30pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

      Thanks for this. Really glad that people who can’t be bothered watching the game have the energy to give long winded comments.

      • Hayden said  | August 29th 2010 @ 12:40pm (3 days ago) | Report comment


        • Blue Sue said  | August 29th 2010 @ 1:42pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

          Word of the day ……… Frustration!

          Frustration that they let this one slip away.
          Frustration that for every two steps forward we take one step back.
          Frustration that for every minute of brilliance and hope we seem to have 10 seconds of ill discipline and despair that brings it all undone.
          Frustration that you can never put old heads on young shoulders, and that as much as we would wish it to be true, someone with 100 tests ( like John Smit) will always find a way to put one over the young guy who is just starting out. It is true in every sport, and the wily old fox has always had time to learn the tricks of the trade.
          Frustration that our athletic stocks are spread across too any codes in Australia and that Rugby is losing out big time. When you look at the size of some of those Boks, we can’t compete. Our guys here that are the same size are playing AFL and League. Watch a game of AFL and see where all of the locks/ second rowers are.

          Frustration that, whilst The Roar is a great read and offers a place for exchange of ideas and opinions, there are still far too many people that feel they have the right to offer an opinion when they haven’t even seen the game. I am gobsmacked that people start their opinions with ” I haven’t seen the game, BUT …….. blah blah blah”. I would call that arrogance.

          Frustration that this great game struggles for column inches in the newspapers, and that today we have two journalists, David Beniuk on the Roar/ Telegraph and Greg Growden in the Herald/ Rugbyheaven both with their names on articles with exactly the same text.
          For example “The Loftus crowd were silenced when Will Genia dummied and scored in just the third minute and James O’Connor bagged the first of a double after after a scintillating 60m run by Kurtley Beale in the fifth.

          Springboks flanker Juan Smith powered through some threadbare defence in the ninth minute but O’Connor was there to pounce when Bryan Habana dropped the kick-off and Australia led 21-7.

          The Boks narrowed the lead to seven when prop Gurthro Steenkamp burrowed over in the 14th minute and an altitude-powered 59m penalty goal from Morne Steyn made it 21-17 after 20 minutes.”

          So these two paid, professional journalists, used exactly the same text in both their articles. Same paragraphs, verbs adverbs adjectives to describe a game ….. amazing! Who came up with original ? Did they both copy it from someone/somewhere else.
          Surely we as readers deserve something better. If my children/ their friends had handed this in as an assignment and claimed it as their own, they would have been awarded a big fat 0.

          As I said Frustration!

          • Red Rooster said  | August 29th 2010 @ 2:30pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

            Mate time zone prevents the journos putting stories out post game so everyone uses the AAP wire service and the resident editors rehashes a story, using the aap quotes/lines for the websites etc. sometimes they do it under the journalists name – We wont get the rugbywriters true opinions until monday morning, when they are released to the world around 1.00am

            • Blue Sue said  | August 29th 2010 @ 2:53pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

              Thanks so much for that!
              As my name may suggest, I am Sue, so please don’t call me mate. That is patronising.
              There are intelligent, thinking females out there, and this site is not just a domain for males.

              This is not print media. This is an instant, electronic medium where time zones have no meaning or relevance. When you sit at a game and look at the press box, the journos are there with their computers and with the press of a button the report is there for all the world to read. If you read on-line sites regularly, from all around the world, the by line at the top says AAP if it is just a re hash. If I see a journalists name, I expect it to be their original work. May be a bit much, but hey, I’m just a wee lass so what would I know!

            • Sylvester said  | August 29th 2010 @ 8:43pm (3 days ago) | Report comment


              It’s likely that crafting the bulk of the story will be enough for the journo to claim the byline, ie adding their own quotes from coaches/players and their own angle.
              Some of the play by play will be generic. There’s no point reinventing the wheel for statements of fact.
              Usually the wire service will be credited at the bottom, but not always.
              I can understand your frustration at the lack of originality, but the demand for instant news via the net has created this beast.

      • MOTHER TERESA said  | August 29th 2010 @ 1:57pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

        ANDREW,yes spot on ;a long winded veiled attempt to once again proffer an excuse for failure based on “LACK OF CATTLE”
        how transparently dumb are the apologists for record defeats?

        • sheek said  | August 29th 2010 @ 2:48pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

          It’s Deans…..No, it’s the cattle…..It’s Deans…..No, it’s the cattle…..It’s Deans…..No, it’s the cattle…..

          Okay, let’s just say all of Australian rugby is the problem!

          Thank you………………..

          • MOTHER TERESA said  | August 29th 2010 @ 6:25pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

            SHEEK, or sticks or whoever,clearly its deans responsibility cant blame cattle when so far in front and dont use bench

            • sheek said  | August 29th 2010 @ 8:07pm (3 days ago) | Report comment


              This is ridiculous.

              So you’re saying when the Wallabies led 14-0 after what,10 minutes, & 21-7 after what, 20 minutes, Deans should have used his bench then??????????

              Because that’s the only time the Wallabies were “SO far in front”…..

  • View stillmissit's Roar profile

    stillmissit said  | August 29th 2010 @ 11:31am (3 days ago) | Report comment

    I was looking forward to seeing Higginbotham on the field and was disappointed he didn’t make it.

    The forwards went OK except for the lineout and generally the boys played well up to a point. If you take the lineout stuff ups out of it, the poor 2nd half was down to a bunch of dropped balls and a couple of accidental offsides and forward passes. Faiinga went well in my book and Moore dropped a couple of balls in the short time he was on.

    Lets not get too down though guys at least they showed that they have a game with speed and execution in them. I don’t think these young Wallabies can play a tight slow game they look so much better doing stuff at speed. Maybe it is all that game boy stuff and they need ELECTRONIC SPEED to react correctly.

    I really enjoyed it. At least I don’t feel like wandering down to the shed with evil intent for once.

    • Cliff (Bishkek) said  | August 29th 2010 @ 12:13pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

      Stillmissit – as muxh as I enjoy your threads – not getting tough on these guys – maybe we shouldn’t – BUT MAYBE DEANS SHOULD.




      We had it won and we lost it – as the Saffas came bakc – BUT – there are no BRAISN AND LEADERSHIP ON THE FIELD.

      Do you think our pack would have been allowed to go soft with Farr Jones behinf them. Do you think that an Ella of Mark Lyangh or a Horan would have allowed out backline to follow – I do not mean by play – BUT BY ENCOURAGING AND DIRECTING THE BACKLINE.

      Deans needs to be asked questions – BENCH, MUMM BROWN — WHY???


      • View stillmissit's Roar profile

        stillmissit said  | August 29th 2010 @ 2:32pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

        Cliff: dont get me wrong mate, I am all for a tougher stance against these guys and I also think Deans has questions to answer, particularly regarding his use of the bench. He reminds me of my ‘Most Hated’ Eddie Jones where he would stick with McQueens old 15 until 5 mins before the end then bring on new players and claim he was blooding more youngsters than ever before. Now, Deans is twice the coach Eddie will ever be but he needs to harden the FOOK up.

        Your other comments I agree with and I think most here do as well. We need more of the old Aussie mongrel and we don’t have it. We do have some fast and adventurous players that showed up today (where have they been before) and with a strong pack we can do some damage.

        This was the game to win. Pounce on them early and then give them nothing, we did the pouncing but gave the result to them. Maybe the Boks were like Hyena’s to our cheetahs, we did all the running and killing and then they stole the meat.

        Bottom line Cliff – A loss in BLFTN – would love to be proven wrong

        • Cliff (Bishkek) said  | August 29th 2010 @ 10:37pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

          SMI – Thanks but I will got – for proving you wrong – I think we will win in BLFTN – but we will need that mongrel to do so and with the running game.

          However a BLFTN and a loss in Sydney – may get some people asking the QUESTIONS. I am afraid that if we win those two – the wrongs will be plastered over.

          I agree with SHEEK – we have no one at the moment better than Deans – unless we take a chance with McKenzie – but McKenzie has had only one cracker with the REDS. Based on his history I would like to wait.

          I also agree with SHEEK that the catle is not a full herd – and injuries put some to the knackery – BUT – these blokes are not thinking, not applying mongrel and making mistakes. Somebody answered me above that the mind-set is not right after losing all the time – BUT Captains make mind sets. We do have the cattle BUT as SHEEK says they do not have the competition to BLOOD THEM AND GET THEM UP. We need a comp and an Australia A – but no money!!!

          I tinkg that Deans has to start and stare the issues in the face – Mumm = Simmons, Brown – Higgenbottom or McCallam, and he has to clearly look at the backline options – maybe Barnes, maybe JOC at 12, maybe Moore – but I am not impressed.

          We will see

  • Red Rooster said  | August 29th 2010 @ 1:21pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

    Cliff – you are a bit late off the mark. These questions have already be tabled time and time again by the non apologists on this site. We have had every excuse you can imagine for the last two years. At some point there needs to be some answers. Selections, replacements, intelligence, leadership, teamwork, strategy etc etc must be the responsibility of someone as it is in every sporting business team – Ask one question only – who has the job description to deal with these issues then you will find your accountability – thats the way multi million dollar businesses operate – shareholders normally demand accountability as do boards

  • Working Class Rugger said  | August 29th 2010 @ 1:41pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

    We are our own worst enemy. Had the game by the scruff of the neck right from the gun but then allowed the Boks to get right back in. Is it fear of actually executing the basics thus removing the old ‘still have alot of improvement’ catch cry from their after match BS. The Boks did defend reasonably well in the second half, however, on a number of occasions is was quite clear that if the Wallabies actually executed the fundamental crisply instead of mucking the blood thing up the result could have been different. Ashley-Cooper should have scored that gift and it was a gift. Poor execution is killing the Wallabies and just makes them seem amateur.

    Apart from that whinge. The game was remarkable for the most part. In the first 20min I was wondering exactly where it was going. The speed of play watch a joy to watch. The boks can play with ball in hand and do it at a cracking pace. Come may lament the percieved lack of defensive structure but with the speed of the breakdown being what it was reseting the defensive line would have been quite difficult. Best examples of this were both the Smith and Spies tries.

    On the positive side for the Wallabies Beale had a good game with his break from our 22 being easily the best piece of individual play. Cooper was solid in his return and I expect a step up next week. The negatives were certainly Brown, Mumm and JOC. Brown isn’t a Test No.8. Why can’t the coaching staff see this. Mumm, well, after last night with the Tahs recruitment especially in the second/back row he’d be hard up keeping his spot on the bench in next year’s S15. His drop ball from the kick off and his ineffective field work are inexcusable. And JOC. Bring Turner in for god’s sake. Yes, he scored two tries but they were purely opportunist. One from the great work of Beale and the other from a woeful mistake from Habana.

    Last night proved that the Wallabies can be lethal but still lack the pysche to really dominate. Will it come. Well, I don’t know. But something got to give. I hate dissecting the games in this manner every week and it actually spoils the memory of what was really and genuinely entertainly game.

  • hog said  | August 29th 2010 @ 2:01pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

    from about 1990 to 2003 Australian rugby has punched above its weight blessed with an unusual amount of talent, but in many ways this has covered up a shallow base, due to its own success and the advent of super rugby grassroots rugby has been ignored and we are now paying for that with a lack of depth. Rugby needs to address this with a clear pathways forward

    • Red Rooster said  | August 29th 2010 @ 2:38pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

      Between 1900 and 1996 we played with the best players being poached regularly by League. So in reality we now have more talent than before at our disposal and we now have 4-5 professional rugby teams to choose from and their academies. How can we be ahead of France and England who have 4 times the playing numbers and professional teams yet keep saying we dont have the “cattle”. Or are there other factors at play – coaching, selection, tactics, culture etc

      • MOTHER TERESA said  | August 29th 2010 @ 7:59pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

        red,you make good logic mate and be kind to big sue could be johnny cash

  • Stash said  | August 29th 2010 @ 2:04pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

    Well the game I SAW was:

    Good guys:

    James O’connor 2 tries – well, well, well
    Will Genia – finally found some snap and snipe (faded in the last 20)
    Cooper – a bit of rust, but the guy has a sweet long pass straight to the man, regardless of his failed Carlos Spencer goose step – which looks more like a chicken dance
    Sharpe – normally goes missing, but actually showed up and got in there…remarkable
    Beale – great run

    Bad Guys:

    Faninga – awful throwing, especially in the enemy 22, inexcusable and amateur
    Mumm – Bloodbin run on: would have been better of just playing with 14 men
    Ashley Cooper – Mr. unreliable
    Robbie Deans – play your bench man – and f*** learn to motivate your team at halftime – its a joke and your embarrassing us kiwis
    Beale – bad catch

  • Stash said  | August 29th 2010 @ 2:17pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

    The other game I saw was,

    Good Guys:

    Juan Smith – the best player 2 weeks in a row
    Matfield – great steals
    Spies – whats with all the rubbish players actually turning up on the day
    Smit – lucky to be 101, played like it was his 80th
    JP Pietersen – pretty good for a 3rd choice

    Bad Guys

    Francois Steyn – for the best boot in the world, well it was pretty damn bad (tho he did make it up with a try
    Habana – whats happened to this guy, awful kicking and decision making
    Matfiled – bad missed tackle
    the whole team – for their defensive effort in the first fifteen

  • Peter K said  | August 29th 2010 @ 2:51pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

    The forwards lost it big time.
    The SA forwards punched holes and made metres easily through the Wallby forward. The first 3 try scorers for Boks were forwards because the Wallaby forwards did not do theiur job in tight.

    The lineout a shambles, how can Mumm be kept.

    The backs in general were reasonable. Beale exemplified the performance though great attack and opportunitsice BUT he is the full back and last line of defence and missed 4 tackles and only made 3.
    THIS IS why Beale cant be kept as F/B he just cannot stop tries if they break the line ahead of him. Having a flyhalf who cant tackle can be compensated for but not a F/B.

    Deans use of the becnh was woeful. But he is is picking unbalanced starting teams and unbalanced reserves bench.

    Moore EASILY played a lot better than Faingaa when he came on, he made good yards up the middle and defended well, why wasnt he allowed to stay on?

    Next game
    Start Moore instead of Faingaa.
    Start Slipper instead of Mafu. Scrum looked better when he came on and better in general play. Maafu is useless almost as bad as Mumm.
    Start Simmons instead of Mumm. Mumm shouldnt even be on the bench.
    Brown tries hard but is ineffective, totally manhandled multiple times and driven back.
    Start Higginbotham and Brown to bench.

    Giteau was invisiable and ineffective. Joc IS in form and very good on his feet.
    JoC at 12 and Giteau to the bench.
    Turner on the wing. I believe Hynes is injured.
    Beale is great in attack and in good form but his tackling is very weak. Very strongly consider Shepherd at 15 or on the bench at least to add balance.

    NOW Deans will make NO CHANGES except for injury.

    Also the lineout is so bad and restarts we BADLY need Vickerman back.

    Well I look forward to Alexander, Vickerman, Horwill, and Palu back in the forwards.
    I also look forward to Ioane back in the backs. Personally I would add Davis on one wing and Chambers at O/C BUT Deans has his favourites and is conservative so I doubt he will give them a chance.

    • kingplaymaker said  | August 29th 2010 @ 11:08pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

      Peter K Beale was the best back on the field yesterday. If you want to drop Giteau, put Beale at 12 instead of O’Connor.

      Turner is inept, if you want a replacement wing then put Shepherd there.

  • Midfielder said  | August 29th 2010 @ 3:07pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

    Question to the RU experts on the Roar….

    Guys my understanding of many things rugby are lacking… in last nights game when we were down 34 to 31 … twice we had lineouts within 5 meters of their line when they were on the rack especially the first one … why can’t we win the big lineouts… it’s not like this is a new thing … don’t hold me to this as I said my knowledge is not perfect in RU matters but I would go so far as to say only when we had John Eales in the lineout did we do OK constantly …

    But why are and have we been so hopeless at lineouts

    • Stash said  | August 29th 2010 @ 3:49pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

      Deans has been copying Henry (again)

    • Stash said  | August 29th 2010 @ 3:59pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

      It looked to me that Sharp was making the calls – yet the call on the 10 meter Wallaby line to go to the back was not only dangerous, it was reckless. Lady luck was on the wallabies side then – or else that could have been earlier points for the Boks.

      I don’t think Sharp was responsible for the Bok 22 lineout calls, rather it was wayward throwing. The last one straight to the (bok) man was pretty much throwing away the game – it was a pivotal moment. Faninga should probably have thrown to the second man. Even though this slows the ball going wide, ball retention was more important during that play. The Boks played most of the game in the middle of the park… and the wallabies kept showing them up on the sides – in fact if it hadn’t been for some woeful catching, passing, running into each other – the Wallabies would have found more points waiting there for them.

      • View Mick Gold Coast QLD's Roar profile

        Mick Gold Coast QLD said  | August 29th 2010 @ 4:26pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

        Can’t help mesself, Stash, for the benefit of commenters who tell us who is really to blame …

        Why Deans instructed them to throw that one long on their own line is beyond me. And to demand his players attack down the sides while practising ball droppery, passing to the linesman and barging into each other is a mystery too.

        Perhaps the ICC fraud squad could have a look at this, after they’ve finished the current cover up for Pakistan, in terms of players drawing salaries under false pretences!

    • JF said  | August 29th 2010 @ 4:02pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

      Adam Freier has written an interesting article on the subject today.

      • Dirty Rotten Scoundrels said  | August 29th 2010 @ 6:23pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

        Every golf swing is the same… Practice, practice, practice at any given task = consistency.

        • View Mick Gold Coast QLD's Roar profile

          Mick Gold Coast QLD said  | August 29th 2010 @ 10:46pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

          But if you’re not getting enough of the other, in between your practice sessions, it can really muck up your game, Dirty Rotten Scoundrels!

        • Lee said  | August 30th 2010 @ 5:58am (2 days ago) | Report comment

          “The more I practise, the luckier I get”

          Gary Player

          • sheek said  | August 30th 2010 @ 7:52am (2 days ago) | Report comment

            You are what you do…..often.

            Robbie Deans (soon after being appointed Wallabies coach)

            So Lee, what conclusions can we draw here…..?

            • MOTHER TERESA said  | August 30th 2010 @ 8:29am (2 days ago) | Report comment

              im upset that youre feeling bemused when most of us can see the 4 legs ,a tail and hear the barking.and from a man who told me he had good sight and ears.
              you spend a full time defending an inadequate coach who clearly was spoiled in chch with all the background music.
              now just when you thought it couldnt get worse the team does the impossible.
              next week another excuse but nothing to do with coach deans
              what is his exact %wins in the last 2years when his faulty reign effectively began.
              the joke is the law of probability will eventually see the team win and you will claim the coach was right all along;how can we question such fanciful thinking outside of a psych ward.sheek have a look around the bus is jack nicholson driving you?

            • View Mick Gold Coast QLD's Roar profile

              Mick Gold Coast QLD said  | August 30th 2010 @ 7:46pm (2 days ago) | Report comment

              Deans lost me, Mother Theresa, when he ran down to the sideline at that last lineout, shoved the specialist hooker aside and threw the ball way past, to the centre.

              I had, until then, forgiven him missing the tackle on Juan Smith when he ran through the middle of exactly where the No 12 and No 15 stand in defence. I forgave him that one ‘cos at least he had a go when he saw there were no Wallaby players – well – there to tackle Smith at the time.

    • Suzy Poison said  | August 29th 2010 @ 9:52pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

      One reason…his name is Matfield…he owns the lineout…And he has for years…it’s his world…that’s his gig. 100 caps and he makes sure of the result in the last ten. Seriously take a bow Victor. Better than Martin Johnson, Better than John Eales.
      Perhaps the best tight forward of all time. (Ok maybe a kiwi takes the claim, Maybe Colin “Pinetree” Meads, or the Welsh legend, Willie John McBride for the Lions., who changed the way rugby is played in South Africa) For me, in recent times, the only guy guy to challenge him was another Saffa. Vickerman….we are all waiting with baited breath to see if Dan is really back. If he truly is, The Wallas world cup hopes, are then level pegging with the other two tri-nations. If I was Deans I would bring Dan straight back into the team.

      • View pothale's Roar profile

        pothale said  | August 30th 2010 @ 8:21am (2 days ago) | Report comment

        “the Welsh legend, Willie John McBride for the Lions….”

        Obviously, quite a legend, even in his own country.

        That’ll be his epitaph no doubt. So good, they thought he was Wesh. :)

  • View John Davidson's Roar profile

    John Davidson said  | August 29th 2010 @ 5:32pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

    Implode. Choke. Thrown away. Fell apart. Got ahead of themselves. They all apply. The Wallabies should have won this game. Should being the key word. The main thing that let them down was the lineout. It was abysmal.

  • Tortion said  | August 29th 2010 @ 5:43pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

    I’d still rather see that Wallabies lose like that than play as they did under Eddie Jones.

  • trophymaster said  | August 29th 2010 @ 6:10pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

    I saw the Boks break the Aussies backs, simple. Second half 12/13 phases recycled – Aussies snapped. The ref was shocking and these useless Micks still spare Oz & Nz yellows/red cards while pushing Saffa sanction stats into orbit. Nice to see egg face Nigel Owens get caught farming about 10 metres for the Wallabies on the touch line (Frans Steyn pointing out how Owens had thieved territory for Oz)

  • Wot a lot of rubbish said  | August 29th 2010 @ 6:31pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

    If the Wallabies had held just a few spilled balls (notably AAC in the final minutes) or had the experience to stabilise the lineout throws (any of the last three) they were likely winners. When they held the ball they were all over the Boks.
    It was a good game. And you have to assume that this young team is getting there.

  • ibika said  | August 29th 2010 @ 7:28pm (3 days ago) | Report comment

    I agree that robbie deans and his coaching staff seem to be ineffectual..
    whatever the overall plan isnt working!
    time to change plan..

    why do they not use the bench effectively.
    why do they persist with players who are
    A) not up to it and have been giving lots of opportunity: like Brown and Mitchell.. but they are not alone.
    B) playing players in postions that they have no long term future in : ie Oconner as a long term winger?

    I also agree that Robbie deans seems very conservative and will most likely pick the same team again next week unless forced to make change by injury.
    the team at the moment is made up of alroundrs ehwo seem to flit from postion to position.. with no one “Owning” a postion and making the number theirs!!

Have your Say

If you like this article, Subscribe! Subscribe to our daily email

Please be sure to enter your name and email before submitting this comment. Please also refer to our comments policy


Hot debate

What you're Roaring!

By signing up to the daily The Roar email you'll receive all the new articles and sports opinion that we put up on the website each day - delivered direct into your inbox. For free. We think it's the best way to receive our content.

Our emails contain the article along with the images - just like on the website.