0
Bret Harris | September 21, 2009
Article from: The Australian
THE Rugby Club television show on Fox Sports introduced a new segment this year called "Piggies versus Princesses" in which a back and a forward are pitted against each other in trivia quizzes, table tennis battles and cook-offs.
It is pretty silly stuff, but it highlights the demarcation that still exists between backs and forwards, at least in Australian rugby.
When people talk about 15-man rugby they are usually referring to attacking strategies, but the philosophy covers every aspect of the game.
Just like forwards should be able to run and pass like backs, backs must be capable of competing at the ruck and mauls like forwards.
Unfortunately, this was not the case for the Wallabies in their 33-6 loss to the All Blacks in Wellington on Saturday night.
Australia's backline is skilful and slick, but it is relatively small and non-combative at the contact zone.
One of the reasons for this is that the Wallabies are effectively playing with three five-eighths -- inside backs Matt Giteau and Berrick Barnes and fullback James O'Connor.
Barnes and O'Connor are quite courageous in the way they attack the breakdown, but because of their lack of size, they are largely ineffective.
Most of the other Australian backs tend to leave the hard yakka at the breakdown to the forwards, unlike the New Zealand backs, who train to be as physical and aggressive at the breakdown as the loose forwards.
This is one of the reasons the Wallabies stand tight five forwards out wide on phase play -- to help the backs at the breakdown.
"It's to mix it up a little bit," Wallabies loosehead prop Benn Robinson said. "They see a couple of props on the wing and they might change their defence a little bit.
"It's mainly to look after the breakdown. The forwards' ability to look after the breakdown compared to a back is a lot different."
Having tight five forwards running out wide did not really add anything to the Wallabies' attack. If anything, it hindered it.
Robinson and hooker Tatafu Polota-Nau both knocked on as the ball was shifted to the edges.
If a player is tackled out wide, the backs should be able to take care of the breakdown themselves.
It is the responsibility of the players closest to the tackle area to enter the breakdown whether they are backs or forwards and to operate efficiently.
But the Wallabies were not just dominated physically in the backs. They were outmuscled across the board in the tackle contest.
From the kickoff, the All Blacks won every physical contact area in the game, although the set pieces were fairly even, at least until towards the end.
Wallabies captain George Smith constantly complained to referee Craig Joubert about the All Blacks infringing at the breakdown, but the Wallabies have to learn to play the whistle and not become distracted by perceived illegalities.
The Wallabies' poor performance was all the more disappointing because they had performed so well in this area in their 21-6 win against the Springboks in Brisbane two weeks ago.
"We weren't happy with any of the ruck and maul work regardless of the numbers on their backs," Deans said. "It had been so much better two weeks ago against a side that is probably the toughest in that area."
That is the most frustrating element of this Australian team: inconsistency.
It is a trait Deans has inherited from his predecessors. In 14 years of Tri-Nations rugby, the Wallabies have recorded back-to-back wins only seven times.
Deans has been trying to instil self-belief into the Wallabies since he took over last year, but there is a fine line between confidence and over-confidence.
As much as Deans warned his players of an All Black backlash after New Zealand's 32-29 loss to the Springboks in Hamilton the previous Saturday, they seemed to be in the wrong head space after their own win against South Africa in Brisbane.
"Without a doubt. That's what you witnessed," Deans said. "We went from being desperate to play well and represent our people well to being a little bit comfortable and expecting others to take care of what is ours to take care of. That's all it takes."
And that brings us back to Piggies versus Princesses. It may be a little bit of fun on a TV show, but it is an outdated concept in modern rugby, particularly at the breakdown where demarcation lines become indistinct.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au...015651,00.html