0
What a difference a week can make in the turbulent world of rugby.
The All Blacks team of 2007, who finished so powerfully against South Africa in Durban, was the opposite seven days later at Melbourne against Australia.
New Zealand won 26-21 at Durban, aided by some superb substitution decisions by coach Graham Henry. In Melbourne more or less the same decisions were made but the players did not respond with an equivalent powerhouse finish they had shown the week before. It was the Wallabies who stormed home to win 20-15 at the Melbourne Cricket Ground in front of 80,000.
At the time of writing four days have passed since the game and the defenders of the New Zealand team have been in full voice. Spend any time listening to radio or TV or perusing any newspaper and the excuses for the New Zealand loss to Australia have been getting a full airing. Try these; "The team did too much travel to South Africa and then straight back to Melbourne." "They were therefore tired," "The loss hurts, but better now than at the Rugby World Cup in a few months time, "The loss will do us good," "Dan Carter needs more rugby," and "Our team was under too much pressure!"
You get the drift? But wait - there's more!
I even heard; "The sidelines at the Melbourne Cricket Ground didn't run parallel to the grandstands so of course many of our team's kicks went out on the full," and even, "The field markings were done in yellow paint which our team couldn't quite adjust to." How funny some people are.
And it goes without saying there has also been a huge outcry about the referee, Marius Jonkers of South Africa. Those complaints about him, in summary, say he was "crap."
So what might really come out in some sort of balanced view of the game and its result?
Firstly, with a glance at history and the place of this latest game in it, it is this writer's view that the All Blacks lost to one of the most modest of Aussie rugby union teams seen in decades. Let's be quite cruel here about the make-up of the Wallaby team. Starting in the backs. Fullback Julian Huxley by his own admission is a 'stand in' who is waiting for the return of the injured Chris Latham. Huxley started badly in the game (sending the kickoff out on the full) and then played an unexceptional role in the game. A bloke by the name of Adam Ashley-Who was on one wing, and close to the scrum were two old battlers, Stephen Larkham and George Gregan. They are true stalwarts who have over 230 test caps between them; surely they should have been dominated by younger and fitter All Blacks?
In the forwards Wycliffe Palu was at number eight. Whoever heard of a rugby loose with a Christian name like his? He was floored in a collision with Jerry Collins and also played an insignificant role before being taken off. Dan Vickerman, the much vaunted lock was hardly mentioned in the commentary soundtrack, a sure sign he was not in the action. And then we come to the front row; over a beer a stern judge might say the three were either fatties, hold-overs or has-beens. Or a combination of all of the above.
That is a cruel rundown of Australia's team. It is true to say there was not a Campese, Eales, Farr-Jones, Lynagh, Horan or Kearns in sight.
But hey, the Australians of last Saturday beat the All Blacks with exactly that team of no-names. And what's more they achieved the victory in a totally commanding and fair dinkum way (their beautiful expression was never better invoked). They did it by going away just like Makybe Diva winning well across town at Flemington racecourse in the last three Melbourne Cups.
Against the Aussies were the famous All Blacks, who arrived on the field lookin' so smooth, oiled up and bandaged in all the right places. They pouted and grimaced menacingly in the haka but soon after their fighting spirit of the week before faded into the night. In the end, after the Aussies had kept them scoreless in the second half they dashed in for two late tries, one by Adam Ashley-Cooper (let's now pay our dues and compliment the fine debutant with his full name) and Scott Staniforth (the veteran, first picked as a Wallaby ten seasons ago, but who has had less than ten caps). The Wallabies, out at their 20-15 lead then rubbed salt into the wound by mocking the New Zealanders with a series of pick-and-go moves to wind the clock down and take the plaudits. But to repeat - they did it with one of their lesser-strength teams of their history.
So thinking kiwis are asking, how the heck did it happen?
It would be too easy to say New Zealand simply laid down and let a bunch of skinny kids walk all over them. No New Zealand team would have allowed that to happen. Surely not.
What did occur, and was comfortably seen by those whose vision is not distorted in judging New Zealand rugby at a time like this, was that a combination of a lack of fighting spirit, determination, momentum, performance and at times, leadership was offered in the game by New Zealand. Too many times the famous All Blacks with their loyal following watching in tens of thousands at the MCG and millions at home, did not live up to the famous colours of their forebears.
On the contrary Australia's team went beyond their personal reputations which New Zealanders had scoffed at and played hard, never gave up, fought back and surged to a win to compliment the magnificent game played by their inspired leader, the centre Stirling Mortlock.
Let's be cruel again. This time I go against what New Zealand offered. Second five-eighths Aaron Mauger had a shocker of a game. Yes we know Aaron is a very nice man, he has an educated boot and has had many fine moments in his 42-match test career - but on his play from last Saturday there ought to be a case for him to be dropped for the next couple of games. He made too many judgmental mistakes with the very strengths he has offered before. Like a test batsman out of form he has to reassess.
Inside him Daniel Carter was awful by his own standards. He should also be made to rest and re-evaluate. He looks far from his former brilliance, indeed he looks short of fired-up motivation to play right now.
Those two were perhaps the worst individual offenders in the New Zealand play, though the rest had moments of their own indifference which collectively contributed to the final result. In a number of defensive tackling situations the standards set were far below what, for instance, any team with ambitions to win the World Cup, would want. Surprisingly Richie McCaw was among the worst offenders, missing two exposed tackles which made New Zealand fans swallow hard and bite down on their usual sumptuous lashings of praise for him.
What was more noted, alarming even, was McCaw's captaincy, which at times appeared meek by comparison to the authority offered by Stirling Mortlock to the referee (assisted ably by the former captain George Gregan who seemed to raise his verbiage around referee Jonkers). McCaw hardly stepped forward at all as a captain. Dare one say it, but he looked a bit like the captain of New Zealand in the last World Cup year, Rueben Thorne. Back in 2003 Thorne was often speechless and submissive-looking in the face of upfront and assertive opposing captains. George Gregan has always played that chat well for his country. He yabbers away full-tilt until sternly advised not to by the referee. Then he always stops. A wise man.
As for the criticism of the referee Marius Jonkers, this is becoming a repetitive and boring weekly mantra of modern New Zealand rugby. Sure Mr. Jonkers was hard to understand at times, especially at scrum time, but the combined wisdom of New Zealand's much vaunted front row, Messrs Hayman, Oliver and Woodcock, could have worked out where he was coming from in his scrum decision-making. As for Carl Hayman being sin-binned at a critical time the tackle ball law clearly states that the man who is the tackler who falls to the ground has no rights to the ball and must release the tackled player immediately. Hayman seemed to claim that he was winning the ball as the player he was tackling was going to the floor. Jonkers in a split second ruled against that so Hayman had to go seeing as New Zealand at that point were on a last warning for repeated offences. There really could be no complaints by New Zealand.
Besides I did not hear any complaints about Jonkers when Woodcock's try was unseen by him and he went to the TV match official for a correct but knife-edge decision. Bravo Sir should have been said. And repeated even louder when the same ref was playing a long advantage which led to Rico Gear's spectacular try. It is tiresome when criticism is repeated every week; in essence it says when New Zealand wins the referee is great, when we don't win he is (expletive deleted) the opposite.
So even though the margin in the final outcome was only five points the final score was a thumping really. Mostly one suspects in the face of New Zealand rugby's self-esteem. Significantly, all the talk of the rotation selection system which had been lauded to the skies in Durban was not mentioned afterwards in Melbourne. In 'Durbs' Graham Henry had shucked TV's Tony Johnson on the arm in an after match interview voicing his delight and plugging the success of the rotation system. Yes, having strong players coming off the bench had worked that time but Mr. Henry was strangely subdued about the same subject a week later. It had not worked. The players off the bench looked as off the pace as those they were replacing. We must ask, why?
In fact Coach Henry compounded the problem against Australia by not bringing on replacement five-eighths Nick Evans for Dan Carter. Everybody else from the substitute's bench got a run but not Evans. The All Black backline was screaming out for some sharpening up in the last 20 minutes. If Graham Henry didn't put the Highlander's man on because he believed "Carter needed more game time, " that was a sure sign that the New Zealand coaches were prepared to overlook the result in Melbourne and instead offer Carter a full chance to play himself back into World Cup form.
That is fair enough perhaps, for Carter has been a brilliant player, but there was a Tri Nations game on the line in Melbourne. Carter's form in 2005 and 2006 has not run into 2007 for him yet. New Zealand need him to play well as history tells that any country who wants to win the World Cup has to have a star player in its midst. A la Jonny Wilkinson in 2003, Michael Lynagh in 1999, David Campese in 1991 and Michael Jones in 1987. The only exception to that was 1995 when Jonah Lomu was the star but South Africa sneaked the title.
In summary then, the result at Melbourne has to be seen as a blow to All Black momentum as they march towards the Rugby World Cup. That event is now only eight weeks away. That the Aussie team was so modest in personnel will not be lost on the well-researched All Black selectors. They will know that. They should be shocked. Barring one or two shuffles it is too late to re-shape things radically in the New Zealand team.
What the Australian loss ought to do, if nothing else is put New Zealand rugby on full alert. Coaches, players and its fans too. Despite everything that is over-blown and sometimes force-fed in home praise and staunch support for the All Blacks upsets can still happen in the professional rugby game. The one last weekend in Melbourne was one of the biggest of the last decade.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by The InnFORCEr
