The Wallabies and Australian rugby must both change



There are two devastating statistics about the Wallaby & # 39; s and Australian rugby. The first is that the Wallaby & # 39; s have not defeated the All Blacks in Auckland since 1986. That is 32 years and it counts.

The second devastating statistic is that the Wallabies have not held the Bledisloe Cup since 2002. That is 16 years and counts.

Jump on the internet and google all the changes that have occurred in the world since 1986. It's a completely different place today when the Wallabies last defeated the All Blacks in Auckland, or held the Bledisloe Cup.

In addition, the Wallabies have only won four of the 28 ever won matches at Eden Park, Auckland. The Wallabies record until 1986 was satisfactory, four victories over 11 tests.

Since then, the Wallaby & # 39; s have lost another 17 consecutive Tests, all four in the professional era.

This is simply unacceptable, because both the Wallabies and the Australian rugby production line are supposedly producing our top line players.

I will briefly discuss the structure of Australian rugby in this essay, but head coach Michael Cheika has to get something out of his box of tricks this weekend, assuming he can find a bag of tricks and get the shock out of all the shocking victories.

Wallabies coach Michael Cheika

Mike Cheika (Photo by Dan Mullan / Getty Images)

Logic says he is hiding for nothing. He says it is important for the team to remain faithful to their processes. But on the surface, so many of those processes do not work.

The All Blacks, says their coach Steve Hansen, does not want to repeat last year's mistakes, basically taking their foot off the accelerator after hitting the Wallabies in the BC / RC opening test.

The Wallabies then jump to a surprising 17-0 lead in Dunedin in just 15 minutes and it is unlikely that this will be repeated. So what can Cheika do?

The injury of Israel Folau and the unjustified line-out give him the chance to try something radical. The All Blacks are awake for the tired old Wallas routine. It is too easy to read their game. It is time to experiment.

Bring young Tom Banks in for his first test at the back-defender and start Joe Maddocks in his first test on the wing.

Drop Brendan Foley and play both Kurtley Beale and Matt Toomua. They can alternate between 10 and 12.

Now comes the biggie and it will not be what you expect. There is a lot of comment that the Pooper is not working and I fully agree. The Pooper, for all their good work in demolition, is an obligation at the line-out.

But instead of throwing Hooper or Pocock at the bank, what can Cheika do that keeps two of his best players on the field?

The answer came via an ex-schoolmother, just like during our three weekly walk along the coast this morning. "Move Pocock to hooker" was his suggestion.

I immediately agreed with him. I have long thought that the whore should play as an extra backrower, so moving from Pocock to hooker ensures that the Wallabies still have an effective running hooker, or extra backrower, in their team.

Our current leading hookers do not seem to be able to find their goal. Tatafu Polota-Nau struggles with this problem during his career. If he can not get it now, he will clearly never get it right. Tolu Latu seems to have contracted the same illness.

Nick Bishop in an accompanying article has gone to his usual excellent lengths to analyze the Wallabies line-out forensic. It is not the fault of the whore, because the jumpers must also take some responsibility.

However, by moving Pocock to the hooker, Cheika can select a fourth specialized line-out jumper, giving them more options.

But Pocock can not throw, I hear you say. Well, we all know the kind of person who is Pocock, he is determined to make a mistake. He will practice and practice his throws until he becomes the best pitcher in the game. You can count on that.

David Pocock from Australia waits to speak with referee referee Pascal Gauzere.

David Pocock from Australia (AAP Image / David Moir)

Ok, that still does not solve all problems. But it offers a whole series of new challenges for the All Blacks that they had not considered until now.

Before I go any further, a brief comment about the condition, or alleged lack of, the Wallabies. Another Roarer made a gripping comment that it is not the fitness of the Wallabies that is the problem. If there is something, they can be overfit. The key for All Blacks is that their skill level is so much superior that it allows them to save energy.

So there you have it. The ABs seem to be fitter only because they are more efficient in performing their skills and their game plan. I fully agree with this comment.

What about the structures of Australian rugby? How can we do things differently, but more importantly, more effectively?

I suggested to my friend during my walk to disband the private school components and to take the private schools into competition with public schools, as I believe it occurs in NZ.

He replied that this would be too great a shock for them. He proposed an alternative, that community clubs play a greater role in encouraging minors, not only through elementary school, but also at secondary school.

This naturally happens to some extent now, but we have to take it to a whole new level.

My friend has two sons who are located in the respective periphery Sheffield Shield cricket squadrons in Tasmania and South Australia. He believes it was a mistake to keep his sons in the private school system, and further believes that once they moved to a district club, their development was accelerated.

His suggestion is that the schools have their association equation mid-week and that children play at the weekend for their district club.

This idea is of course not new. I remember back in the early 1970s, we had up to half a dozen boys who would play at school on Saturday afternoon for the first and second half of the rugby union, and then play for their local rugby league club on Sunday afternoon.

Whatever alternative system is chosen, we can not continue to do things in the same way, while the private schools remain a law in themselves.

As far as the NRC is concerned, while I support the concept of a national organization, for more than 45 years, but I do not accept the implementation of this NRC.

The location of teams has been hacked far too often and changed in Sydney, and the catchment area of ​​some teams is difficult to fathom, again in NSW.

There must be a platform for NSW Country and Queensland Country, but not in an attempt to ever compete with the national comp. To be.

The players of the country come together from a very wide area and have traditionally not been a central home base. Their charter is to play for a certain period of time and be seen around their entire national border.

Why is the Fiji Drua part of the NRC? Very helpful of us to invite them, but this is our comp, an Australian comp.

I do not see that New Zealand invites Samoa or Tonga into the NPC. And New Zealand has closer geographical and cultural ties with them than we do with Fiji.

Last, but no less important, the point correction was changed to accommodate 8-point attempts. It was clear that RA was not confident that the teams and players were good enough to play an attractive rugby under current laws, so they had to mess about it.

This is the big difference between NPC and NRC for those trying to make a comparison. The NPC knows exactly what it is. It does not pretend to be something else.

On the other hand, the NRC does not know what it stands for, or RA does not know what it stands for. There is too much hassle with the structure.

So Roarers, to you.


Source link

Leave a Reply