Is Australian Rugby a cot case?

Loss to the B&I Lions. Shut out of the Bledisloe for 11 years. The most dangerous player benched and a Kiwi anyway. Another Kiwi starting in his place. It's a shambles. The scrum is a global laughing stock and these genuinely are the best players available. Beneath them is thin air.

Deans is lucky to escape after having somehow held them in second spot through his tenure. But the decline has begun already and I can't see it being reversed.

I wonder if Australia will be the first casualty of professional rugby, the Wales of their era as it were.

Lol  

What can be done? First Australia have too many super rugby franchises. They play largely in isolation in a weak conference. I'd strip this back to three. NSW and Queensland and another walkabout team who play in Canberra, Perth, Adelaide, wherever.  This will allow those teams weekly competition outside of Oz against quality opposition and leave space for the much deserved extra SA side. 

This will also allow combinations to build in key areas and a distinct set if game plans. I'd encourage the walkabout team to play like barbarians, grasping the Ozzie desire for entertaining rugby. The other two can focus on developing set piece skills much lacking at the moment and a close quarters patient accumulating style.

As it stands the decline if Australian rugby is hurting the games international standing and the SANZAR nations who no longer have the  intensity in the RC due to dual weak links Australia and Argentina.

Yes, Australian rugby is an absolute basket case. If only we could master the art of the cynical foul and the shoulder charge.

Watch the springboks lose against this weak Wallabies.  

Don't think so BT. I think SA will win the RC this year.

Biltong wrote:Watch the springboks lose against this weak Wallabies.  

You're doing it wrong. The idea is that the human, male and rugby fan's psyche (virtually all the various shades of psyche combined!) forbid the admission of any weakness or vulnerability regarding one's own side. Additionally all other teams, are to be considered at a lower, less advanced level of skill, potential and achievement. All are to be belittled in equal measure but in varying proportions, their proudest moments devalued and all credibility underlying the team as a whole dismantled. No concessions whatsoever ought to be made concerning the opposition's strengths and positive traits save in expressions of mocking contempt. This applies most especially to sides experiencing a particularly poor run of form, the likes of whom ought to be disparaged relentlessly.

Knowsit17 wrote:

Biltong wrote:Watch the springboks lose against this weak Wallabies.  

You're doing it wrong. The idea is that the human, male and rugby fan's psyche (virtually all the various shades of psyche combined!) forbid the admission of any weakness or vulnerability regarding one's own side. Additionally all other teams, are to be considered at a lower, less advanced level of skill, potential and achievement. All are to be belittled in equal measure but in varying proportions, their proudest moments devalued and all credibility underlying the team as a whole dismantled. No concessions whatsoever ought to be made concerning the opposition's strengths and positive traits save in expressions of mocking contempt. This applies most especially to sides experiencing a particularly poor run of form, the likes of whom ought to be disparaged relentlessly.

 


Sorry, should have known that.

Knowsit17 wrote:

Biltong wrote:Watch the springboks lose against this weak Wallabies.  

You're doing it wrong. The idea is that the human, male and rugby fan's psyche (virtually all the various shades of psyche combined!) forbid the admission of any weakness or vulnerability regarding one's own side. Additionally all other teams, are to be considered at a lower, less advanced level of skill, potential and achievement. All are to be belittled in equal measure but in varying proportions, their proudest moments devalued and all credibility underlying the team as a whole dismantled. No concessions whatsoever ought to be made concerning the opposition's strengths and positive traits save in expressions of mocking contempt. This applies most especially to sides experiencing a particularly poor run of form, the likes of whom ought to be disparaged relentlessly.

Ah! The aptly named Knowsit hits the nail square between the eyes.

Let us not forget Scotland. What have they ever achieved? And should they go into self enforced exile from international rugby until they are not so singly and irredeemably rubbish?

Biltong wrote:

Knowsit17 wrote:

Biltong wrote:Watch the springboks lose against this weak Wallabies.  

You're doing it wrong. The idea is that the human, male and rugby fan's psyche (virtually all the various shades of psyche combined!) forbid the admission of any weakness or vulnerability regarding one's own side. Additionally all other teams, are to be considered at a lower, less advanced level of skill, potential and achievement. All are to be belittled in equal measure but in varying proportions, their proudest moments devalued and all credibility underlying the team as a whole dismantled. No concessions whatsoever ought to be made concerning the opposition's strengths and positive traits save in expressions of mocking contempt. This applies most especially to sides experiencing a particularly poor run of form, the likes of whom ought to be disparaged relentlessly.

 


Sorry, should have known that.

I'd have thought a mod and one of our most experienced contributors would be wise to it by now  

It fits together in such a rational sequence. Oz have now lost 4 of their last 5, it follows that they are and always have been a side of questionable ability and limited success or, as the OP so eloquently put it, a "cot case" (whatever that may be). The evidence of recent events is enough to confirm their status as whipping boys of the top brass, the worst of a good bunch one might say, forever flirting with and struggling not to sink below the line that separates the SH of the rest of the world.

There have even been talks within the SARU and the NZRU of moving the Australian landmass smack bang in the middle of the Atlantic so that the reputation of the SH need not suffer further as a result.

 

It is going to take some doing to get that land mass across the equator.

Moving the land mass would be ridiculous.
Merely redefining the location of the equator will suffice !

True, it is only an imaginary line anyway, isn't it.

Besides imagine how confused those Ozzies will get when their bathwater starts running out anti clockwise.

Biltong wrote: 

It is going to take some doing to get that land mass across the equator.

... and halfway around the world into another ocean.

Full Credit wrote:

Biltong wrote: 

It is going to take some doing to get that land mass across the equator.

... and halfway around the world into another ocean.

I was wondering whether they will bring it around the Cape of Good hope or the other way, both south seas are prtty dangerous.

Full Credit wrote:

Biltong wrote: 

It is going to take some doing to get that land mass across the equator.

... and halfway around the world into another ocean.

Roughly judging by the size of Australia and the Atlantic respectively, it's hard to see there being that much ocean left by the time they've got there. On the plus side it might be quicker and cheaper to get across to America now with all the additional ports and airports in between.

GloriousEmpire wrote:

Knowsit17 wrote:

Biltong wrote:Watch the springboks lose against this weak Wallabies.  

You're doing it wrong. The idea is that the human, male and rugby fan's psyche (virtually all the various shades of psyche combined!) forbid the admission of any weakness or vulnerability regarding one's own side. Additionally all other teams, are to be considered at a lower, less advanced level of skill, potential and achievement. All are to be belittled in equal measure but in varying proportions, their proudest moments devalued and all credibility underlying the team as a whole dismantled. No concessions whatsoever ought to be made concerning the opposition's strengths and positive traits save in expressions of mocking contempt. This applies most especially to sides experiencing a particularly poor run of form, the likes of whom ought to be disparaged relentlessly.

Ah! The aptly named Knowsit hits the nail square between the eyes.

Let us not forget Scotland. What have they ever achieved? And should they go into self enforced exile from international rugby until they are not so singly and irredeemably rubbish?

You should leave the Scots alone, you've a lot to thank them for. Without them you wouldn't have your enviable record of having more Scottish pipe bands per head of population in NZ than in Scotland.

What else would you have to do in the close season, watch re runs of sheepdog of the year on T.V?

To be fair Oz are a pretty damn decent Union side, especially when you consider the unique Football code war that exists there. Somthing only England might appreciate, though given our population mass we appear to deal with it better.
For England Soccer is God of the codes with Union and its greater international rugby opportunities along way behind, though ahead of League. In Oz the NRL and AFL head Union by some distance.
The fact is while the All Blacks are the kings of the Union Game the Kangaroos are their equal in League and so dominate the Wallabies across nearly all levels.
Perhaps Oz needs to focus on developing a domestic Union competition if it wants to compete at home and so challenge more abroad. This really is the crux, however they might have already lost one domestic battle too many with the NRL and so may as predicted above become the new 'insert country of your choice'. That said, for a Union national side supposedly struggling so badly they are still pretty damn decent.

tigerleghorn wrote:

GloriousEmpire wrote:

Knowsit17 wrote:

Biltong wrote:Watch the springboks lose against this weak Wallabies.  

You're doing it wrong. The idea is that the human, male and rugby fan's psyche (virtually all the various shades of psyche combined!) forbid the admission of any weakness or vulnerability regarding one's own side. Additionally all other teams, are to be considered at a lower, less advanced level of skill, potential and achievement. All are to be belittled in equal measure but in varying proportions, their proudest moments devalued and all credibility underlying the team as a whole dismantled. No concessions whatsoever ought to be made concerning the opposition's strengths and positive traits save in expressions of mocking contempt. This applies most especially to sides experiencing a particularly poor run of form, the likes of whom ought to be disparaged relentlessly.

Ah! The aptly named Knowsit hits the nail square between the eyes.

Let us not forget Scotland. What have they ever achieved? And should they go into self enforced exile from international rugby until they are not so singly and irredeemably rubbish?

You should leave the Scots alone, you've a lot to thank them for. Without them you wouldn't have your enviable record of having more Scottish pipe bands per head of population in NZ than in Scotland.

What else would you have to do in the close season, watch re runs of sheepdog of the year on T.V?

Oops, sorry, forget the bit about sheepdog of the year, you left New Zealand to live in England didn't you GE?

I think Australia's problem is structural. I'm guessing there are a number of issues. These are the main ones:

1: They struggle to retain talent. If South Africa is bleeding players to Europe and NZ is bleeding players to Europe and to Australian rugby league spare a point for the Aussies. They are in an increasingly competitive market where kids with rugby skills can be contracted to other codes. School sports are an increasingly competitive market with players being targeted at young ages. The average players earns more money as a junior (under 20) in the NRL or AFL.

2: Something about Australian rugby doesn't produce quality international scrumagers. It's the achilles heel of the sport.

3: They lack a quality professional domestic competition. They don't have an equivalent of the Currie Cup, ITM CUP, Premiership or Top 14 to develop their players from juniors to quality professionals.

I wonder whether they are that bad. They have had significant injury issues in the last couple of years. They don't have a huge depth and sometimes drop games they should win (e.g. Scotland or Samoa), but they are arguably still one of the top sides in the world (even, if they have just dropped below England).

I suspect a team with Higgenbottom at No 8 and Beale at Fullback would be more competitive.

tigerleghorn wrote:

GloriousEmpire wrote:

Knowsit17 wrote:

Biltong wrote:Watch the springboks lose against this weak Wallabies.  

You're doing it wrong. The idea is that the human, male and rugby fan's psyche (virtually all the various shades of psyche combined!) forbid the admission of any weakness or vulnerability regarding one's own side. Additionally all other teams, are to be considered at a lower, less advanced level of skill, potential and achievement. All are to be belittled in equal measure but in varying proportions, their proudest moments devalued and all credibility underlying the team as a whole dismantled. No concessions whatsoever ought to be made concerning the opposition's strengths and positive traits save in expressions of mocking contempt. This applies most especially to sides experiencing a particularly poor run of form, the likes of whom ought to be disparaged relentlessly.

---

Ah! The aptly named Knowsit hits the nail square between the eyes.

Let us not forget Scotland. What have they ever achieved? And should they go into self enforced exile from international rugby until they are not so singly and irredeemably rubbish?

You should leave the Scots alone, you've a lot to thank them for. Without them you wouldn't have your enviable record of having more Scottish pipe bands per head of population in NZ than in Scotland.

What else would you have to do in the close season, watch re runs of sheepdog of the year on T.V?

Yes true! NZ are the current reigning pipe band world champions. I wonder if we shouldn't add some
Pipers to the next Haka?

 

Ah GE the founder member of the wum of the month club,the inmates have taken over the asylum during my enforced absences.Many of the matches Wallabies lost in recent years.
Down to lack of a reliable goalkicker.Considering the injury levels in First Lions test which they should have won incidentally, and with current kicker incumbent would have almost certainly.
Injuries heal,gameplans change,a match turn on an incident example Moore incident ruled
a try,conversion,and a 4 point game.AllBlacks having to chase the game instead of just
closing up shop second half.
McKenzie will have to revert to the Reds gameplan or similar,percentage Rugby or a pale
copy of Boks gameplan.Won`t beat SA anywhere."A fixed gameplan"  doesn't work you need
to be able to adapt on the field that takes old hands.Come back George Smith all is forgiven.
"Winning Rugby"is the most overused one in Rugby and means" stuck in a rut can`t adapt"
As Kia wrote you have to go with the players you have and adapt a gameplan to suit them.

Full Credit wrote:Yes, Australian rugby is an absolute basket case. If only we could master the art of the cynical foul and the shoulder charge.

Come on FC mate you're better than that. You guys have mastered obstruction pretty well. NZ would have won had those transgressions been punished as they so merited.

Due to the greater emphasis on big hits and frequency of collisions rugby is evolving into a squad game more and more. This is why England are on the rise and Australia are falling away.

In the Lions series the Aussies dropped like flies and were pummeled in the end as a result as expected. France and England will have massive squads of South African and Pacific Island players pretty soon and will do very well at the world cup.

The 3 year residency rule needs to be doubled to 6 years or even 7 years before it really gets out of hand.

First of all, "Most dangerous player is on the bench"... I'd change that to "Most inconsistent player is on the bench"... I might be willing to accept him starting at 10 if he can string a few decent games together where there are no silly passes, pointless wrap arounds and kicks to no where. In my opinion, he is an erratic player who makes too many silly mistakes, but has potential. Some moments of brilliance so far but doesn't deserve to replace Toomua.

Australian Rugby isn't in bad place just now. I think what has been concerning is the off field antics of a few talented individuals and the disagreement between previous coach and some players. Ewen Mckenzie is the new coach and I think he'll do a better job than Deans. Being handed NZ as your two first fixtures was never going to be easy and I think Australia performed better than I thought they would against NZ, even with some important players injured. Come the Autumn internationals, I can't see any NH team beating them. JOC is back where he should be, on the wing causing mayhem. Toomua is doing well at 10 so far. In my view, the thing that is lacking is the tactics and finishing in attack. However, that will come on as the team progresses through the championship.

As far as the Rugby Championship is concerned, I would hope that Australia can win all their remaining fixtures, although winning away in SA may be a tough one to accomplish, as it is tough for any team to do. Away in Argentina will also be tough.

bsando wrote:First of all, "Most dangerous player is on the bench"... I'd change that to "Most inconsistent player is on the bench"... I might be willing to accept him starting at 10 if he can string a few decent games together where there are no silly passes, pointless wrap arounds and kicks to no where. In my opinion, he is an erratic player who makes too many silly mistakes, but has potential. Some moments of brilliance so far but doesn't deserve to replace Toomua.

Australian Rugby isn't in bad place just now. I think what has been concerning is the off field antics of a few talented individuals and the disagreement between previous coach and some players. Ewen Mckenzie is the new coach and I think he'll do a better job than Deans. Being handed NZ as your two first fixtures was never going to be easy and I think Australia performed better than I thought they would against NZ, even with some important players injured. Come the Autumn internationals, I can't see any NH team beating them. JOC is back where he should be, on the wing causing mayhem. Toomua is doing well at 10 so far. In my view, the thing that is lacking is the tactics and finishing in attack. However, that will come on as the team progresses through the championship.

As far as the Rugby Championship is concerned, I would hope that Australia can win all their remaining fixtures, although winning away in SA may be a tough one to accomplish, as it is tough for any team to do. Away in Argentina will also be tough.

I agree with a lot of what you say except the challenge of NH teams. Dont forget that France hammered Australia in their last encounter. Granted they wont be playing France but Ireland also beat Australia they last time the sides met, Scotland have also done well and England and Wales have both run Australia very close. I think Australia will be doing really really well to beat England, Wales, Scotland and Ireland in Nov especially given the fact that Australia rarely put four wins in in a row.

disneychilly wrote:

Full Credit wrote:Yes, Australian rugby is an absolute basket case. If only we could master the art of the cynical foul and the shoulder charge.

Come on FC mate you're better than that. You guys have mastered obstruction pretty well. NZ would have won had those transgressions been punished as they so merited.

We can't have mastered it too well when Hooper's being pinged for it when he hadn't even obstructed anyone as far as I could tell. Anyway, my post was aimed at the wum OP more so than NZ rugby in general. It's impossible to know if NZ would have won had those offences been punished. It's equally fanciful for me to say that the Wallabies would have won by a record margin had we been playing 14 men for 20 minutes.

That said, there is something lacking with the current Wallaby setup that isn't the referee or opponents fault.... pride in the jersey springs to mind.

Sometimes you get a reputation for foul play and it unfortunately sticks. If I were the wallabies if look at myself instead if others. 

Remember when bakkies got yellow carded for an innocuous shove on McCaw? Reputation. 

The Aussies have a lot of weakness at the moment and their reputation precedes them in obstruction, poor scrumming and infringements in the red zone.

Full Credit wrote:

disneychilly wrote:

Full Credit wrote:Yes, Australian rugby is an absolute basket case. If only we could master the art of the cynical foul and the shoulder charge.

Come on FC mate you're better than that. You guys have mastered obstruction pretty well. NZ would have won had those transgressions been punished as they so merited.

We can't have mastered it too well when Hooper's being pinged for it when he hadn't even obstructed anyone as far as I could tell. Anyway, my post was aimed at the wum OP more so than NZ rugby in general. It's impossible to know if NZ would have won had those offences been punished. It's equally fanciful for me to say that the Wallabies would have won by a record margin had we been playing 14 men for 20 minutes.

That said, there is something lacking with the current Wallaby setup that isn't the referee or opponents fault.... pride in the jersey springs to mind.

Or if the Wallabies had been reduced to 14 men prior to that or had received a number of penalties. It's circular. I'm all for Link asking questions though. A 2:1 penalty count is worth a question.

Jake White recently took the brumbies and a squad of nobodies to within a sniff of SR glory. Had they been anywhere else outside of the Chiefs backyard I think they would have made it home.

Everyone bar NZ has cyclical periods of good times and bad times. They have great backs but struggle upfront... sometimes they are able to compete, often not. If they concentrate on building a forwards base and specifically a tight five then I think they would be unstoppable. If this is the worst of their cycle then I think the game is in good hands.

The reds pull in 33K fans each home game.... thats impressive in any country and better than any NRL side (the bronco's are marginally less in the same stadium).. the best supported side in Australian sport???? Not certain but probable. With stats like that the game isn't on its deathbed.

I certainly back them to beat the boks at home in the next game... they always do.