England to whitewash Australia

mariner4life

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Catogrande" data-cid="588349" data-time="1465993859">
<div>
What about Dean Mumm? Not an out and out line out man but certainly no slouch. Got tons of experience too. Fit enough to go 80.
</div>
</blockquote>
 
But generally a bit shit.

NTA

Mumm has the disease a lot of our locks have: stupid fucking penalties. Particularly at lineout or in the subsequent drive.

Provincial Stalwart

We didn't notice a difference in the RWC final when Douglas went off with a busted ankle (?) and Mumm came on.
 
lying

Provincial Stalwart

First rate write ups Mick.
 
Without wanting to get into national stereotypes, Eddie Jones V1.0 - assuming he hasn't reinvented himself as Eddie 2.0 to be a Hansen-style coach, motivator, investigator, problem solver and father figure to players - may have worked such a treat with Japan because (i) Jones shared ancestry with most of the team and (ii) Japanese society seems to me to be generally industrious, well ordered, law abiding and deferential to authority. Basically I am saying the players probably shut up and did whatever Jones said they should, at maximum effort. He helped raise their game to unprecedented success - they beat Wales in 2013 (albeit a 2nd XV while the Lions tour was on), top 10 ranking, and then RWC 2015 - the mother of all upsets vs. the Boks and a dominant defeat of Samoa. Hell, Japan somehow even contained Luke Whitelock in 2013 in his cameo off the bench for the ABs.
 
To me, the England players (plus players from most other Anglo and Latin societies in countries that play rugby seriously) don't seem to come from a society which has the characteristics of Japan (I'm not criticising these societies here) so long term it makes me wonder what happens to the team when results go pear-shaped, as they almost inevitably will, and Eddie's style goes under the microscope. The trick is for coaches to tune into whatever makes relatively pampered young men respond and perform.
 
I don't think young men in NZ come from a society that respects and responds to authority particularly naturally or successfully but the ABs organisation post John Mitchell has somehow bridged that gap.

SammyC

I think Eddies a great coach.
 
Not every coach has to mimic what has worked for Hansen and the ABs. Look at Craig Bellamy for example, ruthless hard taskmaster and he's been pretty successful doing that.

KiwiMurph

I think the other area the Wallabies need to focus on is their kicking game and option taking. Field kicking isn't always a strength under Cheika coached teams, they prefer to keep ball in hand, but if the defenses are up to it this can limit their options. 
 
There was a key moment in the game on Saturday, Wallabies were up 10-0 and humming, got a turnover on halfway, then Phipps put in a rubbish box kick/kick over the top from the turnover which went straight to an English player, which then a few phases later resulted in a penalty, 10-3 and the game changed from there.

NTA

A couple of times, consecutive penalties against didn't help us either. Let the Poms take a kick for touch, and chances are you'll be in your own half. Give away another penalty and you'll either be on your line or watching the ball sail over for 3.

ACT Crusader

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Provincial Stalwart" data-cid="588589" data-time="1466039260">
I don't think young men in NZ come from a society that respects and responds to authority particularly naturally or successfully but the ABs organisation post John Mitchell has somehow bridged that gap.</blockquote>
 
Without overgeneralising this, my experience dealing with NZ young men with Samoan heritage is that they generally do. If there is a fa'amatai or chief around they are very respectful. If there is a grandparent around they listen. 
It was interesting reading when Tana was captain and the players with Samoan heritage would go out of their way for him.

hurricane

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="mariner4life" data-cid="588519" data-time="1466031896">
<div>
But generally a bit shit. 
</div>
</blockquote>
 
Thank you for this - I thought for a second I was the only one who didn't rate Mumm.
 
Just watch the last 15 minutes of the RWC final. There is a crucial knock on by Mumm and then the ABs don't give up the ball again for the next 6 minutes which helped kill off the Aussie comeback
 
As soon as I saw him take the field in the final I quietly suspected it would be a crucial moment in the match. He is one Australian player who would be overlooked by many other countries except for the likes of Italy.

hurricane

I would be playing McCalman at number 8 instead of McMahon. I know McCalman is well tried and hasn't set the world alight at test level, but I think it will take a number of games for McMahon to learn the number 8 jersey from a set peice perspective and I would rather just have a solid player at 8 than gamble on McMahon doing some game changing line breaks.

antipodean

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="hurricane" data-cid="588723" data-time="1466061774">
<div>
He is one Australian player who would be overlooked by many other countries except for the likes of Italy.
</div>
</blockquote>
 
Parisse light?
 
Mumm's a poor lock, he just doesn't have the impact and plays too loose. Much better suited to a loose forward.

hurricane

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="antipodean" data-cid="588727" data-time="1466062228">
<div>
Parisse light?
 
Mumm's a poor lock, he just doesn't have the impact and plays too loose. Much better suited to a loose forward.
</div>
</blockquote>
 
He is frequently penalised as well. 
 
Even though I try not to swear in my posts unless I am doing it to be a colourful I am starting to think the first poster (mariner) described him well enough when he said he's "a bit shit".

NTA

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="hurricane" data-cid="588728" data-time="1466062483">
<div>
Even though I try not to swear in my posts 
</div>
</blockquote>
 
The fuck? That is some pretty bullshit there - go to town my man. Its the fucking internet!
 
;)

Crucial

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="ACT Crusader" data-cid="588673" data-time="1466050933">Without overgeneralising this, my experience dealing with NZ young men with Samoan heritage is that they generally do. If there is a fa'amatai or chief around they are very respectful. If there is a grandparent around they listen. 
It was interesting reading when Tana was captain and the players with Samoan heritage would go out of their way for him.</blockquote>
Totally off topic but this is in part one reason why I think T will quietly work his way up through the coaching ranks to be AB coach one day.

hurricane

@NTA - the reason for the reticence to swear is that I am a Christian bloke - but will occassionally swear if the moment demands it. Or if I think it will be humorous.
 
 
So I have a very tentative point I want to make and would like to request up front no flames please. If it sounds like I am smoking something then please just let me know and I will drop my point. I respect the opinion of the TSF posters so I want some feedback on the following.
 
I have been following Australian rugby all my life. Most of the time we have better forwards than them and hence we win the game. In a lot of those years the Aussie backline has been world class; players like Nick Farr Jones, Campese, Horan, Folau, Beale, Giteau, AAC are all immensely talented.
 
I feel that Australian rugby victories are very much built on winning the battle up front and gaining the hard yards and then spinning it wide for the backs to do their work.
Now pretty much all sides subscribe to that philosophy. And definitely the All Blacks do. But should Australia?
 
Should the Australian team learn and practice in game tactics for when they meet a stronger pack like the ABs or the mighty England pack. Because it seems like they often meet these circumstances and don't have a plan B. Plan A is "let's win this up front boys and establish a platform" and then when that doesn't work there is no adjustment.
Is there any merit to Australia developing tactics for when they are being dominated up front and somehow bringing their backs more into the game as a counter measure and just clearing the base quickly to the backs?
 
Any responses valued.

NTA

Well, that is pretty much what we do already - rely on the backs. The depth of our school and club level competitions doesn't really allow for development in the forwards because a few bigger kids in the backline will allow you to dominate.

barbarian

The problem, hurricane, is that IMO if you are beaten in the forwards you will lose the game 80-90% of the time. It's just a basic tenet of rugby, and I don't think there is a way to get around that, even with the slickest backs imaginable.

hurricane

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="barbarian" data-cid="588754" data-time="1466070623">
<div>
The problem, hurricane, is that IMO if you are beaten in the forwards you will lose the game 80-90% of the time. It's just a basic tenet of rugby, and I don't think there is a way to get around that, even with the slickest backs imaginable.
</div>
</blockquote>
 
Thanks barbarian appreciate the answer! 
 
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="NTA" data-cid="588753" data-time="1466070415">
<div>
Well, that is pretty much what we do already - rely on the backs. The depth of our school and club level competitions doesn't really allow for development in the forwards because a few bigger kids in the backline will allow you to dominate.
</div>
</blockquote>
 
Thanks NTA - I am very interested in stories about Aussie rugby at the development level. And in the past, and it may have been your answer, enjoyed a post an Australian member made explaining the incredible depth in the number 7 jersey in Aussie rugby vs the number 8 jersey.
 
All for now - thanks again for the feedback gents :)

Siam

Hurricane, from my biased vantage point, (as an AB fan), I've always believed the Wallabies to be at their best when they achieve pretty much parity in the tight 5 (Aussies have always had good as any looses I reckon), have a reliable line out and tackle like absolute madmen. The backs have always run onto the ball well and the passing generally always fine - I attribute their back skills to weather and local grass conditions.
 
The best Aussie teams I've seen have played at pace and tackled like machines. In the late 90's, the Eales team were a great example. he sorted line outs, the scrum was just a restart, Herbert and Horan made it impossible for us to get through and Roff, Tune etc all fed off the silky passing of George and Stephen.
 
When they'd beat the ABs, and even lately, the knee-jerk reaction from us would be "bloody forwards too soft, get the blanket out to throw over them and we'll be right." Invariably the next game would be a marked improvement and commitment of the AB tight five and most times we'd win.
 
Oddly enough the Saffas still got done over more than they should have by the Wallabies but that was a pace of the game thing I reckon.
 
Sorry Hurricane I've used 20 times more words to verbosely say what Nick and Barbs said.
 
Upshot is that this Saturday the Aussies will be haring around all over the place, avoiding tight 5 trench exchanges, moaning at the refs when English players go down with "injuries" and going side to side like they did in the first 10 last week and like Cheika bemoaned in the aftermath that they didn't do enough.
 
Well I think so anyway but for sure it'll be riveting viewing for 80 mins this weekend. Good stuff England and Australia !!

barbarian

Found this on twitter, fantastic article which explains the attacking structure Cheika and Larkham are using:
 
<a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='https://t.co/AvGp710V41'>https://t.co/AvGp710V41</a>

The Silver Fern

England to whitewash Australia