Bob Dwyer Rugby Workshops

ANZ Stadium, Sydney. Saturday, 19^th June, 2010.

England reversed their form - and the result of the previous week’s encounter with the Wallabies - and earned a rare win on Australian soil last night in Sydney. The margin was only the single point but they deserved the victory, only their third from seventeen matches in Australia. Significantly, Martin Johnson has been involved in all three – two as a player and captain, including England’s World Cup victory in 2003, and now one as the coach.

Last week, I commented that three of England’s brightest newcomers - Foden, Ashton and Hape – whilst having previously given cause for much optimism, had been most inconspicuous in England’s poor performance against Australia in Perth. This week was entirely another story. They all played well in a performance full of enterprise and pace. Perhaps most significantly, they were joined by another newcomer also promising much, but this one, Ben Youngs, produced plenty. His pace and enthusiasm, not to forget his considerable talent, added much to the performance.

I had noted prematch, that a week is a long time in terms of team preparation. I was anticipating, perhaps ‘hoping’ may be the more accurate word, for a turn-around in the Wallabies’ scrum performance. There were some early signs that this may have been possible. Indeed, when England opted for a scrum on one early penalty, Australia actually wheeled them “on their own ball”, for the referee to reverse the feed at the reset. We all breathed a sigh of relief, but, alas, we had been duped. The Wallabies scrum was, once again, dominated by England and four further penalties followed. As is frequently the case in big matches, the team that dominated the scrums, controlled the game and came away with the win.

Not for a moment was it all scrums for England, for their lineout was excellent all night. Whereas the Wallabies had excelled at the touchline in Perth, it was England who were far more secure in Sydney. Australia lost four of their own throws – or turned over sloppy delivery at the close tackle – while England were secure on all of their throws. Youngs was alert and agile behind his pack and this added another, much needed, dimension to the ball delivery. If you also consider the threat that his excellent pace poses to any defence, his midfield had so much more room to move. It was Luke Burgess who was able to provide this space last week, but it was clearly Youngs who delivered last night.

Selection is such a vital part of the game, at any level. It is not an easy task; you always know a lot more after the event. However, there are some guidelines which help. One is fitness – I mean, ‘freedom from injury’. It is extremely difficult to produce the required performance at this level, if you are hampered by injury. Surely, Will Genia was not ‘free of injury’. He has been one of a handful of dominant players in this year’s Super 14, but he was way “off the pace” last night. It is the scrum-half’s role to ‘mop up’ in behind the forward pack in defence. Any line breaks in this area were covered by punishing tackles, last weekend, by Luke Burgess. England scored twice through this channel last night and Genia was nowhere to be seen.

Indeed, the Wallaby selectors made two changes from the previous game for last night – Genia for Burgess, and Giteau for Barnes – and in both cases, in my opinion, the changes backfired. I know that Giteau scored two tries – and well done by him – but he contributed only a little for each. In addition, he kicked poorly for goal. “Four from eight” is just not good enough and to miss a sitter, which could well have given his team the win, is totally unacceptable.

It has become the ‘rule’ in the last season or so, for this Wallaby team to take one step forward and then one, or even two, steps backward. We are then patronized by the team management with platitudes of “World Cup development”, striving to give us the impression that there is light at the end of the (horror) tunnel. There is no light; we simply do not have the personnel on the field at the moment to allow for their development into a world-class team.

In after-match discussion, a group of us pondered – comparing this team with those of the 1991 and 1995 World Cup winners. “Where are the Daley, Kearns and McKenzies? Where are the Eales, McCalls, Ofahengaues? Farr-Jones, Lynagh, Horan and Little? from 1991.” “Where are the Harry’s, Foley and Blades’s? Giffin, Kefu? Gregan, Larkam, Roff, Tune or Burkes of 1995?” There are very few comparisons. This group just don’t stack up. Development must be seen to be leading somewhere and there must timelines for some result/s. From my point of view, I see players in this squad who, even at the peak of their development, will not be players of true international class. It is fruitless to continue with them; far better to use, at least temporarily, the battle-hardened ‘old guys’ who will do enough to assist in the development of some potential real quality around them.

For England there was some progress. There is ‘substance’, if lacking somewhat in athleticism, sprinkled through the team. The front-row are big and strong, as is required of their roles. Tom Palmer has played well in both games and has many qualities – his inside pass for Ashton’s try displayed skill and vision. Hape, Foden and Ashton can all take you where you want to go. Cueto continues to be a good player.

On current form, and my assessment of their respective potential, I don’t see either team as winning quarter-finalists next year, and, of the two, I see England as the more likely to alter my opinion.

As I said, you need ‘substance’ to achieve this not-so-easy result.

On the subject of the referee, I can only say similarly to last week, about a different one. He was awful, as was expected. The assistant’s role on the touch-line last week was beyond him. He was never going to be able to manage the top role in the centre. It’s clearly not his fault; I blame the guys who select out ‘top officials’. They should be replaced by men who understand the roles – their’s as selectors, and their choice’s as referees.

Last weekend, England were allowed to do as they wished at the scrum. This week, in addition, they could do as they wished at the tackle, at the off-side line, in continually feigning injury to slow down the game, with the lack of protocol in the substitution of players. I saw two cynical breaches, in ‘the red zone’, with no hint of a yellow card. I have been of the understanding that a ‘punch’ is an automatic yellow card – but not for M. Pointe!

The control by the referee gives shape to our game; the shape that was envisaged by the law-makers. Without that control, the shape disappears and the game can become a shambles – and it was!