[2015 TRC] Australia v South Africa in Brisbane (18/07/2015)

[NamWarrior]

i can't see how the TMO can watch each angle 3/4 times and decide it was conclusive enough to award the try, surely you'd only have to watch them once or twice. maybe i'm being biased but i don't think it was conclusive enough, was it all in one movement? i'm not so sure.

to be fair to the TMO it was pretty much 50/50 and i can see why he gave it.

the boks only have themselves to blame as usual, continually kicking the ball away when there was no need and the majority of the time it was going straight to an opposition player. don't even get me started on the replacements.

 

[Kiwi_]

Pocock makes Australia a different team. Offers so much. Horwill needs to start as well.

On the try - I think it was a good call, you can see he puts it down at one point. Especially form the back end ground angle.

 

[austingtir]

Yeah, Lealiifano is pretty good as well.

Yep Lealifano would deffo be the better backup than foley.

 

[SomeOke]

Great game, and well done Wallabies as I've said. I thought both Hooper and Pocock were brilliant an you really need to make space for them I feel.
Heineke Meyer as much as I rate him as a selector of players has the tendency to pre-arrange his substitutions, the entire front row swap at 50 minutes was clearly a plan, but didn't make sense in the context of the game with BdP playing well, and the scrums completely under control. Whether our lack of scrum dominance was down to the Wallaby reserves or our reserves is up for debate, but I still feel the substitutions were premature.

Additionally our exit strategy throughout the second hand was extremely poor, I'm not sure how kicking an up and under to Folau every time we regain possession is seen as an effective tactic, the Wallabies are not the only team who will punish us for this either.

Anyway I'm not that disappointed, there were some good signs, especially from our lock pairing (post-Vic) and our backline which is looking good. I'm also happy for the Wallabies as they've been some what written off before the WC and it shows that they are a force to be reckoned with and not to be underestimated.

This match kind of reaffirms my belief that our team isn't ready to be world beaters yet, but we very well could be in 2 or 3 years.

Edit: With Toomua or Foley at 10 the Wallabies will be even more dangerous.

 

[William18]

i can't see how the TMO can watch each angle 3/4 times and decide it was conclusive enough to award the try, surely you'd only have to watch them once or twice. maybe i'm being biased but i don't think it was conclusive enough, was it all in one movement? i'm not so sure.

to be fair to the TMO it was pretty much 50/50 and i can see why he gave it.

the boks only have themselves to blame as usual, continually kicking the ball away when there's no need and the majority of the time it was going straight to an opposition player. don't even get me started on the replacements.

Why did you kick so much to Folau? He is so good under the high ball. I feel you guys lacked a Plan B.

 

[RoosTah]

Don't agree with that, thought Phipps brought some genuine urgency.

Yeah, I don't know what game Dale91 was watching... Phipps was way faster and more accurate. Got caught a couple times without runners, but always got to the break down quicker and his passing was just faster once there.

 

[Dale91]

Nam warrior
One angle showed him get it down, another showed him over the line. Neither showed both.
I have no qualms with him taking his time, I do think he made the right call though, but only by millimetres

 

[j'nuh]

How could they give that try? For me it was inconclusive and also don't think it was all in one movement.

It's tricky, I think it's a bit of a grey area in the rules:

15.4 (a) When a player tackles an opponent and they both go to ground, the tackler must immediately release the tackled player.
15.5 (b) A tackled player must immediately pass the ball or release it. That player must also get up or move away from it at once.
15.5 (c) A tackled player may release the ball by putting it on the ground in any direction, provided this is done immediately.
15.5 (f) If a tackled player's momentum carries the player into the in-goal, the player can score a try or make a touch down.
15.5 (g) If a player is tackled near the goal line, that player may immediately reach out and ground the ball on or over the goal line to score a try or make a touch down.

So if he was in the in-goal area, grounding the ball doesn't explicitly have to be immediate (15.5 (f)).

But for me, he was just shy of the goal-line. In which case, he can either immediately reach out over the goal line (15.5 (g)), or immediately release the ball (15.5 (b)) in any direction (15.5 (c)). But the only reason he couldn't do any of this was because the tackler did not release the player (15.4 (a)), wrapping his arms up and preventing him the movement to do any action, and not moving away. This would normally be a penalty, but you see people wrapping players up when they get to the goal line so often that I don't think that this is right?

 

[RoosTah]

Pocock makes Australia a different team. Offers so much. Horwill needs to start as well.

On the try - I think it was a good call, you can see he puts it down at one point. Especially form the back end ground angle.

Pocock is a f##king beast - we're a different side when he's out there. Just makes his presence felt everywhere. Thought Sio and Horwill really steadied the ship too - Skelton just doesn't have the impact at this level and can't scrummage so probably should be a bench player for the last 20 at best.

 

[NamWarrior]

Why did you kick so much to Folau? He is so good under the high ball. I feel you guys lacked a Plan B.

you're spot on!

every time it was kicked it seemed big Israel was saying thank you very much then gaining extra yards and putting the boks on the back foot again.

we've been doing it for years, you'd think by now we'd stop doing. i'm not sure if they're told to do it or the players are panicking and deciding just to get it away.

 

[Jaguares]

The SA reserves should all be hung at dawn. The starters dominated then that lot came on and handed them the game....

The Boks were a HUGE defense and nothing more. The Wallabies gave two penalty kicks (QC & Gits) and still won. Possession was majority of the Aussies, demonstrating the importance of the turnovers at crucial moments.

The main South African gun was the stolen ball at the breakdown and nothing else. Against ABs the breakdown will be very different, can't win only with that, they need to have more possession and more attack options

 

[nik]

Well done Wallabies, stealing the game after the hooter. Eerie comparison to last years third Bledisloe where the Wallabies looked good for most of the match but then it was stolen by the All Blacks after the hooter. I guess it goes to show you need to play rugby for the full 80 to win the game. South Africa defended stoically, for a while it looked like they won't be broken after the series of attacks from Wallabies. But as a neutral watching this game, you lost it South Africa, game was in your hands and you let go. South Africa stopped playing the positive rugby after the Jessie Kriel try and went back into their shell playing their old style of defend/kick game. You can say they were unlucky to have the penalty awarded against them but Wallabies created that with their positive intent.

 

[Dale91]

Yeah, I don't know what game Dale91 was watching... Phipps was way faster and more accurate. Got caught a couple times without runners, but always got to the break down quicker and his passing was just faster once there.

Phipps was quicker to the ball, but wound up 90% of his passes and took longer to get the ball out.
He spent half the time complaining the Boks were lying around the ball instead of passing it.
He had a lot better long ball/cut out.

Definitely wouldn't say he was quick in delivery.

Most balls weren't out in front of the player too, his passes were hot and cold.

Last year he was a lot better than Genia, this SR. Season, he didn't have a box kick, ran poorly and slowed down his delivery significantly

 

[Jaguares]

I don't understand those who say that Boks dominated the game. They were better at the breakdown and their defense was tough, stainless steel, but to DOMINATE your opponent you need to have possession and they never had. That's why the Wallabies could make a try in the last second, they always had the ball in their hands

 

[Dale91]

Boks hardly had the ball in the second half, I agree, they were better in the break down until Pocock came on. But didn't shine anywhere else on the field

 

[austingtir]

The Boks were a HUGE defense and nothing more. The Wallabies gave two penalty kicks (QC & Gits) and still won. Possession was majority of the Aussies, demonstrating the importance of the turnovers at crucial moments.

The main South African gun was the stolen ball at the breakdown and nothing else. Against ABs the breakdown will be very different, can't win only with that, they need to have more possession and more attack options

How can they be just a huge defence when they scored two tries. And the fact that those tries were probably the result of DEFENSIVE/SETPIECE PRESSURE. Defence wins matches and SA almost did enough in this match with defence alone to win it.

The SA substitutions were far far to early. The entire front row at the 50 minute mark or whatever it was, was just totally ridiculous. And from then on it just seemed like a procession of changes for no good reason. Pocock and Horwill made a difference but the real difference for Australia was getting Genia and Cooper off the field I feel this went unnoticed a bit. If those two get another game in the wallaby jersey I feel that Cheika needs a kick in the head. But I wont be complaining if he plays them against us of course.

Pocock wont be as effective against NZ. He's so easy to deal with. You simply avoid the collision where he is or make him the first tackler and always have someone strong enough to blow him off instantly. He'll always get a couple but not like in this match where he almost took them by surprise when he came on. I think some of that was how ineffective Hooper was and once the much stronger over the ball Pocock came on SA didnt adjust right.

 

[iINDOMINUSxx]

Do feel sorry for the Springboks, But to be honest Australia played alot better when Quade Cooper wasn't on apart from Australia's first try. Really happy though that Kriel got a try on debut he really played well and looked threatening when he was on the ball. Australia would have been up 5 or 6 tries if they didn't knocked it on that much. Really don't know is Pocock should start ahead off Hooper, They were both really good today. I thought that Pollard was South Africa's key man today apart from his defence as he did miss a few.

Still don't think Australia will top pool A at the moment but they are much better than last year in my opinion. But will definitely get out off the group.

 

[Dale91]

Poey improved the wallabies 100 fold when he came on
We went from getting punished at the break down, to winning.
He also got involved in every 2nd phase, more than hooper.
Hooper was amazing in line speed and defence! Was offside a number of times, but didn't get caught. I stand by the fact we won't beat the top teams without a fetcher.
Hooper adding his attack from the 50th minute off the bench would be awesome.
Either start both, or stand Pocock

 

[iINDOMINUSxx]

Poey improved the wallabies 100 fold when he came on
We went from getting punished at the break down, to winning.
He also got involved in every 2nd phase, more than hooper.
Hooper was amazing in line speed and defence! Was offside a number of times, but didn't get caught. I stand by the fact we won't beat the top teams without a fetcher.
Hooper adding his attack from the 50th minute off the bench would be awesome.
Either start both, or stand Pocock

I would start both. As much as i thought people underrate Scott Fardy i didn't think he played that well. I would have Pocock at 6 and Hooper at 7 or the other way around.

 

[Dale91]

Everyone said hooper is too small for 6, I agree, but Pocock needs the head start to get to the ball.
So I would start him at 7 and hooper at 6