Australia - scared witless?

http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/international/7797423/Wallabies-reject-new-rules-for-All-Blacks-test

In November, test match rugby will be played under new laws currently in place in NH club rugby, the Currie Cup and ITM Cup. The most pleasing aspect of this is the 5 sec rule for using the ball at the base of the ruck. There is no hiding from this, everyone will be playing under this rule come November.

So why won't the Aussies agree to adopt the new rules for our game next week? The only reason I can think of is that they are running scared. NZ has opened up over the last few weeks and I guess Australia feel that the AB's could cause maximum damage against a weakened and mediocre Wallaby side.

Australia are always up for a fight and I feel that even though they are weak at the moment, there is still the talent in that side who could turn the 5 sec rule to their advantage and maybe give NZ a bit of a fright....I think the fact they aren't prepared to play under the new rule suggest they will be trying to limit the damage next week.

C'mon Australia, what happened to that "give it a go" attitude?

chewed_mintie wrote:http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/international/7797423/Wallabies-reject-new-rules-for-All-Blacks-test

and I guess Australia feel that they could cause maximum damage against a weakened and mediocre Wallaby side.

Yep, we are really scared of ourselves.

I don't think it's the players' decision, chewed - most likely O'Neill and his buffoons are trying to be a smart arses again.

NZ going for a record,so i`m nervous about this one beware the wounded Wallaby.Remember Hong Kong ,nothing to lose John Eales warned them just
fielding a massive pack won`t work.If they get Rolland again and are penalised as much Harris will kill them.OZ in OZ just expecting them to turn up is ignorant and arrogant.Won`t happen Deans has too much to lose and they`ve been party poopers on number16 before.

When does this law come in officially?

Seems to me Emack, they're willing to accept a 10-15 pt loss over a hiding or potential boilover. I think this new rule will work in teams like the Wallabies favour. if they keep possession they will hurt most teams.

Linebreaker wrote:I don't think it's the players' decision, chewed - most likely O'Neill and his buffoons are trying to be a smart arses again.

Not putting it down to the players LB, but certainly the coaches would have been consulted over this. But Deans is trying to save his own arse at the moment. Last thing he needs is a 50 pt flogging in the cauldron of Lang Park

emack2 wrote:NZ going for a record,so i`m nervous about this one beware the wounded Wallaby.Remember Hong Kong ,nothing to lose John Eales warned them just
fielding a massive pack won`t work.If they get Rolland again and are penalised as much Harris will kill them.OZ in OZ just expecting them to turn up is ignorant and arrogant.Won`t happen Deans has too much to lose and they`ve been party poopers on number16 before.

Don't worry about Harris. The NZRFU will be issuing laser pointers at the entry points to the stadium.

It's in brissy isn't it? Kinda don't blame Oz for saying no. They're probably still introducing players to each other, and don't need the complication.

Ask kiwi about cookietime cookies, they sound dangerous.

I hardly see this as scared witless. NZ can clear their own ball as fast as they like regardless of this 5 sec rule. All this does is force us to do it quickly. Given that a lot of our guys are babies when it comes to the international arena and not used to the pace and ferocity that brings then it's just common sense we try to slow it down if we can. There are enough things in NZ's favour going into this game, I don't think we need to add another one through our own stupidity.

Disagree Full Credit. Australia is at it’s most dangerous when it plays fast, intelligent rugby. When they play slow, they are sitting ducks, because they are forced into a tighter game and they haven’t had a forward pack up to tight battles in donkey’s years.

I think this is merely raising the white flag. Harsh but true.

I couldn't agree more that we look good when playing fast, intelligent rugby. But when was the last time you saw us play intelligently? The problem is when you're playing dumb rugby, slower is better. That way you do less stupid things in the space of 80mins. Did you see how much ball we dropped last week? Or what about the amount of ridiculous penalties we gave away.

You guys are structured and settled and a faster pace would suit you down to the ground. Knowing Dingo, he'll probably experiment with Higgers at 10 and Digby at 6. What's the point in speeding up that train wreck?

I agree. Unlike SA and NZ, oz don't beat themselves up over losing. They just move on to the next one and start again.

Happened last week. SA beat oz then everyone started backing argie at home. Except no one told the ozzies how to behave.

They'll be the same with us. Street wise sports stars this lot. Cut the talk...bring it on. Swagger!....

I take your point, maybe forcing us to play quicker would help to eradicate these problems. Maybe there's a perception that the AB's are somehow used to these rules and blocking it would help to cause irritation across the ditch. Who knows what's going on in JON's head.

Either way, the ARU must feel it gives us an advantage or they wouldn't be doing it.

Will the "5 second rule" be the end of Piri?

anotherworldofpain wrote:Will the "5 second rule" be the end of Piri?

It is likely he won't make the ruck in 5 seconds, thus he will become first reciever and take Carter's place, Carter will play 9.

They're going to paint the ball with red and white stripes so that it looks like a KFC bucket. Piri will beat the loosies to it-then fire it away when he realises it's not a bucket to his disgust. Once we train him to aim it at DC he'll be the best 9 in the world.

You just need to dress DC as Colonel Saunders, that will help his aim.

The thing is the SH teams will be playing these new rules up north. Many of the top players won't have played in the ITM where the new laws are being trialled at some stage. So Australia is just prolonging that change until they arrive up north. It's like opening the stadium roof or closing it. What perceived advantage is there to the home side to do one thing and how will that effect the visiting side?

Australia obviously thinks that NZ want to speed up the game so this would be disadvantageous to allow this new rule. I tend to agree with the OP that this makes Australia a less complicated foe to deal with. Deans has had a defensive gameplan for both matches against the ABs this year. This maybe because he doesn't have his full complement of players who can play a more razzle dazzle daggy dancing version.

Deans is without many players for this match in Brisbane. It won't be like the match last year just before the World Cup that decided the 3N. Deans will have noted what happens to oppositions who open up their game and don't employ a rush defence in trying to contain the ABs. A Sydney type loss looks better on paper than a Soweto one.

Then again the Wallabies might come out and try to ambush the ABs and score a bucketload of tries and put real pressure on NZ. Fact is that won't be influenced by the laws to which they play. Much depends on the attitude of the Aussie pack and their ability to secure ball.

disneychilly wrote:They're going to paint the ball with red and white stripes so that it looks like a KFC bucket. Piri will beat the loosies to it-then fire it away when he realises it's not a bucket to his disgust. Once we train him to aim it at DC he'll be the best 9 in the world.

you made me choke on my lunch at work

Thought I'd put this one here.

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-union/union-news/john-oneill-to-step-down-from-aru-20121012-27gom.html



4 minutes to 11 am.

Gosh...Deans will be certain to go then...but where?

McCaws basically put the permanent block on him being AB coach here saying he wouldnt work with people, that any really good assistants have been short term as Deans isnt very inclusive- any long serving assistants there that long simply because they tow the Deans line.

He said Henrys approach was to involve people- 'scrap it out' behind closed doors if necessary and go back to being friends later. Thats why I love the Auckland set up with Kirwan- both very strong personalities and passionate about the game and Auckland Rugby.

Bit off topic but there you go...

Interesting. It strikes me as weird that these two from Canterbury don't get on. They should at least agree to work the 'Auckland way' as they both have the same objectives but with differing approaches as you say, Taylor. But I know these 'country' types... they would be like 2 goats stuck in a decent sized pen and still find a way to clash heads.

Otherwise, I wonder what the chances are that he heads over to Europe if we drop a match or two on the tour?

Linebreaker wrote:Thought I'd put this one here.

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-union/union-news/john-oneill-to-step-down-from-aru-20121012-27gom.html



4 minutes to 11 am.

Something tells me you're quite happy with that news LB.

Nice honour for Larkham announced yesterday as well.

Larkham Australian Sport Hall of Fame

Larkham deserves to be there. His nickname should've been The Master Key: the unlocker of all defences.

John O'Neill is a love him or hate him character. Most people preferred the latter option and you get the feeling he bit off more than he could chew with his expansion plans for the Super teams without expanding grassroots rugby.

You can say many things against the man and LB appears to have a long list but I always had the impression he was always fighting for Australia backed up in the corner and always seemed to give more than what he got. Who are the takers for the job now?

Probably the best passing 10 I've ever seen. Even more impressive as he was originally a 15. Such a class act.