Whatdayawannabe?  A Wallaby says Wendell

First and foremost, I have to declare that I am a rugby league fan more so than a Union fan.  I guess each of us here in the east coast of Australia tends to be like that, so therefore read the following editorial in that light.  But having said that, I am an Australian and a sports fan and therefore I want to see all Australian teams do well no matter what the sport.

With that brief background, I want to now aim both barrels at the Australian Rugby Union and their utter ineptitude of handling a Rugby World Cup (RWC) defence.  We won the last RWC in 1999 with a team that was exceptional.  It defeated all comers and defeated France in the final who had beaten the mighty NZ All Blacks.  The one thing about the team though, despite its great victory, was that it was an old team.  Several players where at the peak of their powers, but for all intents and purposes, only had a couple of good years left in them at the highest level.

But the catch here though is that the RWC for 2003 was to be held in Australia.  This has proved too much of a carrot to alot of players (of both Union and League codes) and as such many of these players who were a little long in the tooth thought it would be good to stick together and defend their 1999 win on home soil.

From a players perspective, I can understand it.  You are at the top of your game, you've won the most prestigious tournament and you easily have the best team - of course you'd want to do it all again!  But 4 years is a long time in sports...

So players refused to retire, with the exception of John Eales the captain of the side, and the rest have been playing in a state of limbo ever since with one eye on October 2004 when the RWC comes to Australia.  The problem with this though is so have the selectors.

To start with, things went well.  We defeated the British Lions on home soil and have held onto the Bledisloe Cup since 1997 (until last weekend!). But then results started to fade... we lost to Ireland in a one off test last year (who with no disrespect have been making up the numbers since the 1980's) and have struggled in virtually every game against top level sides and have copped our fair share of losses on the way.  So the team has both physically and mentally been in decline for the last 12 months - right into the lead up into the RWC that for Australian's is most important because of the home field advantage.

For the above decline, I totally blame the selection panels because they have refused to wield the axe early and have just a few survivors of the 99 side with a blend of youth that has had 3 years to mature in the lead up. But no we haven't - we have a team that is overloaded with old heads and now that they are not performing at 1999 standards we realise that to make changes now would be tantamount to disaster.

So what have the selectors / Australian Rugby Board done to rectify this problem?  They "purchased" top shelf League players for ridiculous amounts of money over very short periods (eg until the RWC is finished).  Now I can see the merits in this as you buy players with high levels of NRL, State of Origin and Test Rugby League experience and therefore given they are professional players, should be able slot into the Wallaby team without too much difficulty...

Wrong

The purchase of Wendell Sailor, Lote Tuqiri, Matt Rogers and Nathan Blacklock has been a disaster for two reasons.  Firstly, with the possible exception of Rogers, the players don't know how to play Rugby.  Its like asking an Ice Hockey player to play Field Hockey... the games are very similar, but the tactics and skill requirements are very different. Secondly, you can't tell me that buying a player like Wendell Sailor for $600,000 a season and giving him a Wallaby jersey doesn't affect the other wingers in the next tier down who have been playing Rugby since they were kids only to get onto the brink of selection and be passed over for a mercenary?  This would also have some effect on the other more established players in the Wallaby side who have given their sporting lives to the Australian Rugby Board only to have the financial rewards that they receive pale into insignificance when compared to the high profile league converts. This has to have an effect on team morale...

And the players that they have bought - all of them wingers.  Sure Tuqiri and Rogers can play in other positions in the backline, but they were in Rugby League all wingers.  And when has a team of champion wingers ever won anything?  Wingers look good and flashy, but primarily grasp opportunites on the field set up by others inside of them.

What the Australian Rugby Board should have done, given that the purchase of league players wasn't a disaster for other reasons, was purchase a half back / five eighth which could take it to the line and break it and a couple of dynamic running back rowers who are punishing in defence.  When looking at the League club rosters, I can say for half / five eighth they should have sacrificed all for Andrew Johns or Brad Fittler.  Maybe Trent Barrett, but Andrew Johns is the best player in either code.  For running back rower, Ben Kennedy is a given because he meets all the criteria I listed but also because he had his grounding in Rugby Union before he signed with the Canberra Raiders.

But what's done is done and whilst I haven't studied the draw for the forthcoming RWC, I don't think Australia will be there come the semi finals and final.  The All Blacks look too strong and the English are strong as well.  Australia is very much in the pack with the South Africans and French.  I hope I am wrong, but this RWC will be a disaster for Australia

RELATED READING

http://foxsports.news.com.au/story/0,8659,6845114-23209,00.html